Clear difference between civil servants and politicians
-
May 25, 2011 - ST Forum
THE ministerial pay review should not be extended to the civil service.
Being a civil servant is different from being a politician. The job of a civil servant is just like any other job in the private sector: Workers are rewarded based on their merits and contributions. People do not necessarily join the civil service because they want to serve the community; it is more of a profession.
On the other hand, a different set of expectations and criteria is applied to politicians, because their main purpose is to uphold the spirit of sacrifice and contribute towards the community.
By accepting the role of a politician, one is assumed to have agreed to the conditions that one's salary be discounted from what one can earn in the private sector.
The distinction between politicians and civil servants is clear. Hence, we should not adjust the pay scales of those in our civil service, or we risk losing top talent.
Victor Looi
-
Originally posted by Clivebenss:
May 25, 2011 - ST Forum
Being a civil servant is different from being a politician. The job of a civil servant is just like any other job in the private sector: Workers are rewarded based on their merits and contributions. People do not necessarily join the civil service because they want to serve the community; it is more of a profession.
PM Lee has made it clear - PAP MPs are servants fo the people. PAP!
-
Civil servants work for the betterment of all Singaporeans.
Private sector employees like Ministers work for the betterment of themselves.
-
Originally posted by Redwhite spore:
PM Lee has made it clear - PAP MPs are servants fo the people. PAP!
servant or serpent?
-
Originally posted by Clivebenss:
servant or serpent?
Ouch.
-
Originally posted by βÎτά:
Civil servants work for the betterment of all Singaporeans.
Private sector employees like Ministers work for the betterment of themselves.
But how can u say Ministers are pte sector employees?
They double up as MPs too to serve Singapore
-
they do have KPIs...and the benchmark is of course the lives and affordability of all singaporeans..balanced socio-psychological aspects are also important....aside to greater participation of the citizens and transparency in all policies....
-
my view is that they only score 30% of the overall KPIs ...there are so much rooms for improvements...hence, there should be 70% cut in their pay...
-
I think it is not the KPI of the existing people.
Their agenda should be to make money, make more money and make lots of money.
GPS ERP ? next idea ?
-
Aside to doubling NS engagement in the protection of this country....why didn't they focus also on enforcing much greater contributions from women, esp. gals of the same age towards the civil side of the society...the needy and disadvanatged?
the govt must be balanced in the gender policy and drive home the message that equality is not sustained solely on the backs of men
-
Originally posted by Fcukpap:
Aside to doubling NS engagement in the protection of this country....why didn't they focus also on enforcing much greater contributions from women, esp. gals of the same age towards the civil side of the society...the needy and disadvanatged?
the govt must be balanced in the gender policy and drive home the message that equality is not sustained solely on the backs of men
considering half the voters are women....
-
thats the reason why the system is still hesitating to make the unpopular move to amend it...
the other half are the good men like us...that makes us feel women are really good for nothing and living off on our shoulders to enjoy the ride
-
dun forget we are asking for balanced gender policy
-
and its better to stay single and see lower fertility rates....i am all for it...and see with eventual rise of FTs as well...they are all interconnecting issues
-
i have never hated such system of gender policy so much so that i made sound decision to endorse my rights every 5 years during the election