Salary.sg Forums

Originally Posted by Unregistered

That's the thing. Many times, bosses don't care, so long as someone takes over and finishes it, including CCA that would benefit the bosses as well. Because the management uses secondary tasks or CCA to benchmark promotion or good scoring, it results in people taking shortcuts and not wanting to do their primary job well. It became a choice. When the bosses also want to score points and hands and legs are willing to come help, honestly, they won't care if you can perform well in your primary job, they just care if you can help them to complete the secondary tasks. These are not my views, but what I have seen all these well. A wrongly built culture and beliefs.

Originally Posted by Unregistered

I respect your views. But if a person cannot even do their primary job well, seldom are they given the opportunities for secondary tasks. After all, more work often goes to those who are capable doesn't it? Unless the RO is blind.

Originally Posted by Unregistered

I joined civil service with a significantly smaller “primary scope” as compared to my peers. As a result, I am able to voluntarily take on a lot more CCAs and this has given me a favourable CEP.

Originally Posted by Unregistered

I joined civil service with a significantly smaller “primary scope” as compared to my peers. As a result, I am able to voluntarily take on a lot more CCAs and this has given me a favourable CEP.

Originally Posted by Unregistered

That's the thing. Many times, bosses don't care, so long as someone takes over and finishes it, including CCA that would benefit the bosses as well. Because the management uses secondary tasks or CCA to benchmark promotion or good scoring, it results in people taking shortcuts and not wanting to do their primary job well. It became a choice. When the bosses also want to score points and hands and legs are willing to come help, honestly, they won't care if you can perform well in your primary job, they just care if you can help them to complete the secondary tasks. These are not my views, but what I have seen all these well. A wrongly built culture and beliefs.

Originally Posted by Unregistered

I respect your views. But if a person cannot even do their primary job well, seldom are they given the opportunities for secondary tasks. After all, more work often goes to those who are capable, doesn't it? Unless the RO is blind.

Originally Posted by Unregistered

I disagree. The intensity of the primary job varies among departments. Hence, shouldn't just take it that someone who has secondary things meaning they go over and beyond and also assume that everyone performs average for primary jobs which might not be the case. I have seen people who just focus on secondary things because they know that's how to get more than a C or even a promotion and they just did crap for their primary job and someone has to take their ****.

Originally Posted by Unregistered

Read what you wrote, but slowly this time. If you do your primary scope, you are decent and hence a C. If you go beyond your primary scope and 'overwork', you may deserve something better than a C. Makes sense?

Originally Posted by Unregistered

spoken true to my heart. not sure if all organisations are the same. primary job scope performance does not translate to ranking. in their eyes, primary job scopes are equal and only additional 'projects' or 'organising events' is the differentiation. good people are overworked, bad performance are given a pass.

Originally Posted by Unregistered

spoken true to my heart. not sure if all organisations are the same. primary job scope performance does not translate to ranking. in their eyes, primary job scopes are equal and only additional 'projects' or 'organising events' is the differentiation. good people are overworked, bad performance are given a pass.