I am more shocked by the paltry bonus amounts (1.5 to 2 months, no 13th month) than low starting pay. I can still semi understand if their operating model is to give lower starting basics with health annual increments and filter out people who drop out along the way.

There is simply no excuse for a audit/consulting firm that charges an arm & a leg to give the grunts on the ground a 13.5 - 14 month package. I mean come on, even civil service average C+ performers are able to get a 15.9 month package not to even mention better monthly basic salaries.

Either the Big 4 is so good at marketing themselves as top prestigious elite here in SG or else I can only conclude most of our local grads are really dumb beyond belief to accept this kind of crap package for the lousy working hours.

No la, I am from a local uni biz school. I can assure you that big 4 is for the lowest of the low, and the worst of the lot typically head there because they have no options.

You will find no one bragging about their offer to big 4. It's a complete joke.

Two of you talking rubbish!

You need big 4 experience plus CA certification to be a future CFO of multinational firms. This has proven to be the most convenient method. Unless one expires to be a successful banker or fund manager, entering big 4 is the way to go.

Must be either an SIM or big 4 loser talking..

You do not "need" (oh gosh, even putting it down as a need is a joke) big 4 experience to be a future CFO of a multinational firm. Don't talk crap pls, the caliber of big 4 losers is so apparent.

There are many other programs like GE FMP or other FLDP which are way better in guiding an individual to becoming a CFO.

IIRC, EY bonus schemes is 0, 0.5, 2 and 4 months bonus for sub manager. Not sure about above.

this is the most successful myth by the big4 recruitment so far - telling freshies that big4 is 'compulsory' in a finance career. many of my friends complain about long hours, lousy pay & bonus, no training etc. and how they stay only because it is 'paying school fees' for a better career in the future.

truth is one is better off starting off as a finance exec in a fortune 100 big mnc and moving up the ranks then slave for 4-5 years in a big4 then join as accountant. lets not even talk about those who are good enough to join graduate programs, after 5 years light years ahead of your typical big4 'manager'.

yeah, that's why the top finance students won't go to big 4. There are many better ways to learn the ropes and climb up the corporate ladder. The salary increments are also way higher. Big 4 is a stupid sweatshop for those who CMI.

Big 4 is a good place to be exposed to a variety of work. This is simply because they offer professional services, hence staff will work on multiple projects throughout the year with varying challenges.

Straight route into commercial is also possible but you lose out a bit on the exposure. Eg if you go into a bank, you only learn about financial industry. Those in Big 4 are exposed to financial, manufacturing, FMCG, etc.

There are many finance managers outside who have previous experience in Big 4. Of course, there are also many who have been in commercial all the way.

This is another common marketing hype - "exposure". What's the use of all these exposure if you end up working crazy hours with piss poor remuneration and get something of doubtful value to convert to high paying cushy corporate job in the future?

Would a bank looking for an accountant be impressed by the fact that you had exposure in another 5 industries? I doubt so. They are looking at people who can deliver and pick up the slack asap. Would a global MNC be impressed with your so called multi industry exposure that they place you ahead of their own grad programs? I doubt so.

Also realistically what sort of exposure can a big 4 junior grunt get being a nomad doing ad-hoc work from 1 company to another?

I am not looking down on big 4 staff per se, just challenging all these common buzz words that are thrown around by recruiters and fresh grads without much corroboration with facts on the ground.

My personal observation is that despite all that hype about the need to 'sacrifice' 4-5 prime years of your life to get a comfy finance job in the future, big 4 'students' don't actually fare better than corporate finance exec direct hires in any meaningful way. If we compare them to big MNCs with MAP, they fare considerably worse off if you compare pay / rank with like for like working year.

exactly, big mncs with MAP or grad programs like GE, Unilever, P&G etc have no need for big 4 guys to come in with their "exposure".

in fact, they typically practice promoting from within except for specialized roles like tax.