Singapore Expats Forum

Singapore Fair Consideration Framework

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.
gailwynand
Regular
Regular
Posts: 54
Joined: Mon, 10 Dec 2012

Postby gailwynand » Sun, 03 Aug 2014 8:31 pm

AndrewV wrote:I'm not implying that at all and I don't think the FCF is meant for this purpose.
given two equally qualified potential hires, the preference should always go to the singaporean/PR. Currently this is not the case because of the 17% overhead in the salary due to CPF contribution (there may be some factors negating this)and mandatory reservist nudging the hiring decision(albeit slightly) the other way. The FCF nudges companies to swing the pendulum more towards equilibrium.

Foreigners have their own overhead though so the calculation isn't that clear cut.

- need higher pay to cover rental costs
- require health insurance for themselves and possibly family members
- generally take a long annual vacation to go home
- EP paperwork/fees
- have to contribute CPF anyway if they get PR

brian_singapore
Chatter
Chatter
Posts: 304
Joined: Mon, 29 Jul 2013

Postby brian_singapore » Sun, 03 Aug 2014 8:54 pm

I think in most countries the standard is given 2 equally qualified candidates you have to take the local over the foreigner. But here is the thing (and obviously skewed towards my particular niche), in 17 years I have never had 2 equally qualified candidates.

There is a myriad of reasons for this, good candidates are hard to find. Period. In most cases when I've finally found one I like, I move forward as quickly as possible so we don't loose them. I don't usually have a pipeline lined up behind them that I continue interviewing. In cases where I find a good candidate but not the right person for my opening, I put them forward for other more suitable positions I may be aware of in the organization.

For these reasons I'm sceptical of any argument based on '2 equally skilled candidates'. It feels a bit too theoretical and just doesn't reflect my day-to-day.

Now I'll admit to being less sceptical for positions in industries or environments that require hiring of scores of individuals to carry out manual or procedural tasks.

I think what the FCF does do, far more importantly then re-enforce the 'hire equally skilled locals first' is ensure the pipeline of locals is visible to hiring managers and they are first in the queue to be interviewed, and that they will be interviewed. This I think will be the most beneficial side-effect for SG/PRs overall and probably the desired outcome of the FCF.

All of the above is predicated on my view that companies that actively discriminate and explicitly don't hire certain groups on policy really should be actively sanctioned and have their access to work permits curtailed and/or revoked. The FCF may provide statistical or flagging of these types.

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

Postby Wd40 » Sun, 03 Aug 2014 9:28 pm

brian_singapore wrote:There is a myriad of reasons for this, good candidates are hard to find. Period. In most cases when I've finally found one I like, I move forward as quickly as possible so we don't loose them. I don't usually have a pipeline lined up behind them that I continue interviewing. In cases where I find a good candidate but not the right person for my opening, I put them forward for other more suitable positions I may be aware of in the organization.



Off topic, but I love it when I spot people making this typo, especially from native English speakers :P

brian_singapore
Chatter
Chatter
Posts: 304
Joined: Mon, 29 Jul 2013

Postby brian_singapore » Sun, 03 Aug 2014 9:34 pm

Wd40 wrote:
brian_singapore wrote:There is a myriad of reasons for this, good candidates are hard to find. Period. In most cases when I've finally found one I like, I move forward as quickly as possible so we don't loose them. I don't usually have a pipeline lined up behind them that I continue interviewing. In cases where I find a good candidate but not the right person for my opening, I put them forward for other more suitable positions I may be aware of in the organization.



Off topic, but I love it when I spot people making this typo, especially from native English speakers :P


Oddly, I'm not a native English writer.
:D

User avatar
sundaymorningstaple
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 34268
Joined: Thu, 11 Nov 2004
Location: Still Fishing!
Contact:

Postby sundaymorningstaple » Sun, 03 Aug 2014 10:40 pm

Wd, something about hoists & petards springs to mind. :lol:

User avatar
ecureilx
Immortal
Immortal
Posts: 9283
Joined: Fri, 20 Aug 2010

Postby ecureilx » Sun, 03 Aug 2014 11:06 pm

Wd40 wrote:[.

Also most foreigners coming from emerging markets, for the PMET categories, these days have better living standards in their own countries than Singapore and unless they can save significantly higher, they wont come here.


other than India which emerging countries are you talking about here?

especially in asean nations a PMET with the lowest pay offer here get thrilled since that amount is more than twice of whats on offer back home.

btw, I noticed FCF has excluded companies with less than 25 staff head count

isn't it that most employers here are SMEs?

myprhui
Member
Member
Posts: 21
Joined: Fri, 01 Aug 2014

Postby myprhui » Sun, 03 Aug 2014 11:28 pm

Hi Andrew
For pete's sake, I am not sure why you have this opinion but I assure you that the cost of hiring a foreigner is definitely higher than a local. If cost is the only consideration, I will always hire a local over a foreigner.

The FCF and FCD are there for other reasons. There are some foreign managers who prefer to hire their own and I guess these incompetent fools prefer to stay in their comfort zone. There are also some companies who try to cut down on search cost, time and effort by hiring foreigners from the same channels. With FCF and FCD, its getting risky for them to continue with these practices. In the jobs bank, there is a feedback aka complain option for each advertisement which I am sure Singaporeans will make full use. We do not need FCD. They should release the civil servants in FCD back into the labour market. HR and senior managers are also well aware of the risk and impact of being named and shamed by Singaporeans. We do have idiots like Anton to remind us.

Just relax and have a good week.

beppi
Manager
Manager
Posts: 1751
Joined: Thu, 07 Sep 2006
Location: Ahlongistan (O$P$)

Postby beppi » Mon, 04 Aug 2014 4:37 am

myprhui wrote:I assure you that the cost of hiring a foreigner is definitely higher than a local.

The statistics clearly dispute this claim:
The majority of foreigners in Singapore work in manual or other labour positions (on WP) for salaries no local would want to work for (usually well below S$2000/month).
Even if you meant hiring foreigners is more costly than a similarly skilled local (if you can find one), you forget about the scores of Malaysians, Indians, Indonesians and Chinese who are so desperate to come here on EP that they accept job offers far below what is market rate for locals.

Why would a company in its right mind pay a foreigner more for the same job than a local???

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

Postby the lynx » Mon, 04 Aug 2014 9:27 am

myprhui wrote:I will expect some companies especially banks to overreact to the FCF requirements. Banks are always wary of unnecessary attention from the authorities and if I still remember correctly some of the banks in Singapore were actually warned by MAS or MOM to rectify their HR practices.

In my company, we will advise our hiring managers to always interview the Singaporean/PR candidates first. We also encourage them to consider hiring a local candidate who may not fully meet all the job requirements but they have good attitudes. The concept is to first bring these local folks in and then train/mentor them on areas where they are weak in. There are a lot of reasons why Singaporeans are not being hire and its not always because they are not qualified or we didn't give them a chance. In my experience, a lot of times its due to the salary negotiation. We have candidates who strongly insist on a 30-40% (or even 50%) increment and it just not possible for the hiring manager to always justify such an increment especially if it is the same role.

Actually this FCD thing was created because Singaporeans complained to MOM that a system which only relies on whistle blowers is not enough. So MOM create this FCD to proactively identify "bad" employers. In my opinion and with my understanding of Singaporeans, I believe the complaint system will work just fine.


Just wondering, how would a hiring manager know that the candidate is asking 30-50% increment? Is it because this hiring manager has the practice of making the candidate to break his confidentiality with his former employer and divulge his previous salary? I'd personally think that it is an unfair and wrong practice, no matter how common it is (I noticed) around here.

I think the candidate should be given the chance to negotiate the salary as high or as low as he wants. If his track records speak of that high value and he has been chaffed by unscrupulous previous employer, why not? Pay him for what he's worth.

User avatar
zzm9980
Governor
Governor
Posts: 6837
Joined: Wed, 06 Jul 2011
Location: Once more unto the breach

Postby zzm9980 » Mon, 04 Aug 2014 11:05 am

the lynx wrote:
myprhui wrote:I will expect some companies especially banks to overreact to the FCF requirements. Banks are always wary of unnecessary attention from the authorities and if I still remember correctly some of the banks in Singapore were actually warned by MAS or MOM to rectify their HR practices.

In my company, we will advise our hiring managers to always interview the Singaporean/PR candidates first. We also encourage them to consider hiring a local candidate who may not fully meet all the job requirements but they have good attitudes. The concept is to first bring these local folks in and then train/mentor them on areas where they are weak in. There are a lot of reasons why Singaporeans are not being hire and its not always because they are not qualified or we didn't give them a chance. In my experience, a lot of times its due to the salary negotiation. We have candidates who strongly insist on a 30-40% (or even 50%) increment and it just not possible for the hiring manager to always justify such an increment especially if it is the same role.

Actually this FCD thing was created because Singaporeans complained to MOM that a system which only relies on whistle blowers is not enough. So MOM create this FCD to proactively identify "bad" employers. In my opinion and with my understanding of Singaporeans, I believe the complaint system will work just fine.


Just wondering, how would a hiring manager know that the candidate is asking 30-50% increment? Is it because this hiring manager has the practice of making the candidate to break his confidentiality with his former employer and divulge his previous salary? I'd personally think that it is an unfair and wrong practice, no matter how common it is (I noticed) around here.

I think the candidate should be given the chance to negotiate the salary as high or as low as he wants. If his track records speak of that high value and he has been chaffed by unscrupulous previous employer, why not? Pay him for what he's worth.


This is just like my old neighbor telling me not to pay the part-time maid more than $12/hour (I had given her $15/hour) because "you'll spoil the market fpr everyone else!"

myprhui
Member
Member
Posts: 21
Joined: Fri, 01 Aug 2014

Postby myprhui » Mon, 04 Aug 2014 12:07 pm

Let just say that some people tend to overvalue themselves or the ability of the market to pay. HR has certain information or evaluation criteria to decide on what is commonly acceptable and what is not. These information are usually based on research data and our internal benchmarks for job/grades. Most of our positions are unlimited contract and they must be sustainable. If a candidate's current salary is within market range and they are asking for a very significant increment to move then the ladies from HR will call me. If I want to proceed then justifications must be made. After a number of such calls from HR, I can more or less figure out some of the details.

I am not sure if this is local trend but people tend to just look at the monthly wage and dismiss everything else. Other than the wage, we also provide what we called a total reward package (insurance, off days, course fees....). That is actually 2-3 pages long.

User avatar
zzm9980
Governor
Governor
Posts: 6837
Joined: Wed, 06 Jul 2011
Location: Once more unto the breach

Postby zzm9980 » Mon, 04 Aug 2014 12:23 pm

myprhui wrote:Let just say that some people tend to overvalue themselves or the ability of the market to pay. HR has certain information or evaluation criteria to decide on what is commonly acceptable and what is not. These information are usually based on research data and our internal benchmarks for job/grades. Most of our positions are unlimited contract and they must be sustainable. If a candidate's current salary is within market range and they are asking for a very significant increment to move then the ladies from HR will call me. If I want to proceed then justifications must be made. After a number of such calls from HR, I can more or less figure out some of the details.


You just contradicted yourself. Is it based on the applicant's last salary, or is it based on the market rate (what you say above in bold)? If the later, then I agree with you. Applicants who price themselves out of the market should not be considered. But if your determination is based on their current salary (which may be below market) then you're scum, pure and simple. :)

I am not sure if this is local trend but people tend to just look at the monthly wage and dismiss everything else. Other than the wage, we also provide what we called a total reward package (insurance, off days, course fees....). That is actually 2-3 pages long.


Useless fluff benefits, nearly all companies have lists of these things so you don't really have a major competitive advantage over any other employer. Companies that think otherwise should do what NetFlix does and give an 'ala carte' menu of benefits and allow any employee to instead take cash value for *anything*. I know of people making over $300k USD/year there for a mid-senior engineering role, a good 50-100% more than the market rate. They have cashed out all benefits, including sick time. This may have changed though since the introduction of ObamaCare. [/b]

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

Postby AndrewV » Mon, 04 Aug 2014 3:12 pm

beppi wrote:
myprhui wrote:I assure you that the cost of hiring a foreigner is definitely higher than a local.

The statistics clearly dispute this claim:


Yes, the statistics do indeed dispute this claim. For several jobs, there is a salary range/guideline and companies do take into account the 17% overhead in hiring singaporeans/PR's as it adds to the overall cost.

