Things to watch out for when switching companies on EP

[the_newguy]

My current EP is valid until 2018. I'm considering to switch to another company in a few months time (my current company is fine with me leaving).

Does applying for a new EP mean I need to jump through the same hoops again as I did for my current EP, regarding translation of documents, medical test, etc.?
(My position at both companies will be the same.)

Also, if the new pass application is rejected, can I still continue using my current pass until it's expiration date (assuming I would remain at my current company)?

[bro75]

You should apply for the new EP first. Once it is approved and you get an IPA then you can file your resignation.

Not sure if you need retranslation of documents, but if your last medical exam for EP was just less than 1 year ago (or less than 2 years ago?), I believe you do not need to do this again. But the new IPA will tell you for sure if you need to do it.

As long as your current employer does not cancel your pass, you can continue to work for that employer.

[beppi]

Job-hoppers are unwanted by MoM and changing after just a year or so counts in your disfavour - meaning that a new EP even for the same job level and function in another company might be rejected. Even if, after rejection, you stay where you are, it might also influence if your current EP is renewed.
If you already told your current employer that you intend to leave (which is bad style) and they said o.k. (which mean "we don't really need you anyway"), you'll be one of the first to be retrenched if the need arises.
That's how greed (assuming you want to change for higher pay) can bite back!

[sundaymorningstaple]

Boy have I seen a lot of that happening over the years.

[the_newguy]

Job-hoppers are unwanted by MoM and changing after just a year or so counts in your disfavour - meaning that a new EP even for the same job level and function in another company might be rejected.

Where did I say that I'm leaving after just a year? I've been with this company for more than 3 years...

If you already told your current employer that you intend to leave (which is bad style) and they said o.k. (which mean "we don't really need you anyway"), you'll be one of the first to be retrenched if the need arises.

Yeah right, "bad style"... You're completely clueless about the industry I'm working in. (For what it's worth, it's *very* common in my industry to switch between companies after a few years, in fact, it's REQUIRED if you want to stay relevant! That's why my current employer is fine with me switching. So please keep your (wrong) conclusions to yourself.

That's how greed (assuming you want to change for higher pay) can bite back!

Again, in my industry you're required to work with different people, so no, "greed", was not my motivation.

[beppi]

My assumptions are valid in most industries and for the majority of job changes.
It was not obvious from your post that you are in a very different situation and environment. I apologize for my generalization!

[zzm9980]

Again, in my industry you're required to work with different people, so no, "greed", was not my motivation.

And which industry is this? Don't be so hard on Beppi, since what he says is true for 99%+ of industries and roles. Since you state your EP expires in 2018, the assumption would be you have a 5-yr PEP, and you got it in 2013. Most EPs are for much shorter validity terms than you were given, like ~2yrs.

Anyway, if it's really a 'condition' for working in your industry, hopefully MOM is aware and recognizes it.

[x9200]

I don't get this "bad style" bit. IMHO this is a very good style, but taking into account how many bad employers are around it is just a very bad strategy.

[beppi]

O.k., "bad strategy" would have been a better term here. Basically, if you tell an employer that you intend to leave (i.e. you are disloyal to them) you will automatically be the next on the "to be laid off" list - why should they still be loyal to you?
I believe this is normal human behaviour and independent of good/bad employer.

[JR8]

Changing employers in banking say every 3 odd years, earlier on in your career is considered normal. It gives you a 'rounded view of the industry'. To stay with an employer too long is not considered loyal, rather, it is considered unambitious, and demonstrating a lack of hunger.

It would be considered respectful, and considerate to give a 'boss' you respect an honest heads-up that you're maybe looking elsewhere. It's expected you'll move on, so why not tell them the wheels are perhaps in motion?

[Wd40]

Changing employers in banking say every 3 odd years, earlier on in your career is considered normal. It gives you a 'rounded view of the industry'. To stay with an employer too long is not considered loyal, rather, it is considered unambitious, and demonstrating a lack of hunger.

It would be considered respectful, and considerate to give a 'boss' you respect an honest heads-up that you're maybe looking elsewhere. It's expected you'll move on, so why not tell them the wheels are perhaps in motion?

+1. In fact I would go on to say that at the moment most staff working in banks(in an expensive offshore location like Singapore) are more of a burden/drag than value. In my company, most people are sticking on and would wait until they get fired just to get the serverance pay. There are people with 8-9 yrs in the bank and severance pay at the rate of 1 month salary for every year worked is quite a sum.

The bank on the other hand is more than happy to replace every headcount lost here in a cheaper location. They need to cut cost further by about 3 billion, you see.

So contrary to what the popular belief is not all employees are as valuable as they think.

[JR8]

... which is why the recent post, was it by AussieExpat? ... surprised me.

An MD level expat, working for an Aussie bank, setting up a new back-office team in Singapore... to do work that requires extensive travel to branch offices through the AsiaPac region, and as far as I can see there is no requirement for it to be SG based, (i.e. the function is completely mobile), and yet that's what they're going to do.*

So while banking/finance in SG has been trying to de-expatise for years now, his employer are opting to do the reverse.


* In this kind of situation generally (and I've been in similar myself) I would be wary that they're bringing you in as a subject matter expert, to hire and train a local team to do that function, and once that local team is up and running, you're on the first plane out.

[sundaymorningstaple]

^^Pretty sure of that as well. Makes sense if it's an offshore bank, setting up here. MOM going to allow a set up team from outside and come in as they are the ones with the offshore bank's knowledge. Once a team is trained locally, pfft! probably back to Oz again. So I'd make damn sure it was worth my while to be disrupted for a couple of years. $$$$

[JR8]

^^Pretty sure of that as well. Makes sense if it's an offshore bank, setting up here. MOM going to allow a set up team from outside and come in as they are the ones with the offshore bank's knowledge. Once a team is trained locally, pfft! probably back to Oz again. So I'd make damn sure it was worth my while to be disrupted for a couple of years. $$$$

Exactly. I negotiated very hard for my role, and the moment I was expendable, I got relo'd back home. But I don't doubt the same would have happened if I hadn't negotiated as hard: I'd just have gone home much poorer.

The other thing worth considering in advance is what position you'd return to back home; your old one? In my case I returned to 'It's the only position available, do you want it or not?'