Unfortunately, this is just how the civil service works. Take on appointment first, then wait for salary scale to catch up. Believe it works the same for MX scheme as well…

That said, I don't think it's a terrible deal. Young KP who consistently prove themselves should find themselves receiving good performance grades, higher merit increment, and faster promotions. Shouldn't all take that long for a GEO4 HOD to climb up the ranks… (or has it also slowed dramatically in recent years?)

But whatever the case, the KP HOD's salary is likely to go up significantly faster than his teaching peers'. While I don't think it's unfair to wish for a fair pay when taking on management duties, assuming there's no change in the system... I hope that young middle managers are also able to look past the short-term gap and appreciate the long-term advantage in remuneration they do enjoy, as compared to their peers.

Wouldn’t that indicate that the teaching profession is a well paid job now which is why it is driving the demand for these courses?

s://blog.seedly.sg/civil-service-salary/?amp=1

I don’t see how the mx scheme is much better than the teaching profession.

Like what others said, go out and prove yourself in other profession like engineering and accounting if you think you deserve better.

More misleading deductions and conclusions here -_-

It is because of the extreme cut in recruitment hence the requirements were also raised drastically to only attract the best. It is also the same for interviews.

And since you have mentioned that the MX scheme isn't any better, then why are they the only group receiving the adjustment? Isn't that weirder?

Problem is that this isn't why it's driving demand. It's sort of artificially inflated because MOE's now forcing most of the people who get scholarships to go to NIE to do the TSP.

No TSP, no scholarship. The number of people being sent to NUS/NTU or overseas has dropped a lot too.

MX is receiving adjustment because they are the lowest paid group compared to other specialised services?

I am the previous post owner who questioned the OP’s claim that 1/3 of the HODs in his/her school are Geo 4. It makes things worse when he/she claimed that they are C performers. Come on, HOD at Geo 4 will NEVER be a C grader, since you would have outperformed the other officers, including non-appointment holder at the same grade. Giving a Geo 4 HOD C grade. One thing the person must learn is to take things said by KP with a pinch of salt. Life is not a bed of roses with everyone being frank.

I am an experienced KP and I can safely said that having a third of the HODs at Geo 4 is bs.

Facts check is necessary. Don’t create unnecessary confusion.

Yes, it depends on the P. I have had different P with very differing views/advice on career matters.

I would say that the P is the most important factor when it comes to career progression and appraisal for KP. Some Ps really know their stuff and are driven to fight for the KPs to go for FHQ, appointment etc while the others are simply too chill.

Ranking of the KPs is usually done by the SLs. Some might seek input from experienced KPs, and this practice is not consistent across schools.

Pardon me for being straightforward, but in the first place, specialised schemes should always be paid higher than generalist schemes like MX, no?

Unless specialised and niche areas such as the uniformed organisations are not recognised? Then might as well do an overhaul, get rid of all specialised schemes and make everyone follow the MX scheme instead?

What about the bulk of the workforce who are GEOs? Wouldn't the inconsistency be even more prominent and significant?

In my school, there is no HOD at GEO 4. LH/SH/AYH, yes but no HOD. KPs at GEO 4 are all newly appointed and while we don't openly ask each other about PB, I doubt any of those at GEO4/5 get any lesser than B