@myprhui: thanks for the insight, however my gut feel is that your hiring activities are concentrated on the higher end of the spectrum which the FCF is trying to manage (even if not at the higher end of the spectrum it seems you'll are very careful about the type of people you'll hire [which is good]). In this spectrum high performers are coveted and pursued with packages being negotiated heavily. In the mid/lower range, the employers try to stick to the salary guidelines for that band/role (and like someone mentioned above, the HR here is notorious for only looking at the monthly base salary) and hiring a singaporean/PR will indeed add to the cost.

This leads to vicious cycle of there not being that many quality Locals who work themselves up to the higher levels. I feel the government is trying to curtail this by stepping in trying to nudge companies to fill this part of the spectrum so that over time these folks will move up the value chain where they will be competing purely based on ability.

User avatar
Mi Amigo
Manager
Manager
Posts: 1767
Joined: Sat, 19 Jun 2004
Location: Kinto Pino

Postby Mi Amigo » Mon, 04 Aug 2014 4:18 pm

AndrewV wrote:This leads to vicious cycle of there not being that many quality Locals who work themselves up to the higher levels. I feel the government is trying to curtail this by stepping in trying to nudge companies to fill this part of the spectrum so that over time these folks will move up the value chain where they will be competing purely based on ability.

Sorry, but I think that is nonsense. If a Singaporean really has the (demonstrable) ability, then they will be considered for the 'higher levels'. Why should I, as an employer, go to all the trouble of finding a foreign candidate, getting the EP, paying for their expat package, etc., if there is a local Singaporean who is able (and keen) to do the job? There's no way I'd do that, so does that mean I'm unusual and most other employers go out of their way to make it more difficult and complicated than it needs to be?

One of the difficulties I've experienced first hand is that that there are some (not all, obviously) Singaporeans who have a far higher opinion of themselves than could be justified. Of course this is not an exclusively Singaporean thing, but I've come across quite a few local candidates who suffer from the entitlement / chip on the shoulder affliction. However much they try to mask it in an interview, it still comes through. I don't want to hire someone who considers themselves God's gift to humanity and 'entitled' to the role. These are probably the people who are pushing the gahmen to set up systems to ensure they get their way.

Despite your earlier rebuttal of the suggestion, it does seem to me that you advocating a positive discrimination regime in favour of Singaporean candidates.

N.B. All my comments above are hypothetical at this point, since (thankfully) I no longer have to make hiring decisions in Singapore. The thought of having to jump through these FCF hoops and be 'advised' (read: second guessed) by a gahmen official makes me very glad that this is the case. If I were still in that role, I'd probably be looking to hire more people in other countries in the region instead.
Be careful what you wish for

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

Postby AndrewV » Mon, 04 Aug 2014 5:30 pm

Mi Amigo wrote:Sorry, but I think that is nonsense. If a Singaporean really has the (demonstrable) ability, then they will be considered for the 'higher levels'. Why should I, as an employer, go to all the trouble of finding a foreign candidate, getting the EP, paying for their expat package, etc., if there is a local Singaporean who is able (and keen) to do the job? There's no way I'd do that, so does that mean I'm unusual and most other employers go out of their way to make it more difficult and complicated than it needs to be?


Well you're entitled to your point of view. However, based on my experience in going through hiring cycles (i'm not HR, but I am in a position to hire people for my team), for most of the roles at the 3K - 7k kind of range, "expat packages" aren't really in the picture. In this range, employers just set a criteria and try to hire qualified people who will accept what they are trying to offer. Yes, there is inconvenience in getting the EP and the whole uncertainty thing, however, they weigh up the whole pro's and con's in making the decision and the 17% overhead they have to pay at this range does influence the picture (I know because it has cropped up in certain meetings)

A lot of the guys in this board work at the higher end of the spectrum where talent is at a premium an needs to be carefully managed. My point of view is more at the mid/lower end to do with locals who are around 5 years into their career as well as small time expats from around the region. I can't speak in general, but I am talking from my own experiences.

note the usage of the term "junior"
http://news.efinancialcareers.com/uk-en ... singapore/
Last edited by AndrewV on Mon, 04 Aug 2014 5:51 pm, edited 1 time in total.


  • Similar Topics
    Replies
    Views
    Last post

Return to “Latest News & Current Affairs”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests