Singapore Expats Forum

Getting EPs is going to get tougher

Discuss about any latest news or current affairs in Singapore or globally. Please DO NOT copy and paste news articles from other sources without written permission.
User avatar
Wd40
Director
Director
Posts: 3788
Joined: Tue, 04 Dec 2012
Location: SIndiapore

Getting EPs is going to get tougher

Postby Wd40 » Mon, 28 Apr 2014 2:39 pm

Although we know this for sometime already that EPs approvals have been tightened. Here is an interesting article that confirms that:

http://news.efinancialcareers.com/sg-en ... n-bankers/

User avatar
Fortan
Chatter
Chatter
Posts: 466
Joined: Thu, 01 Aug 2013

Postby Fortan » Mon, 28 Apr 2014 3:57 pm

Just go ahead and keep tightening until everybody buggers off to neighboring countries....

User avatar
Barnsley
Manager
Manager
Posts: 2067
Joined: Tue, 10 Jun 2008
Location: Pasir Ris
Contact:

Postby Barnsley » Mon, 28 Apr 2014 5:28 pm

Fortan wrote:Just go ahead and keep tightening until everybody buggers off to neighboring countries....


If you feel like you are not benefiting from the current system then you are not going to care.
Life is short, paddle harder!!

User avatar
Brah
Manager
Manager
Posts: 1956
Joined: Sat, 18 Dec 2010

Postby Brah » Mon, 28 Apr 2014 7:24 pm

Interesting article, thanks for the link:

"Despite the rising administrative burden created by the FCF, banks in Singapore will still be hiring foreign candidates this year. “Singapore has comparatively high economic growth, low unemployment and a small population for a big financial centre, so fundamentally the local skill-shortage problem will never be entirely solved,”

User avatar
Wd40
Director
Director
Posts: 3788
Joined: Tue, 04 Dec 2012
Location: SIndiapore

Postby Wd40 » Mon, 28 Apr 2014 7:57 pm

I hear from couple of sources that Barclays is going to make some massive layoffs this month end, eliminate entire departments. Expect lots of supply in the jobs markets for the next couple of months.

One good thing about Singapore is that people usually head back home when they lose their job, because most people are on EP. Compare this with Australia where people just land there with PRs in an already saturated IT job market and people who lose jobs are also PRs/Citizens also hang around.

User avatar
JR8
Immortal
Immortal
Posts: 16514
Joined: Wed, 24 Mar 2010
Location: K. Puki Manis

Postby JR8 » Mon, 28 Apr 2014 8:44 pm

An MNC has to pay an FT maybe double+ (fully costed) what a local would get in that same role: Presumably they are currently willing to do that for a very good reason.

Solution: Force MNC to hire locals

Result: MNC decides operating a business/subsidiary in SG is no longer viable, and hence leaves, taking ALL jobs with it.



I am reminded of Ayn Rand's book 'Atlas Shrugged'.

User avatar
Barnsley
Manager
Manager
Posts: 2067
Joined: Tue, 10 Jun 2008
Location: Pasir Ris
Contact:

Postby Barnsley » Tue, 29 Apr 2014 10:34 am

JR8 wrote:An MNC has to pay an FT maybe double+ (fully costed) what a local would get in that same role: Presumably they are currently willing to do that for a very good reason.

Solution: Force MNC to hire locals

Result: MNC decides operating a business/subsidiary in SG is no longer viable, and hence leaves, taking ALL jobs with it.

I am reminded of Ayn Rand's book 'Atlas Shrugged'.


I will refer you to the answer I gave earlier , if a majority of the public feel that they are not benefiting from how things are then they really wouldnt care if all the MNC's up and leave.
Where all the companies would relocate to I do not know.


T
Life is short, paddle harder!!

User avatar
JR8
Immortal
Immortal
Posts: 16514
Joined: Wed, 24 Mar 2010
Location: K. Puki Manis

Postby JR8 » Tue, 29 Apr 2014 1:06 pm

Barnsley wrote:I will refer you to the answer I gave earlier , if a majority of the public feel that they are not benefiting from how things are then they really wouldnt care if all the MNC's up and leave. Where all the companies would relocate to I do not know.
T


Given how much effort the gahmen put into attracting MNCs I'm not sure that correlates with The Plan.

Perhaps more effort should be made by the gahmen to publicise how much tax the MNCs pay? You know, try and reduce the sour-grapes/kiasuness from the vocal-locals*. Though the cynic in me also considers that the gahmen find it convenient having a 'bete de jour' ('beast of the day' i.e. target for current popular displeasure. Better than than have them bash the government eh?).

I know from when I worked in finance here, that the company was very sensitive to local circumstances, and how the latter changed. We relo'd units from Tokyo to Hong Kong (and back again!), and from Singapore to HK and India. At least once a year it was reviewed what if any departments could be relo'd to materially more cost effective locations than Singapore, or outsourced, and so on.

If your operation is say institutional banking, then you look for a regional base. It doesn't really matter if it's say SG, KL, BK, or maybe DUB. Refer further how physical pit-trading no longer exists - it has all gone computerised and 'upstairs' to the corporate offices, but it matters little precisely where those offices are located.

It's helpful if it has reasonable time-zone presence (not many people enjoy working nights), an ability to hire educated and intelligent local staff to work with the required P and S-Pass imports (hopefully there will be locals within those skill-levels too), and decent IT/comms infrastructure. That said, private client banking is another matter, as in that case you need a posh office in a convenient city-centre area, where the local clients can come visit for meetings.

I think the gahmen better take care. If this policy forces MNCs to hire locals just to 'get quota' then it might make SG a relatively less attractive place. So in future, the pressure to leave will grow, and if you have a dynamic and growing company, looking for a base in Asia-Pac, what might they see, a requirement to hire a lot of 'collateral baggage' they don't want and can't afford?


* can I 'TM' that one, as an expression for anti-FT locals ... :) :wink:

User avatar
AndrewV
Chatter
Chatter
Posts: 176
Joined: Sun, 05 Jun 2011

Postby AndrewV » Tue, 29 Apr 2014 6:05 pm

JR8 wrote:
Barnsley wrote:I will refer you to the answer I gave earlier , if a majority of the public feel that they are not benefiting from how things are then they really wouldnt care if all the MNC's up and leave. Where all the companies would relocate to I do not know.
T


Given how much effort the gahmen put into attracting MNCs I'm not sure that correlates with The Plan.

Perhaps more effort should be made by the gahmen to publicise how much tax the MNCs pay? You know, try and reduce the sour-grapes/kiasuness from the vocal-locals*. Though the cynic in me also considers that the gahmen find it convenient having a 'bete de jour' ('beast of the day' i.e. target for current popular displeasure. Better than than have them bash the government eh?).

I know from when I worked in finance here, that the company was very sensitive to local circumstances, and how the latter changed. We relo'd units from Tokyo to Hong Kong (and back again!), and from Singapore to HK and India. At least once a year it was reviewed what if any departments could be relo'd to materially more cost effective locations than Singapore, or outsourced, and so on.

If your operation is say institutional banking, then you look for a regional base. It doesn't really matter if it's say SG, KL, BK, or maybe DUB. Refer further how physical pit-trading no longer exists - it has all gone computerised and 'upstairs' to the corporate offices, but it matters little precisely where those offices are located.

It's helpful if it has reasonable time-zone presence (not many people enjoy working nights), an ability to hire educated and intelligent local staff to work with the required P and S-Pass imports (hopefully there will be locals within those skill-levels too), and decent IT/comms infrastructure. That said, private client banking is another matter, as in that case you need a posh office in a convenient city-centre area, where the local clients can come visit for meetings.

I think the gahmen better take care. If this policy forces MNCs to hire locals just to 'get quota' then it might make SG a relatively less attractive place. So in future, the pressure to leave will grow, and if you have a dynamic and growing company, looking for a base in Asia-Pac, what might they see, a requirement to hire a lot of 'collateral baggage' they don't want and can't afford?


* can I 'TM' that one, as an expression for anti-FT locals ... :) :wink:


this policy is not forcing companies to hire locals, it is forcing companies to look for locals first before hiring from outside. I think this is perfectly fair and practiced by several countries (like Canada).

Yes, you can argue that sg's competitiveness will be compromised and cost structure may be impacted, however from the governments point of view, in the long run this may create more skilled locals, which the goverment is trying to achieve.

They should be careful to calibrate the pass approvals based on feedback they receive from the company's though.

User avatar
JR8
Immortal
Immortal
Posts: 16514
Joined: Wed, 24 Mar 2010
Location: K. Puki Manis

Postby JR8 » Tue, 29 Apr 2014 6:33 pm

If the incentive to hire locals is already there, why do MNCs have to now be forced to prove they've scanned the market to check for candidates? Surely if they wished to hire far cheaper local staff, they'd simply would do so.

SG scared away lots of smart *locals*, who emigrated. Later, they created a government 'special forces' unit called Contact Singapore, to try and coax them back.

Not so long ago, gahmen have campaign, 'Stop at one', to coerce people into only having one child. Subsequently they reversed this completely and started paying out 'Baby Bonuses' for as much as a local woman could hatch.

Now, gahmen scaring away MNCs. Maybe down the road, they will have to create a special unit, to try and coax them all back?

User avatar
the lynx
Governor
Governor
Posts: 5239
Joined: Thu, 09 Dec 2010
Location: Midgar

Postby the lynx » Wed, 30 Apr 2014 9:03 am

JR8 wrote:Not so long ago, gahmen have campaign, 'Stop at one', to coerce people into only having one child. Subsequently they reversed this completely and started paying out 'Baby Bonuses' for as much as a local woman could hatch.


Stop at Two :P

And then there was Graduate Mother scheme.

User avatar
JR8
Immortal
Immortal
Posts: 16514
Joined: Wed, 24 Mar 2010
Location: K. Puki Manis

Postby JR8 » Wed, 30 Apr 2014 10:55 am

the lynx wrote:Stop at Two :P
And then there was Graduate Mother scheme.


Yah that was a bit of super-classy neo-eugenics.

Get paid a cash bonus for popping them out, but only if you're a graduate.

Hmmm! Uniquely Singapore.

User avatar
Addadude
Reporter
Reporter
Posts: 683
Joined: Fri, 26 May 2006
Location: Darkest Telok Blangah
Contact:

Postby Addadude » Wed, 30 Apr 2014 11:26 am

JR8 wrote:If the incentive to hire locals is already there, why do MNCs have to now be forced to prove they've scanned the market to check for candidates? Surely if they wished to hire far cheaper local staff, they'd simply would do so.


Because the preferential hiring of particular nationalities by MNCs who have senior management of that same nationality is a very common practise.

I have seen it happen so often in companies I've worked in/interacted with and it's so blatant it's not funny.

So many MNCs have been taking the piss with their hiring policies for years that it's hardly surprising the gahment has decided to push back.
"Both politicians and nappies need to be changed regularly, and for the same reasons."

User avatar
Wd40
Director
Director
Posts: 3788
Joined: Tue, 04 Dec 2012
Location: SIndiapore

Postby Wd40 » Wed, 30 Apr 2014 11:50 am

Addadude wrote:
JR8 wrote:If the incentive to hire locals is already there, why do MNCs have to now be forced to prove they've scanned the market to check for candidates? Surely if they wished to hire far cheaper local staff, they'd simply would do so.


Because the preferential hiring of particular nationalities by MNCs who have senior management of that same nationality is a very common practise.

I have seen it happen so often in companies I've worked in/interacted with and it's so blatant it's not funny.

So many MNCs have been taking the piss with their hiring policies for years that it's hardly surprising the gahment has decided to push back.


Just because there are hordes of particular nationality in MNCs doesn't mean they have been hired by ignoring locals.

Its like there are hordes of Bangladeshi cleaners in HDB blocks, doesn't mean they were hired by disadvantaging Singaporeans.

You see these same nationalities in abundance in MNCs in top cities anywhere in the world. Go to Microsoft in Redmond and see for yourself.

http://redmond.patch.com/groups/politic ... 9474ad98b8

User avatar
Barnsley
Manager
Manager
Posts: 2067
Joined: Tue, 10 Jun 2008
Location: Pasir Ris
Contact:

Postby Barnsley » Wed, 30 Apr 2014 11:58 am

Wd40 wrote:
Just because there are hordes of particular nationality in MNCs doesn't mean they have been hired by ignoring locals.

Its like there are hordes of Bangladeshi cleaners in HDB blocks, doesn't mean they were hired by disadvantaging Singaporeans.


It doesnt matter if there are discremanatory hiring practises or not .....

If the perception is that there are then its up to the hiring folks to change that perception or they will pay the price in the long run.

Perceeption often trumps reality
Life is short, paddle harder!!


  • Similar Topics
    Replies
    Views
    Last post

Return to “Latest News & Current Affairs”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests