Career as Teacher

Originally Posted by Unregistered

Whats e CEP benchmark for FHQ posting? Any idea?

Ask got use meh? Talk to your RO about your aspirations. Yes, it doesn't mean that you ask = you get. But you must make sure that your school understands your aspirations. Then if they decide to support you, they will know what to do.

As for your qn, there is no fixed benchmark as it depends on your age and other factors.

Originally Posted by Unregistered

Young officers cannot afford a bto? That's absolutely rubbish. Starting salary now is almost 4k.a teacher couple would earn between 8-9k combined after teaching a few years. A 4 room bto costs. A hdb bto at jurong west costs 291k and even if you're looking at a more attractive location such as at Queens town, it's 541k.

Why look at owning a condo? 80% of Singapore residents stay in hdb. If you're saying that teachers should be able to stay at a condo, you're saying that teachers should be in the top 20% of income earners in the country!

As mentioned by another poster...
Matured estate bto easily 600-800k lo!

Originally Posted by Unregistered

As mentioned by another poster...
Matured estate bto easily 600-800k lo!

These kinda comments really show why some people cannot rise into SEO ranks. It's the lack of big picture thinking. MOE is part of the civil service. If you're saying that teachers are paid too low and cannot afford BTOs, you're essentially saying that BTOs are out of the reach of a large segment of the Singaporean population.

We're talking about younger teachers starting out here. Should they really be aiming for 600k to 800k btos when they're just starting out in their careers? Whatever happened to financial responsibility and thinking long term. You have a long career ahead of you, there's nothing stopping you from buying a more expensive house as both your incomes increase. Why must have it now when you're only establishing yourself in the workplace.

Really is entitlement mentality.

Originally Posted by Unregistered

The original poster was comparing with teachers of the past. Therefore it is relevant to compare between the lifestyle afforded to teachers in the past vs teachers in the present. Not everyone wants to live in non-mature estates, for various reasons. A 4rm in matured estates cost $600k to 800k nowadays. Even if husband and wife earn $5k each after a number of years teaching, a flat of such prices will cost at least 5x their annual income. And both couple need to work continuously to afford paying the instalments, and any stints of NPL will severely strain their finances.

This is not about MOE not paying teachers enough. This is about the choices that the teachers make. If your personal preference is to live in a matured estate, then it's your decision that you make.

If you want to take NPL then it's also your choice which has an impact on your finances. Why would you blame moe for the fact that they don't pay you luxuriously enough that you can lead a life of doing nothing?

Originally Posted by Unregistered

This is not about MOE not paying teachers enough. This is about the choices that the teachers make. If your personal preference is to live in a matured estate, then it's your decision that you make.

If you want to take NPL then it's also your choice which has an impact on your finances. Why would you blame moe for the fact that they don't pay you luxuriously enough that you can lead a life of doing nothing?

Actually, I think the point of that poster is to raise the fact that teachers' salaries have fallen behind a lot as compared to the past. Yes, there have been adjustments, but I think the cost of living has increased so much that the salary can no longer catch up.

Yes, we can indeed make our own choices. But for those who wish to have a family (i.e. 1 or more kids - which the civil service ironically encourages despite salaries falling behind), they definitely have to sacrifice work and hence, income.

I don't think boomer teachers in the past have such serious consequences with making such choices. They can rise up quickly into the SEO ranks 20 years ago and raise 2 kids, with some small struggles perhaps, but not as bad as today's teachers (who are also parents). They at least are able to still spare sufficient time and finances with their kids while working full-time.

Why do you think more and more teachers simply choose to remain single, or childless now?

To be fair in this argument though, I think all sectors in Singapore are facing this issue. But statistically speaking, teachers' salaries have indeed fallen behind as compared to the past (considering the cost of living then and now).

Originally Posted by Unregistered

Cost of living is kinda out of our scope here leh

But it explains why teachers are more career-minded nowadays. While nobody expects to become rich in teaching, but at the very least, shouldn't be living like a church mouse either.

Originally Posted by Unregistered

Actually, I think the point of that poster is to raise the fact that teachers' salaries have fallen behind a lot as compared to the past. Yes, there have been adjustments, but I think the cost of living has increased so much that the salary can no longer catch up.

Yes, we can indeed make our own choices. But for those who wish to have a family (i.e. 1 or more kids - which the civil service ironically encourages despite salaries falling behind), they definitely have to sacrifice work and hence, income.

I don't think boomer teachers in the past have such serious consequences with making such choices. They can rise up quickly into the SEO ranks 20 years ago and raise 2 kids, with some small struggles perhaps, but not as bad as today's teachers (who are also parents). They at least are able to still spare sufficient time and finances with their kids while working full-time.

Why do you think more and more teachers simply choose to remain single, or childless now?

To be fair in this argument though, I think all sectors in Singapore are facing this issue. But statistically speaking, teachers' salaries have indeed fallen behind as compared to the past (considering the cost of living then and now).

“teachers' salaries have indeed fallen behind as compared to the past (considering the cost of living then and now” - really?? What is this evidence base for this?!

Please let’s not forget that teachers are the premium scheme in MOE with Connect Plan that has just been increased. In addition to the allowances provided.

Originally Posted by Unregistered

But it explains why teachers are more career-minded nowadays. While nobody expects to become rich in teaching, but at the very least, shouldn't be living like a church mouse either.

If teachers are church mice, then many in Singapore are living dead already

Originally Posted by Unregistered

These kinda comments really show why some people cannot rise into SEO ranks. It's the lack of big picture thinking. MOE is part of the civil service. If you're saying that teachers are paid too low and cannot afford BTOs, you're essentially saying that BTOs are out of the reach of a large segment of the Singaporean population.

We're talking about younger teachers starting out here. Should they really be aiming for 600k to 800k btos when they're just starting out in their careers? Whatever happened to financial responsibility and thinking long term. You have a long career ahead of you, there's nothing stopping you from buying a more expensive house as both your incomes increase. Why must have it now when you're only establishing yourself in the workplace.

Really is entitlement mentality.

95% of BTOs are reserved for first timer, with an income ceiling of 14k.
As a civil servant, you should know that this indicates that such flats are targeted at first timers, not upgraders.
And for many people, the couples are both working, and it is necessary to live near the parents for childcare arrangements, or need to look after elderly parents.

Originally Posted by Unregistered

“teachers' salaries have indeed fallen behind as compared to the past (considering the cost of living then and now” - really?? What is this evidence base for this?!

Please let’s not forget that teachers are the premium scheme in MOE with Connect Plan that has just been increased. In addition to the allowances provided.

You speak as if connect plan is a huge deal.

If you average out the payouts, it is merely 4k a year, plus minus. Not to mention that when they give out as one lump sum, you end up paying more income tax, and the real amount remaining after tax is even lower. A premium scheme means nothing if actual salaries end up falling behind non-premium scheme folks. Yes, EOs might have higher starting pay. But unless you are a higher tier scholar, slower rate of promotion will erode away that 'premium'. Is it still a 'premium scheme' when after 10 years of service, you are 1-2 paygrades behind your fellow farmer peers in other ministries, and earning correspondingly lesser than them? Most in other ministries will hit assistant director or senior assistant director by their mid 30s, and some even reaching deputy director. MOE GEO5 is only around senior manager/assistant director. If you have friends in other branches of public service, feel free to check with them. See whether they see the EO scheme and EO pay as premium or not.