pay for gov/public sector vs mnc vs sme

[bladez87]

Originally Posted by Unregistered

I'm afraid that would be something you have to answer for yourself. My aim is to correct some obvious misconceptions such as 10k very rare in pte sector, COO/GM is paid only 15k etc. You will need to take an honest look at yourself & determine if you have the capabilities & motivation to get there, for sure it will be very competitive & not easy.

If not, honestly joining gov is probably best for you. As long as no major screw up, minimally can retire at MX10 Dy Director level ~8k+ which is not bad. There are after all lots of pte sector ppl who end up jobless at 40+yrs old.

Ya, my main concern is ending up jobless at 40+. That is when we have family, kids and retired parents to consider.
Coming from a neighbourhood school, poly, and DL degree, really doubt can compete with the scholars in private sector.

In my company (US MNC), engineers and sales guys are paid between 100K to 200K.
Directors are paid 200K to 300K. Senior execs inc. senior director, VP and SVP are paid 400K onwards. Almost everyone around me are on 6-figures package.

My first job was in a stat board. Had miserable increment and decided to join private. Started with a local SME and then a MNC. 8 years on, pay is 5 to 7 times the pay in stat board.

[bladez87]

Originally Posted by Unregistered

In my company (US MNC), engineers and sales guys are paid between 100K to 200K.
Directors are paid 200K to 300K. Senior execs inc. senior director, VP and SVP are paid 400K onwards. Almost everyone around me are on 6-figures package.

My first job was in a stat board. Had miserable increment and decided to join private. Started with a local SME and then a MNC. 8 years on, pay is 5 to 7 times the pay in stat board.

and what is your profession?

Originally Posted by bladez87

Ya, my main concern is ending up jobless at 40+. That is when we have family, kids and retired parents to consider.
Coming from a neighbourhood school, poly, and DL degree, really doubt can compete with the scholars in private sector.

Why are you worried about scholars in pte sector? They really only matter when you are in CS. In the pte sector, many succeed in high paying jobs without being scholars. Sadly, I am not one of them T_T

[cslee]

Originally Posted by Unregistered

You obviously have no clue how MOM data is obtained. MOM aggregates a wide spectrum of companies and industries and does not go only for respectable companies like you asserted, that would defeat the whole point of the exercise - they are supposed to provide nationwide pay trends, not "respectable companies" pay trends. Contrary to your claim, HRC data is the one that only has "respectable companies" particpate because their high consulting fee acts as a natural barrier to smaller companies.

MOM obtains its data primarily from 3 sources - IRAS, DOS & random sampling. IRAS & DOS provides tom MOM scrambled and anoynomous data points that provide only age, salary and job title. These job titles are reflected in IR8A & submitted by the admin department of each company, they are likely going to be business titles as employees who have interacted with various government agencies such as ICA, MOM throughout the year would have inputed their external title instead of their internal title.

Random sampling by MOM consist of them mailing out survey forms sometimes followed by focus group to random companies and basically ask their admin to self decalre. Anything goes & there is no verification done by MOM on whether the titles reflect their jobs. I did one of those before and I remembered putting myself as Sales Director with a pay of 4.7k because that was my title. My boss was listed as Managing Director, pay 6k. It was a SME & there is no such thing as fake title or real title.

Is MOM data useful as a proxy for the average pay of various jobs in Singapore? I would say yes due to their large sample size & exclusive access to tax filings that covers a wide range of companies & industries.

Is it useful to assess the max pay ceiling of a high performing farmer in pte sector vs gov sector? No, it will severly understate pte sector senior management pay due to the real CEO/COO/CFO/Dept Directors being dragged down by the large number of SME managers with fancy titles.

Just take a step back & look at facts and try to remove emotions because of your personal pay experience or the small sample of friends around you:

Government (High performing farmer)
Salary ceiling at MX9 scale high end of 15k (usually called Director or Senior Director) <-- I think this is public enough and everyone will agree.

Private (High performing farmer)
A few good sources available to estimate earnings potential. Let's start with this report which you yourself shared in another thread just a while ago http://www.robertwalters.com.sg/file...urvey-2012.pdf

Lets pick a random page say page 3 "Accounting & Finance":

Base on the table, a 15k salary (ie 180k p.a.) represents the following jobs:
Tax Manager, Treasury Manager, Commercial Manager, FC or FD for a SME

Any of them sound like senior managerial level to you? Are such jobs going to be the end point of a high performing farmer in pte sector? Extremely unlikely. So what does Robert Walters have to say about real senior managerial jobs with "respectable companies"?

CFO: 250 - 450k Pg3
Banking VP for IB: 300 - 430k Pg5
Banking VP for BO roles: 160 - 350k+ Pg10
HRBP: 200 - 400k Pg17
CTO: 320 - 400k Pg20
Legal for IB: 180 - 400k Pg31
Sales & Marketing GM: 200 - 300k+ Pg25
Head of Global Sourcing: 250 - 300k+ Pg31
Regional Prcourement Director: 200 - 300k Pg31
Supply Chain Director: 200 - 300k Pg31

Another source is to look at senior manager pay in local listed companies. Their pay can be found at the discolsure section of all annual reports. Company Disclosure & Information | SGX

Last I checked most were ranged from 500k - 1M, which is way above what a high performing farmer can ever make in gov jobs.

At the risk of sounding like a broken record, I am not saying such pay is typical of the pte sector, I am just answering TS original question that if you think you are good enough, have the drive to move up corporate ladder and money is very important to you, pte sector will have far greater potential rewards that joining the public sector. If he wants work life balance, cruise along & retire at jnr manager level, public sector would be more appropriate because of security & stability.

Lol. You must be very free to write such long essay. Definitely, the top earners come from private sector. Look at top surgeons, top legal eagles, top IB bankers etc. No doubt about that. Even some ministers commented that they had earned more at private sectors. If you follow my statement carefully, I've mentioned keywords "consistency" and "chances" e.g. only 1 COO per private company vs many MX9 in any single agency.

[cslee]

Originally Posted by cslee

Lol. You must be very free to write such long essay. Definitely, the top earners come from private sector. Look at top surgeons, top legal eagles, top IB bankers etc. No doubt about that. Even some ministers commented that they had earned more at private sectors. If you follow my statement carefully, I've mentioned keywords "consistency" and "chances" e.g. only 1 COO per private company vs many MX9 in any single agency.

Forgot to add, as you mentioned these are HR recruitment firms and it's well-known that their best interests can be served by inflating salaries. Take those figures with a pinch of salt. And the hiring outlook that they published tend to be more optimise than actual norm. Or else who would want to look for new jobs? I remember I quoted banking outlook in some IB wannabe threads, which was fairly optimal in their reports. My HR business owner friend (who specialise in finance/banking) is telling me that IB recruitment is almost quiet as dead.

there is no shortage of mid level positions in the private sector that pays more than mx9...
path to mx9 probably takes a while but it's almost a sure thing over time..

but in the private sector, there's no rigid pay structure... you can get a bump in your paycheck when you get a lucky break.. or you can get stuck at a range for a while...

but the uncertainty is fun.... as your network of contacts widens.. it may lead you to new opportunities with bigger payout at the end..

[bladez87]

Originally Posted by Unregistered

there is no shortage of mid level positions in the private sector that pays more than mx9...
path to mx9 probably takes a while but it's almost a sure thing over time..

but in the private sector, there's no rigid pay structure... you can get a bump in your paycheck when you get a lucky break.. or you can get stuck at a range for a while...

but the uncertainty is fun.... as your network of contacts widens.. it may lead you to new opportunities with bigger payout at the end..

I am curious. If you are in accounts dept, how do you widen the network of contacts in your industry if stuck in a desk bound job?

Originally Posted by cslee

Lol. You must be very free to write such long essay. Definitely, the top earners come from private sector. Look at top surgeons, top legal eagles, top IB bankers etc. No doubt about that. Even some ministers commented that they had earned more at private sectors. If you follow my statement carefully, I've mentioned keywords "consistency" and "chances" e.g. only 1 COO per private company vs many MX9 in any single agency.

Nice try to switch the topic. I have emphasized I think numerous times to TS (I am sure he will be glad to affirm) that chances of reaching senior levels are low and such numbers are not relfective of typical experience. My main point is to rebut your erronous assertion that MOM pay trends are reflective of only "respectable companies" and crazy stuff like 15k is the 75 percentile of a COO.

You have totally not followed up with these claims you callously put up earlier at all & instead went on to harp about "consistency" in gov service. Excuse me, we get it, gov job has better job secrutiy & fixed promotion path etc. We all know that & I doubt that is news to any layman on the street.

This lengthy write up is in response to your call earlier to back my claims up with solid data, which I have done so by providing a link to an archive of public remuneration discolusre and a sample of a Robert Walters report. Instead of either conceeding the point because of the overwhelming evidence or gathering rebutting facts & data, you choose to laugh it off by making a snide remark like "Lol. You must be very free to write such long essay." That line about sums up everything about you.

Originally Posted by cslee

Forgot to add, as you mentioned these are HR recruitment firms and it's well-known that their best interests can be served by inflating salaries. Take those figures with a pinch of salt. And the hiring outlook that they published tend to be more optimise than actual norm. Or else who would want to look for new jobs? I remember I quoted banking outlook in some IB wannabe threads, which was fairly optimal in their reports. My HR business owner friend (who specialise in finance/banking) is telling me that IB recruitment is almost quiet as dead.

“Well known” by who? You, yourself & yours again?

Come on, you are always making allegations about statistical data providers without furnishing any evidence at all. Earlier was the rubbish about MOM ( a nationwide ministry, mind you) publishing jobs & pay data that are only polling for “respectable companies”.

Now we learn from your latest rhetoric that HRC reports are “inflating salaries” i.e. you are alleging Robert Walters is lying in its jobs report to further commercial interest. This is a serious charge & while the anonymousness of online interaction shields you from litigation, it is only responsible that you demonstrate that there is a sound basis for making such serious charges.

Saying this is supposedly a “well known” fact like handing out commandments from Mt Horeb might convince some innocent newbie undergrad, but cuts no ice with experienced folks at all.