I'm not advising anyone (except maybe those who offer snap judgments and verbal abuse instead of useful information, or preferably keeping their mouths shut).sundaymorningstaple wrote:The difference here is you are talking about employers. That is one thing. The MOM is another. Employers don't care.... Anger? Nah. Pity is a more appropriate way as you are "advising" people of ways to screw up their lives here in Singapore. We are trying to help. What's your reason for giving 'bad' advice?
chococat wrote:I'm not advising anyone (except maybe those who offer snap judgments and verbal abuse instead of useful information, or preferably keeping their mouths shut).sundaymorningstaple wrote:The difference here is you are talking about employers. That is one thing. The MOM is another. Employers don't care.... Anger? Nah. Pity is a more appropriate way as you are "advising" people of ways to screw up their lives here in Singapore. We are trying to help. What's your reason for giving 'bad' advice?
I'm not really talking about employers either. (Any company/individual employer worth working your time will not make a value judgment about a worked-six-months-only-but-parted-amicably situation without knowing a few details. In that sense your "employers don't care" is somewhat correct.)
To make it simple, my point is this. The paradigm is shifting...or has shifted (sorry for the cliche). The current view is that an employment history should be a narrative more than a checklist.
Some of the most successful companies now are those that recognize that things that may once have been viewed as "inconsistent/erratic employment history" can be signs of incredibly gifted or charismatic individuals with diverse and valuable skills and/or knowledge bases.
I have seen this firsthand in a small niche company that ballooned to double its size while tripling its profit margin by actively recruiting people with a very specific and varied educational and employment background. In about 18 months it was blowing larger, older companies out of the water--winning un-winnable contracts--all because it focused on hiring people whose "erratic" work histories made them "worth 4 employees" rather than one (in the words of one of their CEOs).
A major western nation as well, has finally stopped using its foreign service examination (an egalitarian but pedantic system) as its primary recruitment tool for general diplomatic positions* and now also takes a close look at CVs to find the sort of people they want to represent them and handle their business abroad.
*generalists are "masters of all trades" (to use a metaphor we all understand)
And the anger is/was obviously mine...your reading skills need a little work, I think!
Not sure why you would find it funny but then it's obvious you are not too aware of the employment ways of Singaporeans. Locals tend to stay with a Company for years, if not for their entire working life, that's just the way they are. Having an expat come into a position just as a stepping stone to move on after a few months does cause resentment amongst locals. It's basically a waste of Company's time, effect and money. I've had a few discussions with both local and expat friends here who have witnessed this first hand.chococat wrote: (Someone is worried amarettoSour is the one "giving us a bad name"? i lol'd at that one!)
I have to agree with Saint. There are two sides.Most Asian or SGer will stay with one company. If they are blue collar , their rice bowl is a big factor to them. White collar yes, they will move round esp in banking, advertising, sales etc.This is already inculcate in their Asian valuesbeppi wrote:Saint is wrong: The average (over all Singapore employees) staying time in one job is around 3.5 years.
I saw this in a study about 8-9 years ago, and don't think it has changed much since.
The study also showed that those who stay longer in one organisation do not progress any more in their job grade. Not sure about cause and effect, but job-hopping and career seem to go together here.
Thank you MSMad Scientist wrote:I have to agree with Saint. There are two sides.Most Asian or SGer will stay with one company. If they are blue collar , their rice bowl is a big factor to them. White collar yes, they will move round esp in banking, advertising, sales etc.This is already inculcate in their Asian valuesbeppi wrote:Saint is wrong: The average (over all Singapore employees) staying time in one job is around 3.5 years.
I saw this in a study about 8-9 years ago, and don't think it has changed much since.
The study also showed that those who stay longer in one organisation do not progress any more in their job grade. Not sure about cause and effect, but job-hopping and career seem to go together here.
I came from sales , mfg electronic background. Most of my staff here has been with me about 5 to 20 yrs when we started back then. Expat and local alike. You treat them like human , it will repay itself in kindness.
For those that job hop , you can see their colours in under 3 years
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests