Really that bad for engineers?

Originally Posted by Unregistered

Being in the public service, you see people doing well and you automatically assume they are backstabbers. That to me, is a really nasty attitude and uncalled for. I know of many who cleared the 5k hurdle within the 5 years because they did well, and they are certainly nice, helpful people. What's wrong with you?

LOL. No point discussing this to assume dishonestly that people in civil service management are talent. hahaha.

Originally Posted by Unregistered

If you want to go into banks IT Dept today which are controlled by FT Indians-- unless pig sprout wings.

Subject: A step in the right direction: discriminatory practices against Singaporeans
To: [email protected]
Cc: [email protected]

Dear Mr. Minister:
I just read the article entitled ‘Don’t hire, promote own kind at expense of S’poreans‘. I cannot begin to say just how thrilled I am to see that the government is FINALLY stepping up to the plate in trying to curb this problem. I have been ranting and raving about this issue ever since I joined the workforce in 2004. I have worked at Hewlett Packard and Frost & Sullivan in Singapore, and both these companies are unabashedly guilty of such hiring practices.

I was a Director at Frost & Sullivan (Singapore) Pte Ltd. and I am well aware of our internal slant towards hiring MBAs from India. There was one time when we made 12 offers in one fell swoop to SP Jain (Singapore campus) and IIM MBA graduates. NOT A SINGLE Singaporean was offered a position. It wasn’t for lack of qualified Singaporean candidates either. Even our campus recruitment was geared towards hiring from Indian universities, instead of NUS, SMU and NTU. Cost was not the factor. We offered many of these graduates between SGD6,000 to SGD10,000 a month.

I can’t help but recall a situation of such irony that to this day, it pains me to have had experienced it at all. At Frost & Sullivan, one of our largest client sectors was the Government sector in Singapore. We brought in well over USD2 million a year in consulting engagements from the Government sector alone – both stat boards and ministries. When we staffed our projects, we would be lucky if we had even 20% of Singaporeans being utilized in the project team.

The entire management team at Frost & Sullivan are foreigners (with the exception of one). We have also helped many of our foreign hires to become Singaporean citizens during the period of their employment. While I am not against using foreign talent, the unfortunate reality is that many of these decently paying positions could have very easily been filled by Singaporeans.

Having done Manpower planning studies for two stat boards in Singapore, the facts and figures are quite startling, to say the least.

During my tenure at Hewlett Packard, I was on several government IT projects. Over 90% of my 100+ person team were foreigners. Like many other companies, how HP cleverly circumvented being “obvious” was to use “contractors”. Our contract was with the employment agencies who, in turn hire almost only foreigners. Hence, the headcount was never really seen. Of the 100+ person who was staffed on this one particular government IT engagement, less than 10% were full-time employees hired directly by HP.

In addition to my own personal experience, I know with absolute certainty that many of my close non-Singaporean friends who head up IT divisions within the banking sector have similar preferences of hiring foreigners over Singaporeans. While I cannot condone such practices, the system makes it far too easy for this to happen. They claim that it is better to hire foreigners because these foreign workers are more than likely to stay as almost all of them want to ultimately obtain Singapore citizenship.

Rather than formulating workable incentives to keep Singaporeans at their jobs, management takes the easy way out. Is this how a country takes care of its own?

As citizens, we give our country two and a half years of our life by going through national service. In that time, our foreign compatriots gain experience in the work force and we, as loyal citizens are penalized. Where is the logic behind this? I strongly believe that our government has a primary and inalienable duty and dedication to its citizens.

The vicious cycle is well engrained in every level of employment. Senior Management positions are given to foreign nationals. They then are inclined to hire their own kind, cutting people like myself completely out in the cold with no options but to seek higher-salaried employment elsewhere.

I am now a foreigner working in China because of the simple fact that many of the high-paying jobs in Singapore have been taken by my foreign friends. I would return to Singapore in a heartbeat if I could make the same sort of salary as I do here.

I have never felt more slighted being a Singaporean than I have during my career in Singapore.

Warmest Regards,
xxxxx

Wow, great article. When was this published?? in Straits Times?

[Anonymous]

Originally Posted by Unregistered

LOL. No point discussing this to assume dishonestly that people in civil service management are talent. hahaha.

I'm quite certain that they are more talented than you.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

I'm quite certain that they are more talented than you.

Maybe its time for me to leak out more **** of civil service talent... hahaha.

My former teacher HOD SxK. HOD is talent that can earn $100,000 but look for like parasite to me. When I am teaching in schools, my colleauge told me he everytime go Thailand find chicken.

My colleauge Chinese HOD CTx, everytime told me he go Taiwan find Chicken. Want to reccomend a Taiwanese teacher to me. But then he told me once when she go back Taiwan, that she go back to give her bf there a big Fxxx.

A secondary school in the east, C sec, everyone know then the malay principal kept students as mistress in Australia.

My Principal Singh, like to boost he has a lot of woman when he is young....etc

i got many many stories....

Nevertheless, haha, I think many civil service boss are talent. haha.... since this forum is about engineering, so I stop here for civil service.

I am a engineer and work 3 worst part of my life in civil service. Private sector is much better as you don get to see so many "talent".

More stories... more stories but better keep to myself.

[Anonymous]

Originally Posted by Unregistered

I am a engineer and work 3 worst part of my life in civil service. Private sector is much better as you don get to see so many "talent".

More stories... more stories but better keep to myself.

You can't even justify your point properly and you have to drag individuals' personal conduct into the picture to justify the lack of talent. You say this as though there are fewer of such cases in the private sector. Fact is, scandals exist everywhere. It has got nothing to do with general competencies which is the issue here.

Can't be helped that you disliked your time in the service. I can't imagine you doing any better outside actually, with attitude like yours.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

You can't even justify your point properly and you have to drag individuals' personal conduct into the picture to justify the lack of talent. You say this as though there are fewer of such cases in the private sector. Fact is, scandals exist everywhere. It has got nothing to do with general competencies which is the issue here.

Can't be helped that you disliked your time in the service. I can't imagine you doing any better outside actually, with attitude like yours.

With people like you that do not see the critical link between moral personal vices and educational profession, I am not surprise to see so many teachers screwing students. Even female teachers go to bed with students, and the most high profile case is Goh Ken Swee grandson Goh Ken Yi was recently exposed in court of screwing his teacher.

I really doubt your IQ.

Back to your point, regarding professional knowledge. This is some of my experience of talent I found in MOE.

I was once furious that MOE's edumail was 100++M, without client and support no POP, pure HTTP based, get log out in couple of minutes. And worse, MOE paid for these lousy service and we get free Gmail from google in couple of Gig.

I wrote to IDA, I think it reach someone like Tee Miang and his lackey L. These IDA folks, high ranking, drawing a lot of $$$ cannot even understand the technical terms I wrote. (from the reply they wrote)

Throw me back a email accusing me CC many people using false charges. I wrote in another technical mail, rebuking all the points, I guess they don understand the technical terms.

IDA called me and want to meet me. I told the person I will stop this because as a civil servant, I fully understand that a underling will be held scapegoat.

Can some imagine MOE's edumail was 100++M (if i don remember wrongly), without client and support no POP, pure HTTP based, get log out in couple of minutes. That is 2008 and they actually pay lots of $$$ for this. You call these IT people talent?

The next thing is I attend IDA conference on WIFI-ing the school, where they bring in a lot of vendor. A fat chap from Qala says that we a school need 20-30 AP (cant really remember the number but I think its exhorbitant).

I throw the question to the IDA people. I say my experience in deploying 802.11 BG network is 4 AP within 30m indoor. I cannot figure out the rational of 20-30 AP in a school, and according to my experience there will be inter-channel interference. (There is no 802.11N then).

As a engineer, I am not too sure whether 20-30 AP can really be done in close proximity. Maybe can, so I want to hear the rationale of IDA and Qala and want them to convince me.

The IDA person (IT expert) cannot answer and try to bluff me and told me something that you are teacher, don try to act smart.

I told me I used to deploy network bla bla... The whole theatre suddenly become deaf silence. You know what happened after that? I am out of the game of the commitee of implementing WIFI in school.

I have many many stories...

I am going to be adamant that this time I would not talk about civil service again in this post.

[Anonymous]

Originally Posted by Unregistered

With people like you that do not see the critical link between moral personal vices and educational profession, I am not surprise to see so many teachers screwing students. Even female teachers go to bed with students, and the most high profile case is Goh Ken Swee grandson Goh Ken Yi was recently exposed in court of screwing his teacher.

You are trying to use the examples of several black sheep to prove your point that there are few/no talent, which doesn't make sense. It's like saying most apples are bad because I can show you a few bad apples. Yes, those are bad apples, but there are also many good apples too. I dare say in the teaching service, there are many more good teachers, HODs and principals, than there are bad.

The IDA example - are you seriously expecting senior management to understand technical jargon? Come on. While I respect senior management that worked their way from the ground up, these days most are parachuted in. Even in the private sector, most CEOs would not know the nitty gritty details. They leave it to the technical pp. Rather, they are some MBA folks who are supposedly trained in business strategy. In any case, if you were serious about solving the issue you should have spoken to the IDA staff. I don't buy the scapegoat excuse.

I would be the first to agree that the public service tends to use seemingly old and dated technology that does not seem to be value for money. What to do? public service organisations tend to be very large and changing technology is a slow and tedious process. By the time they decide to adopt a technology after all the 'assessment', technology has already evolved to something else. Is this a critical flaw that totally prevents a good teacher from performing his/her role? My wife is a dedicated teacher. I often lament that the school doesn't provide her with enough resources. She simply works around the problems, and doesn't waste time on such things. Her email is working fine, btw.

MOE example - perhaps that IDA chap was really lousy. You seem to suggest that there was some conspiracy going on which led to your being kicked out. Did they tell you why you were out of the committee? Surely they would have given a reason? Mind sharing here?

You seem to be suggesting that the folks at IDA are pretty useless, don't even know how many access points are needed. Considering that there are many local engineers in IDA, and that many of them probably came from the same school as you, I find it hard to fathom that there isn't a single person in IDA who could have 'discovered' such a significant over-provision. Hard to tell, we don't have the tender specs, and the relevant papers, etc. Everything here, including your views, are all guess work.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

You seem to be suggesting that the folks at IDA are pretty useless, don't even know how many access points are needed. Considering that there are many local engineers in IDA, and that many of them probably came from the same school as you, I find it hard to fathom that there isn't a single person in IDA who could have 'discovered' such a significant over-provision. Hard to tell, we don't have the tender specs, and the relevant papers, etc. Everything here, including your views, are all guess work.

IDA guys are talent. Their talent are not one or two isolated case, but systemic and institutional. Not only they prove themselves extremely competent in making everyone use HTTP mail, then sub-contract MOE mail to GOOGLE (disgraceful). Their boss Yong Ying-il, daughter of LKY classmate are extremely talented holding position as Permanent Secretary (Health) and concurrently Permanent Secretary (National Research and Development).

For example,

Koh Seah Wee was sentenced to 22 years in jail and Lim Chai Meng to 15 years for their roles in cheating Singapore government agencies of S$12.5 million ($10 million) in the city’s biggest public-sector fraud since 1995.

Koh and IDA attached to SLA has a reporting officer of, also another IDA attached to SLA (forget his name). Apparently he is not able understand what Koh is doing. A very junior engineer would have smell a rat.

Ya correct bosses don know nitty gritty.

Anyway, MRT breaks down again and again. Our government so many talent. All these are just isolated cases Singaporeans use to denigrate government.

[Anonymous]

Originally Posted by Unregistered

Anyway, MRT breaks down again and again. Our government so many talent. All these are just isolated cases Singaporeans use to denigrate government.

You are assuming that everyone else with the appropriate technical knowledge, having assessed the business needs, cost,and other relevant factors would agree with you that web-mail is the wrong for schools (I don't think MOE HQ uses web-mail for security reasons). I'm simply not sure if they do.

This discussion stemmed from a very simple point which I made - that there are good officers in the public service who are able to earn within 5 years, above 5k pm. It is a simple fact. And I know because I've seen many of such cases. This point does not contradict and is in itself not mutually exclusive to the fact that corruption and poor bosses exist in the civil service. Yet you kept using the latter to rebut the former. Clearly you can't see logic.

You have a lot of bitterness in you. I think it is obvious to everyone who reads this thread. You can't accept the fact that there are many others in this world who are much more successful than you. Your first reaction is to lash out at them instead of trying to learn from them. Yes, some of them may start off appearing to be arrogant. You can't seem to let that pass and listen to the useful points.

With your kind attitude - thinking that you're always right and everyone else is always wrong - I wonder how you can ever work properly with others who do not share your views. And I predict quite confidently here that that the outcome for you is going to be the same, be it in the public service or outside.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

You are assuming that everyone else with the appropriate technical knowledge, having assessed the business needs, cost,and other relevant factors would agree with you that web-mail is the wrong for schools (I don't think MOE HQ uses web-mail for security reasons). I'm simply not sure if they do.

This discussion stemmed from a very simple point which I made - that there are good officers in the public service who are able to earn within 5 years, above 5k pm. It is a simple fact. And I know because I've seen many of such cases. This point does not contradict and is in itself not mutually exclusive to the fact that corruption and poor bosses exist in the civil service. Yet you kept using the latter to rebut the former. Clearly you can't see logic.

You have a lot of bitterness in you. I think it is obvious to everyone who reads this thread. You can't accept the fact that there are many others in this world who are much more successful than you. Your first reaction is to lash out at them instead of trying to learn from them. Yes, some of them may start off appearing to be arrogant. You can't seem to let that pass and listen to the useful points.

With your kind attitude - thinking that you're always right and everyone else is always wrong - I wonder how you can ever work properly with others who do not share your views. And I predict quite confidently here that that the outcome for you is going to be the same, be it in the public service or outside.

well said.

in fact I think it's incredibly magnanimous of you to continue this discourse with somebody who is clearly not interested in listening to what you have to say.