I really don’t know what I’m defending any more.

[victorlee10]

but if i dun have the oxford guy as an option for you, who will u choose? just curious:think: this has no link with whateva was discussed.

and back to topic.
5 out of 10 is 50%. u sure that lvl of biaseness is so high?
anyways remember. FTs are the cream of the crop of wherever they came from. our cream of the crop is likely not working as your surbordinate but your superior no?

just a honest question: are we sacrificing a little to much on our citizen's livelihood just for the sole sake of financial gain? i believe this could be discussed.

Why do you think it is off topic? You're saying that only 10% in Astar are local due to biasesness of manager. I'm saying it's not solely that. Many FTs are more qualified for the job and asking for same pay. If I'm a PRC manager and the most qualified candidate is a PRC, will you accuse me of biasness if I hire him?

If you don't like the oxford example let me give you another one. I want to hire a plumber, the FT plumber has experience fixing L shape, U shape, I shape pipes whereas the local plumber has only fixed I shape pipes. Whichever I choose, company will offer the market rate. My main concern is quality of experience, not money. I will choose the FT one.

Our FTs are not the cream of the crop. The best are in the US, Europe. Those in singapore are the 2nd best ones. Btw my boss, boss's boss, boss's boss's boss all the way to the top all FTs. Their competence are beyond reproach and I am learning a lot from them. If you ask me if there are locals who can do their job just as well.... I'm sure there is but I've not met him yet. Mine might be a special case since I work in a highly technical area.

 

[allenleonhart]

Why do you think it is off topic? You're saying that only 10% in Astar are local due to biasesness of manager. I'm saying it's not solely that. Many FTs are more qualified for the job and asking for same pay. If I'm a PRC manager and the most qualified candidate is a PRC, will you accuse me of biasness if I hire him?

If you don't like the oxford example let me give you another one. I want to hire a plumber, the FT plumber has experience fixing L shape, U shape, I shape pipes whereas the local plumber has only fixed I shape pipes. Whichever I choose, company will offer the market rate. My main concern is quality of experience, not money. I will choose the FT one.

Our FTs are not the cream of the crop. The best are in the US, Europe. Those in singapore are the 2nd best ones. Btw my boss, boss's boss, boss's boss's boss all the way to the top all FTs. Their competence are beyond reproach and I am learning a lot from them. If you ask me if there are locals who can do their job just as well.... I'm sure there is but I've not met him yet. Mine might be a special case since I work in a highly technical area.

which may be the case with regards why we must import.

example: lucas arts. we dun have the necessary training nor manpower. how u wanna develop something we have no experience with? that i wont deny the importance.

yet for other areas... i cant say its as fair i guess. anyways i'm getting sick of this topic.
it is arguable abt whether the importing has a negative influence in the opportunities for sg ppl to develop in the field. remember. with each upper position taken up, it might mean you have 1 less position to climb, to learn and experience. sure putting the best man in the place may seem like the obvious ans, but that would mean 1 less chance for anyone who could have the potential to learn.

its like... if i am a boss of a photography company and i have to cover a wedding, sure i have to field my best photographers for lets say a wedding cause its professionalism. if they are FTs, so be it. but with each FT that i have, it will mean less 1 local to take on the role. there is a need to balance out the financial development and the development of local talents. FTs may be a shortcut to solving work force issues, but it may also result in the long run a lack of development in the local talents.

i debated it in a thread i started somewhere in this year jan to death.:sweat:

i still stand by my stand. FTs are fine. so long as they stay here, leave the knowledge and develop sg. take up citizenship for all they want. its a good thing.

what is not good would be FTs who come here, leech and then run away. that would be a pressing problem.

balance out the development of FT and LTs. in long term run, aim to rely more on LTs than FTs.

 

[night86mare]

Will I be asked "put yourself in his shoe" if a thief comes into my house, rob my money off, and get scot-free? Ask yourself this question. ;(

could you kindly explain how your analogy of a thief relates to foreigners in singapore?

let's be a little more objective here. maybe you can't see the difference, but i have friends who work overseas, and i think it's sad that the people here attach such negative connotations to the good people i know who just want to gain some work experience in another country for a while. maybe if you had say, a good friend who was working overseas, you might think twice about using such a strong analogy as a "thief".

are we all going to say that zemotion (zhang jingna), who's currently based overseas, is also a thief living off other people's resources? you can't just selectively paint your friends or the people you know as perfectly alright people, while painting others as thieves....?

 

[night86mare]

its like... if i am a boss of a photography company and i have to cover a wedding, sure i have to field my best photographers for lets say a wedding cause its professionalism. if they are FTs, so be it. but with each FT that i have, it will mean less 1 local to take on the role. there is a need to balance out the financial development and the development of local talents. FTs may be a shortcut to solving work force issues, but it may also result in the long run a lack of development in the local talents.

you are saying that having a localised industry leads to localised development of talent?

i think that's taking a far too simplistic view. you need a lot more than just "employment of locals" for that to happen. that's like saying that if i start a little colony focusing on quantum physics on pulau ubin, eventually after a hundred years, my little society over there is going to produce little einsteins. :bsmilie:

 

[Limsgp]

imho, there are alot of managerial position which not possible to be filled by locals only.
quality is NOT subjective to nationality. quality is more to individual.. we dont have to see he/she is FT or Local.. as long he can do the job, he agree with the pay, he gets the job.

I do not agree with that. Majority of these position could be easily filled by locals. But the situation now is that more than acceptable percentage is filled with foreigners.

My point here is not to discuss the reason why foreigners are hired. What I'm saying is the foreigners are taking away jobs that could hv been filled by locals. And sometimes, the foreigners are not necessarily doing a better job.

And, more or less the govt policy has a part to play to result in this situations.

Maybe, if they limit the EP and S Pass numbers, it would be better for locals.

 

[brapodam]

Have we given up on training locals? I thought we had spur? Or has changing its name made it irrelevant? The whole point of it is to train our people right? If we are just going to stop training locals because these foreigners got more experience than us and are already ready for hire then where is all this money going? Are employers now excused from sending people for training because they can just tale the easy way out and hire those who have the skills? Not saying it's wrong but not hiring locals because they don't want to send their workers for heavily subsidized training doesn't sound too good

 

[night86mare]

btw, if you have to stand up to ask and say that you don't know what you're defending anymore, i'm not really sure that everything can be blamed on policy. maybe the reasons that are cited could be seen as valid , depending on your perspective... but if you say that you don't feel inclined or bonded to singapore because there are many foreigners around... then i would really question if you are picking at a convenient excuse to explain your lack of attachment to the country you live in. i would also think that given another country, another scenario, that same person would probably not feel much at all.

attachment to a country is not just based on external factors. you have cases of mothers who had did their best for their kids being abandoned in old age. would you have the heart to say that in such a case, they deserved it? if you won't, then why do so many people (who won't) choose to dump the entire load at someone else's door?

 

[Limsgp]

Don't tell me you'll hire peeps based on his nationality alone. :nono:

It's easy to miss out important matters like locals being picky about location of work, long working hours, being inflexible (don't want weekend work, don't want night shift, don't want to do support work etc).. among other things.

:Later,

That is an irrelevant question.

The issue here is whether the govt can safeguard the interests and jobs of its citizens by appropriate policies. Nowadays, the policies seems to encourage foreigners working here, and making citizens more and more difficult to earn their keep.

And who are the ones who's not happy with some of the labor policies that contributed to increase in foreign labors?

It's the Singaporeans talking about the policies in their home, their land, their country, their Singapore. They have every right to voice their displeasure at the ugly fact of foreigners taking away their jobs in THEIR HOMELAND. A little dot on the Map where they committed to it's defense and sworn to protect.

 

[allenleonhart]

you are saying that having a localised industry leads to localised development of talent?

i think that's taking a far too simplistic view. you need a lot more than just "employment of locals" for that to happen. that's like saying that if i start a little colony focusing on quantum physics on pulau ubin, eventually after a hundred years, my little society over there is going to produce little einsteins. :bsmilie:

well... we dun need einsteins every day right?:bsmilie: thats too specific, and it requires a bit of a flair/talent.

its more of ensuring that those who are good at what they do having the necessary opportunities for them to develop? if i have a talent at relativity, but i lack the necessary working experience and i got no money to go oxford, so i might have gotten my degree at nus. i might have less chance of landing that job for the experience compared to my foreign counterparts who have both working experience and better qualifications...

afterall einstein was just a 3rd class engineer:bsmilie: somehow he got his lucky break with his stay at the patent office:sweat: it seems like he almost gave up hope of going to a university too.

is singapoer worth defending? honestly i dunno. is my family worth defending? yes. to be patriotic, there must be some level of acceptance of the policies implemented. when you defend a country, to me its not just the people, but the value system, the beliefs that come with it. differs slightly from your definition of a country i guess

 

[night86mare]

afterall einstein was just a 3rd class engineer:bsmilie: somehow he got his lucky break with his stay at the patent office:sweat: it seems like he almost gave up hope of going to a university too

well, looks like he actually bothered to sit around on his own and think, instead of waiting for the local government then to train him to produce the concept of relativity.

food for thought, ain't it?

 

[allenleonhart]

well, looks like he actually bothered to sit around on his own and think, instead of waiting for the local government then to train him to produce the concept of relativity.

food for thought, ain't it?

:bsmilie: well i do try to day dream. it seems he got his inspiration cause of day dreaming. i need more inspiration for whateva development i need too!

just kidding. i do try my best in to my best of my ability at least. so far no regrets einstein wasnt a passive learner. very self motivated. seems like he learned calculus on his own...

 

[PaulKami]

could you kindly explain how your analogy of a thief relates to foreigners in singapore?

let's be a little more objective here. maybe you can't see the difference, but i have friends who work overseas, and i think it's sad that the people here attach such negative connotations to the good people i know who just want to gain some work experience in another country for a while. maybe if you had say, a good friend who was working overseas, you might think twice about using such a strong analogy as a "thief".

are we all going to say that zemotion (zhang jingna), who's currently based overseas, is also a thief living off other people's resources? you can't just selectively paint your friends or the people you know as perfectly alright people, while painting others as thieves....?

Your analogy: A foreigner gaining experience from work overseas, a form of living

My words: A foreigner who uses our resources for their own beneficial, a leecher
My analogy: A thief gain access to your assets unrightfully. My claim is that they uses our resources unrightfully, leading to moral and social issue, worse when they contributed nothing. In what way am I pointing them and claimed as 'thieves'? After all, the foreigners who worked here pay taxes too... unless you're talking about those whom 'exploit loop holes'. :dunno:

Perhaps you disagree. Mind telling me why you disagree so?

Perhaps you can enlighten me with your ideas with these examples, I'm not stubborn enough to hold my belief if you can 'correct' me in my view. But until then, my view stays. We don't need leechers. :nono:

1) A bond breaker of a scholarship, especially having locals as guarantor
2) A foreigner gaining PR after working here for a period of time before migrating to other countries (especially a certain nation of people)
3) A foreigner with recognition in their country (degree) finding a job in Singapore with the requirement of degree at a lower pay (10-20% lower than standard market rate)

PS: who is zemotion btw?

 

[allenleonhart]

Your analogy: A foreigner gaining experience from work overseas, a form of living

My words: A foreigner who uses our resources for their own beneficial, a leecher
My analogy: A thief gain access to your assets unrightfully. My claim is that they uses our resources unrightfully, leading to moral and social issue, worse when they contributed nothing. In what way am I pointing them and claimed as 'thieves'? After all, the foreigners who worked here pay taxes too... unless you're talking about those whom 'exploit loop holes'. :dunno:

Perhaps you disagree. Mind telling me why you disagree so?

Perhaps you can enlighten me with your ideas with these examples, I'm not stubborn enough to hold my belief if you can 'correct' me in my view. But until then, my view stays. We don't need leechers. :nono:

1) A bond breaker of a scholarship, especially having locals as guarantor
2) A foreigner gaining PR after working here for a period of time before migrating to other countries (especially a certain nation of people)
3) A foreigner with recognition in their country (degree) finding a job in Singapore with the requirement of degree at a lower pay (10-20% lower than standard market rate)

PS: who is zemotion btw?

i think your definition is too wide. not all FTs are leechers. u have to give up with that point. go up and see about lucas arts with regards to this.

the leechers you define has to be
1: good pay.
2: minimal impact in sg, no passing on of knowledge and provides minimal development
3: runs back to the motherland after earning enough.
4: spends minimal in their stay in sg

its only in this context i'll agree with leechers.

on the other hand:
professors from good universities around the world, coming here to do a project with nus, while giving lectures to the uni students. i'll say they have a positive impact overall.

it depends really.

 

[CamInit]

I do not agree with that. Majority of these position could be easily filled by locals. But the situation now is that more than acceptable percentage is filled with foreigners.

My point here is not to discuss the reason why foreigners are hired. What I'm saying is the foreigners are taking away jobs that could hv been filled by locals. And sometimes, the foreigners are not necessarily doing a better job.

And, more or less the govt policy has a part to play to result in this situations.

Maybe, if they limit the EP and S Pass numbers, it would be better for locals.

There's a quota based on employment percentage but apparently there are ways going around it. One of the contractors I worked with last time, employs all foreign workers. Malaysian, Burmese and Indian for everything technical, installation, support, software and IT. Oh well. And there's the pretty common practice of underpaying the minimum required for the various work passes/permits in SMEs. With the mindset of cost cutting and squeezing the most from employees, I can see why locals are at a disadvantage. Limited not just to just blue collar work which locals shunned. NS is also seen as a liability.

 

[PaulKami]

i think your definition is too wide. not all FTs are leechers. u have to give up with that point. go up and see about lucas arts with regards to this.

the leechers you define has to be
1: good pay.
2: minimal impact in sg, no passing on of knowledge and provides minimal development
3: runs back to the motherland after earning enough.
4: spends minimal in their stay in sg

its only in this context i'll agree with leechers.

on the other hand:
professors from good universities around the world, coming here to do a project with nus, while giving lectures to the uni students. i'll say they have a positive impact overall.

it depends really.

If I have to point finger and be specific, then I guess I'll really be the one who create the social problems already :bsmilie:

The question for him to me is my definition of 'thieves' and why he disagree, which I raised a few questions to him too. I believe his answer would be objective one, and I'll take that into account. As mentioned previously (not really the last post thingy, but to be specific...), I've no intention to further discuss this topic here (brain dead, can't think now... -_-;. Reading the discussion you guys made is adequate.

My sentiment stays as of now. What more can be added? That I disagree there's certain social issues that are being ignored and not taken care off? Very difficult for me to agree with this statement. :dunno:

 

[Simon_84]

 

[deadsea]

Have we given up on training locals? I thought we had spur? Or has changing its name made it irrelevant? The whole point of it is to train our people right? If we are just going to stop training locals because these foreigners got more experience than us and are already ready for hire then where is all this money going? Are employers now excused from sending people for training because they can just tale the easy way out and hire those who have the skills? Not saying it's wrong but not hiring locals because they don't want to send their workers for heavily subsidized training doesn't sound too good

Just think about it from the company's point of view. If i send the local for training, i lose the worker for however many days it needs to complete the lessons. Then there's the salary during the training period. Then the training costs. And of course in typical government fashion, the paperwork to get the grants for the training.

At the end of it all, the company gets a freshly trained worker.

Alternative, hire some FT that has some experience, can start now and is willing to accept a lower pay. Fairly obvious choice if you're the boss.

It's nearly impossible to compete with a FT even if the skillsets, job experience is the same. Simply because they can do the same for less. Lower cost of living back home. We've got no back home to run to.

 

[deadsea]

professors from good universities around the world, coming here to do a project with nus, while giving lectures to the uni students. i'll say they have a positive impact overall.

it depends really.

This REALLY depends too. I've had plenty of issues with my FT lecturers back then.. Undecipherable lectures, smoke screens so lousy that we could tell he was smoking us. Explanations that are totally inane.

Q: How to identify between A and B.
A: B is the one that's not A............ Face, i would like to introduce you to Palm.

Fortunately for us, we can read and we do have notes and textbooks.

Of course not all are like that. But imagine the QC in place if classics like A not B can get through?

 

[ricohflex]

It is a fact that life is not fair.
Think back to WW2.
Before the war broke out, some rich people left Europe for USA or South America or Canada and brought their riches with them.
Similarly, some rich locals in Malaysia or Singapore may have left for Australia or even US.
They were untouched by the war.
They avoided fighting for their country or colonial master (whichever side Nazi Germany or Allies).
Many of their countrymen who stayed to fight, died or were maimed or lost everything after the war.
After the war in 1946, these people returned in one piece and with the retained wealth, was able to buy up large properties and land, start businesses or factories.
From merely rich, they became very rich.
Then when the country prospered in the 1970s, their wealth multiplied many fold.
They became super rich.
Then when the country prospered even more in 2010, they already passed away. But their children and grand children became mega-ultra rich.

Yes, these were cowards who ran away.
But they have benefited immensely.
This is the stark reality.

The descendants of many of their countrymen who stayed to fight, died or were maimed in the war, struggled a poverty stricken life. Some made it out of poverty trap through education or sheer hard work. Many of those descendants of the brave are still very poor today. So you just have to accept reality for what it is.

In USA, a person who escaped to Canada and refused to do his duty fighting in Vietnam, later became President of the United States. Life is not fair.

 

[aeskywan]

It is a fact that life is not fair.
Think back to WW2.
Before the war broke out, some rich people left Europe for USA or South America or Canada and brought their riches with them.
Similarly, some rich locals in Malaysia or Singapore may have left for Australia or even US.
They were untouched by the war.
They avoided fighting for their country or colonial master (whichever side Nazi Germany or Allies).
Many of their countrymen who stayed to fight, died or were maimed or lost everything after the war.
After the war in 1946, these people returned in one piece and with the retained wealth, was able to buy up large properties and land, start businesses or factories.
From merely rich, they became very rich.
Then when the country prospered in the 1970s, their wealth multiplied many fold.
They became super rich.
Then when the country prospered even more in 2010, they already passed away. But their children and grand children became mega-ultra rich.

Yes, these were cowards who ran away.
But they have benefited immensely.
This is the stark reality.

The descendants of many of their countrymen who stayed to fight, died or were maimed in the war, struggled a poverty stricken life. Some made it out of poverty trap through education or sheer hard work. Many of those descendants of the brave are still very poor today. So you just have to accept reality for what it is.

In USA, a person who escaped to Canada and refused to do his duty fighting in Vietnam, later became President of the United States. Life is not fair.

U should check out this book Asian Godfathers..... it is exactly what you just said...