The thing is, everyone is aware of the strange phenomena you guys stated above. Heck, even HQ and HR are aware of:
Slow promotions and progression Manpower shortage (even for STEM teachers) Too many GEO5 and SEO dead weights The more important thing is...Do you guys see them doing anything effective about it? We all just see a vicious cycle of resignations among the GEO3 and GEO4, which kinda breeds KPIs for HR to produce some minimal recruitment numbers. Not sure if this is really healthy for the system in the long term though. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
Ironic right? With work hours like this how to even go paktor |
vicious cycles everywhere
|
Pgs
Hi all, is it hard to clear interview for PGS? And does PGS awardees have better career prospects? Thanks in advance!
|
Quote:
Deadweight is someone who underperforms, not meeting the minimum job requirements, but still somehow kept on the team. Someone who does what is specified in the job description, they are pulling their own weight. It is ridiculous to expect everyone to perform above and beyond their paygrade, and unreasonable to expect everyone to perform at managerial level for free. GEO5s at the end of the day, are still ordinary teachers. It is not their responsibility to do any kind of management related roles (if so, then there's no need to differentiate between GEO and SEO alr). Strangely, SEOs who are not taking KP roles are asked to step down and revert to GEO5, yet the reverse is not true. GEOs taking KP roles are not stepped up to their rightful SEO paygrade. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
In practice, reflecting on my own path, I wonder if that would necessarily make that big a difference - especially if under such a scheme, officers are pegged near the bottom of the pay scale. We should keep in mind that the different subgrades have overlapping pay scales. I was only promoted to SEO1 eight years after taking on an SH role. This all happened sometime ago (back when payslips were emailed, which allowed me to check back more easily haha) so certain things like GEO4 requirement weren’t in place yet. For simplicity, I’ve reported subgrades using the new terminology, and used Apr salary (post increment) for reference. My KP journey Y1: GEO3 5.1k Y2: GEO4 5.6k Y3: GEO4 5.8k Y4: GEO5 6.3k Y5: GEO5 6.7k Y6: GEO5 6.9k Y7: GEO5 7.2k Y8: SEO1 7.4k Given that the SEO1 range was just 5651-9064 at the time… I'd actually already entered the SEO1 range in my second/third year as KP. Having a lower subgrade probably also allowed me to score higher increments easily as I wasn't ranked against other KP. So… even though I'd of course have preferred receiving an instant pay raise to my Y8 salary point, I don't think I lost out terribly under the current system… Is there perhaps too much attention on the subgrade label, when it's the actual take-home that should matter (from a financial perspective), at the end of the day? As long as you're not hitting the cap yet, what's the rush? |
Quote:
7.4k for 8 YOE is like a godsend... people I know around that same years of service are at best mid 6k+ |
All times are GMT +8. The time now is 11:14 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.5
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.3.2