Graduate income

Don't look at starting pays, that is too short-sighted. The average pay is low because a large portion of graduates start of as auditors. However, the pay increment in the next 4-5 years are substantial and standardised.

You seem to have the "just pick whatever I can get" mentality and making your course selection based on pay. You should focus on pickinga course that you are interested in and can do well.

If you pick a specialised and technical route (accountancy, engineering, law, etc), you must consider whether you ultimately like the industry.

Sure there are a handful that pursue an alternative career post graduation, which maybe significantly different from what they have studied. The question is then why did you pick that course in the first place?

Originally Posted by Unregistered

Don't look at starting pays, that is too short-sighted. The average pay is low because a large portion of graduates start of as auditors. However, the pay increment in the next 4-5 years are substantial and standardised.

You seem to have the "just pick whatever I can get" mentality and making your course selection based on pay. You should focus on pickinga course that you are interested in and can do well.

If you pick a specialised and technical route (accountancy, engineering, law, etc), you must consider whether you ultimately like the industry.

Sure there are a handful that pursue an alternative career post graduation, which maybe significantly different from what they have studied. The question is then why did you pick that course in the first place?

best ans of the thread.

screw the starting pay man. many grads join civil service for high starting pay and many want out after a few years (including scholars).

TS, I tell u police and army got high starting pay, would u join?

Originally Posted by Unregistered

best ans of the thread.

screw the starting pay man. many grads join civil service for high starting pay and many want out after a few years (including scholars).

TS, I tell u police and army got high starting pay, would u join?

WEll, at the least, if you have made a few years of higher pay, you would have much more savings than your peers who chose the "delayed gratification" route. It's also possible that your peers may not get their gratification at all.

With savings, you would have more choices.

I wouldn't dismiss the army and police routes. There are no perfect jobs. All jobs come with their nasty side. Consider carefully.

[Bean]

Originally Posted by Unregistered

best ans of the thread.

screw the starting pay man. many grads join civil service for high starting pay and many want out after a few years (including scholars).

TS, I tell u police and army got high starting pay, would u join?

come'on I join ST as an engineer in the private sector, consider average starting salary $2.9k, i dun wanna to be in my boss(degree holder, consistently A grader) shoes only getting mid-6k after 17-18 years exp....

I probably able to hit mid-6k earlier with civil service

Originally Posted by Bean

come'on I join ST as an engineer in the private sector, consider average starting salary $2.9k, i dun wanna to be in my boss(degree holder, consistently A grader) shoes only getting mid-6k after 17-18 years exp....

I probably able to hit mid-6k earlier with civil service

Yeah.. Better run for your life while you still have it... Unless you wanna die poor and drag your parents, wife and kids down to hell with you..
Engineers sell their lives at a discount to the world, when they become a little well-paid, they get retrench and die poor.. The rest of the world enjoy life at your expense... No difference from being a condom... After you get used, you get flush down the toilet bowl...

[cslee]

Originally Posted by Bean

come'on I join ST as an engineer in the private sector, consider average starting salary $2.9k, i dun wanna to be in my boss(degree holder, consistently A grader) shoes only getting mid-6k after 17-18 years exp....

I probably able to hit mid-6k earlier with civil service

If CS pay better than ST, then I'm very curious since ST groups have very close business tie with defence and government bodies. Won't they lose all the good engineers to DSTA, A*Star, DSO etc if ST don't pay them well enough? (or at least comparable to these technical government bodies)

I have to re-emphasize again, please don't be misled by starting pay. Basing your career decision on starting pay is going to mislead you badly.

Ultimately, what do you need form your career? To me, it is clear that the primary goal why we all work is for money. (money to put food on the table, money to achieve the other goals we want in our lives). Interesting job, good working environment are all bonus. Secondary.

So okay, assuming we want a job that pays us well. Why do we not pursue jobs with the highest starting pay? The answer is in the word "starting". It is too short-term. Your first year pay is minute in the context of 40 years of work. Also, your first year pay can and is likely to be very different from your pay after 4-5 years.

I like to use audit as a good example. My time, starting salary was $2,400. Bank operations paid $3,000. That is like 25% difference. But 4-5 years down the road, an auditor would be earning close to $6k. The auditor could also have moved into banking (after getting his CPA) and could be earning way higher. How about the ops person? He/she took the higher starting pay job. He/she didn't like ops in the first place but took the job for the additional $600 (this is quite a common scenario). 4-5 years down the ops route, he is earning $4-5k. Learnt nothing new, no progression. Further 5-10 years down the road, the Auditor makes partner or moves out to be a financial controller. Where is the Ops guy now?

Before you brush it off and say, hey this is just a scenario and the Ops guy could have done so well that he is now a HOD. My main pt is not to tell you audit path > or < than bank ops path, but it is to highlight to you that basing your career choice on start pay will mislead you. Start pay is but a very small factor and function of your total earning capability in the future.

Think longer term. I believe that in general, you will be rewarded properly if you are top of your profession. (dont start the "number 1 road sweeper" line of argument again.) Top banker. Top lawyer. Top doctor. Top engineer. Top Property agent. Top Hawker.

It is better to pick a profession that you can be very good in rather than a profession where the average salary is high but you have no aptitude in at all.

Originally Posted by Unregistered

Don't look at starting pays, that is too short-sighted. The average pay is low because a large portion of graduates start of as auditors. However, the pay increment in the next 4-5 years are substantial and standardised.

You seem to have the "just pick whatever I can get" mentality and making your course selection based on pay. You should focus on pickinga course that you are interested in and can do well.

If you pick a specialised and technical route (accountancy, engineering, law, etc), you must consider whether you ultimately like the industry.

Sure there are a handful that pursue an alternative career post graduation, which maybe significantly different from what they have studied. The question is then why did you pick that course in the first place?

I saw that you listed alot of engineering related fields as your choices.

I don't know you and I am not here to tell you what to choose.

I think you got 1 point right that your decision will play a very significant role in your life from now on.

So, I will urge you to read the threads on engineering. Hear real life comments from engineers who have gone down the path. You don't have to believe everything they say. Hear the real life comments of the successsful engineers as well. Ultimately, your goal is to get as much data points as you can, and make a decision for yourself.

Someone's experience maybe totally different than your own. The right decision for some maybe the wrong decision for you, vice versa. However, from MY Experience, I believe that there is always an element of truth in the masses. And it seems to me, from my reading of various threads so far, that engineering is a hellish path to take if you are approaching it without aptitude and interests.

My own brother went down the engineering path.
My good friend from JC went down the engineering path.
I know many people who went through the engineering path.
I myself could have ended up down the engineering path.

If anyone important to me asks me for an advice, I would say pick engineering ONLY if you are very sure that it is the path for you. If you are not sure, stay the hell away.

Originally Posted by Unregistered

I have to re-emphasize again, please don't be misled by starting pay. Basing your career decision on starting pay is going to mislead you badly.

Ultimately, what do you need form your career? To me, it is clear that the primary goal why we all work is for money. (money to put food on the table, money to achieve the other goals we want in our lives). Interesting job, good working environment are all bonus. Secondary.

So okay, assuming we want a job that pays us well. Why do we not pursue jobs with the highest starting pay? The answer is in the word "starting". It is too short-term. Your first year pay is minute in the context of 40 years of work. Also, your first year pay can and is likely to be very different from your pay after 4-5 years.

I like to use audit as a good example. My time, starting salary was $2,400. Bank operations paid $3,000. That is like 25% difference. But 4-5 years down the road, an auditor would be earning close to $6k. The auditor could also have moved into banking (after getting his CPA) and could be earning way higher. How about the ops person? He/she took the higher starting pay job. He/she didn't like ops in the first place but took the job for the additional $600 (this is quite a common scenario). 4-5 years down the ops route, he is earning $4-5k. Learnt nothing new, no progression. Further 5-10 years down the road, the Auditor makes partner or moves out to be a financial controller. Where is the Ops guy now?

Before you brush it off and say, hey this is just a scenario and the Ops guy could have done so well that he is now a HOD. My main pt is not to tell you audit path > or < than bank ops path, but it is to highlight to you that basing your career choice on start pay will mislead you. Start pay is but a very small factor and function of your total earning capability in the future.

Think longer term. I believe that in general, you will be rewarded properly if you are top of your profession. (dont start the "number 1 road sweeper" line of argument again.) Top banker. Top lawyer. Top doctor. Top engineer. Top Property agent. Top Hawker.

It is better to pick a profession that you can be very good in rather than a profession where the average salary is high but you have no aptitude in at all.

Good advice, but I beg to differ. Money in the pocket is worth twice that's not in the pocket. Who will know if auditing career will not be as smooth-sailing as planned?

That said, with regards to your ops example, I would go for the ops job. Good people can actually progress into well-paid positions from "lowly" ops positions. Taking all things equal (including luck and opportunity), I would say a capable ops guy will make even more than an equally capable auditor. And given that the ops guy makes more, he will have more savings and more investment returns (again assuming all things equal).

Nothing is cast in stone. The advice is all here. It's your life - you take a position and go with it eyes wide open.

[Chewbm]

Few days back all I worried about is the income I will earn with regards to the course I choose. This might be due to my will in wanting to earn money quickly so that I can pay my parents back my education fees as well as not living off them.

But i'm finally seeing a clearer picture now; it's only when I do where my passion lies in, only then I can able to excel in that course, then can I earn a decent income. Thanks alot for ur help.