MPs in Singapore work long hours
-
Originally posted by angel3070:
So, should we finish off his mother now?
He must take the lead in this since he proposed the idea.
people prayed i cursed
-
PM telling people go and die, I wonder whether this is another world first from Singapore.
-
Originally posted by tan reborn:
PM Lee urged Singaporeans who are terminally ill to consider end-of-life options
From our Correspondent
Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong said during a speech at Assisi Hospice last night that terminally ill patients should not treat death as a taboo subject.
He was speaking as the guest of honour at Assisi Hospice’s 40th anniversary charity dinner. His wife, Ms Ho Ching, is the patron of the hospice.
PM Lee urged them to discuss with their families and doctors plans for dying with dignity and under the best possible care.
He also said he felt more public education was needed about what hospice and home palliative care can do to provide comfort for patients in their last days.
With medical advances, people are living longer, but with terminal illnesses, lives can be prolonged only up to a point when ‘more aggressive treatment will likely do more harm than good’, he said.
Palliative care is a field of medicine that helps terminally ill patients live the remaining days of their lives with minimal pain and suffering. There are few specialist palliative-care physicians in Singapore.
Singapore’s aging population will put more strain on its public healthcare system which was rated one of the best in the world by the World Health Organization.
Unlike Australia, Canada or the United Kingdom, palliative care is not a recognized specialty in Singapore. The current palliative care physicians are mostly geriatricians or internists whose postgraduate training is in internal medicine.
The Ministry of Health (MOH) is recruiting and training more doctors, nurses and social workers who can provide palliative care which will also be introduced to nursing homes.
Earlier this year, Health Minister Khaw Boon Wan caused a furore when he suggested that Singaporeans send their aged parents to live in nursing homes in Johor Baru where medical expenses are lower. It is not sure if there are any hospices in Johor Baru which can accept Singapore patients in the future.
LegislationLegislative Acts And GuidelinesAdvance Medical Directive Act
Introduction to AMD Act
An Advance Medical Directive (AMD) is a legal document that you sign in advance to inform the doctor treating you (in the event you become terminally ill and unconscious) that you do not want any extraordinary life-sustaining treatment 1 to be used to prolong your life.
Making an AMD is a voluntary decision. It is entirely up to you whether you wish to make one. In fact, it is a criminal offence for any person to force you to make one against your will.
New advances in medical knowledge and technology create new choices for both patients and health care providers. Some of these choices raise new ethical and legal issues.
One issue is that modern medical technology can technically prolong life in the final stages of a terminal illness2. However, it cannot stop the dying process. In such situations, further medical intervention would be medically ineffective, and a decision has to be made whether to withdraw such futile medical intervention. Some terminally ill persons who are unable to express their wishes at that time, may want to be spared further suffering and be allowed to die naturally, in peace and with dignity.
The law in Singapore allows Singaporeans who wish to make an advance medical directive to do so. The AMD Act was passed in Parliament in May 1996. -
Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong said during a speech at Assisi Hospice last night that terminally ill patients should not treat death as a taboo subject.
Why? I already try hard to restraint myself already.
Why they still force me to go and curse certain figures to go and die?
-
If the MP think they work too hard and too long hours, resign lar
.... no one forcing them to stay in this job.
-
Local IT Talents Dying ???
When reading abt IT talents still in demand .. I can only summarised with my own experience :Our own talents no longer wants to be in this line.
Reason:
1) Pay low even with degree + certs(MCSE,CCNA)
Seriously, have classmates who are offered 2K plus.. and pay is dropping as companies are comparing with foreign talents.
Those who stayed either moved overseas or to another area with minimal involvment in IT and they are ones with best technical knowledge...
2) No career progression within the field.
Can you imagine whole project outsource to china and india??..
So where got need for managers or tech consultants developers??
They just need sales ppl with minimal knowledge and direct the rest to the overseas team.
So what r the remaining posts available ??? -
Originally posted by tan reborn:
Local IT Talents Dying ???
When reading abt IT talents still in demand .. I can only summarised with my own experience :Our own talents no longer wants to be in this line.
Reason:
1) Pay low even with degree + certs(MCSE,CCNA)
Seriously, have classmates who are offered 2K plus.. and pay is dropping as companies are comparing with foreign talents.
Those who stayed either moved overseas or to another area with minimal involvment in IT and they are ones with best technical knowledge...
2) No career progression within the field.
Can you imagine whole project outsource to china and india??..
So where got need for managers or tech consultants developers??
They just need sales ppl with minimal knowledge and direct the rest to the overseas team.
So what r the remaining posts available ???whose fault your fault loh
-
Originally posted by tan reborn:
Local IT Talents Dying ???
When reading abt IT talents still in demand .. I can only summarised with my own experience :Our own talents no longer wants to be in this line.
Reason:
1) Pay low even with degree + certs(MCSE,CCNA)
Seriously, have classmates who are offered 2K plus.. and pay is dropping as companies are comparing with foreign talents.
Those who stayed either moved overseas or to another area with minimal involvment in IT and they are ones with best technical knowledge...
2) No career progression within the field.
Can you imagine whole project outsource to china and india??..
So where got need for managers or tech consultants developers??
They just need sales ppl with minimal knowledge and direct the rest to the overseas team.
So what r the remaining posts available ???We need to be cheaper.
Really.
-
Originally posted by charlize:
We need to be cheaper.
Really.
MPs in Singapore work long hours
in future singaporean in Singapore work long hours
Members of Parliament in Singapore lead busy lives and can work for up to 18 hours a day,in future singaporean in Singapore lead busy lives and can work for up to 18 hours a day, -
Originally posted by tan reborn:
MPs in Singapore work long hours
in future singaporean in Singapore work long hours
Members of Parliament in Singapore lead busy lives and can work for up to 18 hours a day,in future singaporean in Singapore lead busy lives and can work for up to 18 hours a day,We need to be better and faster too.
-
Originally posted by charlize:
We need to be better and faster too.
better still 1 person do 2 person done - salary sameno mc
no ot
no off
no holiday
no annual leave
no taxi claim
-
so now is... either u are faster, better and cheaper.... or u are out...
if pay is now lower, why cost of living is getting higher....
lower labour cost shd help lowering the cost of living? no? raw material higher then labour or just director cut get bigger?
always wonder who is keeping the profit....
-
Originally posted by EarlNeo:
so now is... either u are faster, better and cheaper.... or u are out...
if pay is now lower, why cost of living is getting higher....
lower labour cost shd help lowering the cost of living? no? raw material higher then labour or just director cut get bigger?
always wonder who is keeping the profit....
The people on top. CEOs, board of directors, Ministers, MPs, etc. That's why rich get richer, poor get poorer
I've a feeling ministers and mps going to give themselves a pay hike soon. hence the article about working long hours.
-
cos we no natural resource cannot be welfare society - co tax and personal tax - must be low
otherwise more people no job
so gst 3 - 5 - 7 % if i am not wrong
so more pr prc ft flock here - gst cannot drop use them to give needy public assistance
unless become elites or ministers
-
Originally posted by FireIce:
everybardie else oso work long hours wat.............................
Thats right...people who draw less than 2000 a month also work more..... -
Originally posted by Arapahoe:
Thats right...people who draw less than 2000 a month also work more.....Nonsense.
These people drawing low salaries don't have to go for high level meetings in aircon rooms where they listen to presentations for hours with tea breaks in between.
-
Originally posted by av98m:
The people on top. CEOs, board of directors, Ministers, MPs, etc. That's why rich get richer, poor get poorer
I've a feeling ministers and mps going to give themselves a pay hike soon. hence the article about working long hours.
nah... they not that stupid lah... most prob they will opt for pay cut.. to get vote....
and when election is over.. say they done a good job and get their the pay cut+ interest back thru bonuses if not more....
-
the best is they i month donate s$50000.00 no increase in salary
but that would not happen - not enough salary later corrupted
they drive m300 bmw730i
-
Pegging ministerial and civil service pay to that of the private sector?
Pegging salaries in civil service against the private sector
By Kelvin Teo
Published: July 6, 2009
SINGAPORE – Much earlier on, the Singapore government tabled a motion to peg the salaries of ministers and civil servants to that of the private sector. To peg the salaries against earners in the private sector, there must be some basis to show that a civil servant is indeed comparable to someone who is employed in the private sector.
One of the questions that arises is if there is any basis of comparison in the first place. If there is no basis of comparison, the argument for the need to raise salaries of civil servants and ministers by pegging them to the salaries of executives in the private sector is untenable. This is simply because there is little basis for comparison with their counterparts in the private sector.
In fact, in reality, there is little basis of comparison between someone working in the private sector and a civil servant. In the private sector, the raison d’etre for an employee or executive is simply to generate revenue or profits for the firms they are working for. A top executive in a firm is ultimately answerable to the shareholders, in as far as profits are concerned. Thus, more often than not, the worth of an employee or executive for that matter in the private sector is based on his ability to generate revenue through his contributions directly or indirectly. Therefore, his salary is justified by his ability to generate revenue or level of competitiveness, one way or another. (in the context of this article, competitiveness means the ability to generate profits or revenue directly or indirectly).
How about a civil servant or even a top grade civil servant for that matter? His raison d’etre is public administration. Barring exceptions of civil servants occupying certain positions in the Economic Development Board or the Ministry of Trade and Industry, majority of civil servants are not in the position to generate revenue, so to speak. It follows that the working philosophy is not competitive in that particular sense. This can be illustrated with a simple comparative example. A superscale civil servant working at the headquarters of the Education Ministry makes decisions on the education system in Singapore in a public administrative capacity. However, a top executive in an educational provider company would be tasked with steering the company with the goal of generating more profits in mind. There is a world of difference between the two and the nature and aims of their work. It follows that the argument of using the private sector as a basis to justify the revisions in salary is not tenable.
There is another argument from the basis of lost opportunities, i.e. what talents in the civil service would have gained if they worked in the private sector instead. I am not denying that there are people formerly in the civil service who will eventually do well in the private sector, BUT again, to assert that a top executive within a civil service would go on to be a high flyer in the private sector may not sound convincing. The reason is the argument that I highlight earlier. The civil servant may have been brilliant at public administration, but we do not know if he is brilliant at generating revenue. An extrapolation of such a nature would be problematic.
The main thrust of my argument is that if one wants to peg salaries against a benchmark, there must be some basis of comparison with the benchmark. Thus, it is important to compare a civil servant with a someone working in the private sector. If there is no basis of comparison, then it follows that there is no basis for pegging salaries against that certain benchmark.
-
maybe they minster pegging salary with private sector world wide.
like compare salary with tiger woods,britney spears,tom cruise and other top players in pvt sector .tigger woods slary is 3o million dollars/year so the ministers say 1 million /year is a fraction ...............i think minsters have to be realistic.thye should peg salary to world countries various presidents and not to movie stars who have viewers worldwide.
so if us president is $300,000/year and their gdp is a certain amount say 100 billion/year then salary is 100%.
to be fair and based on their performance results on economy gdp if spore gdp is 50 billion/year then leader slary should be less to 150k/year.after all the leader isnt a world movie star who sings and plays a good golf game that wins plenty prizes.
-
Underhanded tactics in terminating employment
By Christopher Ong
Published: June 15, 2009
Termination of employment is becoming more and more common these days as companies try to down size. Different employers make use of different methods to terminate employment. Some are transparent, while others are shady and underhanded.
Lionel (not his real name), an alumnus of NUS science who had graduated 6 years ago, recounts his experience of being the victim of an underhanded tactic his direct boss used to terminate his employment.
What company was that?
It was a science-related companyHow was the company like?
It was a small company, but has offices all over the world from the Asia-Pacific to North America and Europe.How long were you with the company?
More than a yearHow would you rate your job satisfaction?
I rated my job satisfaction highly. Unlike my friends with science degrees who ended up in non-related fields, I considered myself fortunate to find work with a company whose focus is relevant to my degree. I definitely enjoyed being in touch with the latest developments in the scientific field, which was part and parcel of my job.What were the circumstances leading to your termination?
It came during the annual performance review for 2008 which was a standard operating procedure in my company. When my report came, I was stunned at its contents. There were fictitious accounts justifying my poor performance. Some of the accounts bothered on defamation, and were direct assaults on my character. The report was drawn up by my direct boss.Give examples of such fictitious accounts.
One allegation was a description of my negative reaction towards an external agency whom my company hired for certain projects. In certain areas of work, we required inputs from these hired agencies. In my case, I never ever had to rely on their inputs. The negative reaction was displayed by another colleague in my department, and it wasn’t by me. I managed to deliver the project without any input from the agency right on schedule. So there was no reason to react negatively. And what happened was that the agency encountered problems which meant we could not receive their inputs on time, and thus, we would not be in a position to deliver the project on time if we were to rely on the agency. But I delivered the project,so there is no reason for me to be negative towards the hired agency. I have always treated external agencies in a diplomatic fashion and to report that I was negative towards them was too much!The second was an allegation of the poor quality of work I produced for a certain category of project. I had kept a log of all the projects that I had done, but there wasn’t one that fell into the alleged category.
What was your opinion of your boss on hindsight?
I can summarize her with one statement – management is never her strength. I found from working with her that her knowledge in legal compliance for certain procedures is sorely lacking. There was an instance when she told me to do something, but I refused because it might potentially contravene one of the legal acts of Singapore. Look, no one wants to get on the wrong end of the law, and I rather give up the job than get on the wrong end of the law. My direct boss also reported this instance to back up her criticism of me in the annual report of my performance, citing my stubborn attitude. But, any reasonable manager would demonstrate understanding towards subordinates who reacted as I did due to the fact that I was the overall overseer of the project, and this was captured in black and white. The fact that she used such an incident as a criticism of me in her evaluation betrayed her lack of objectivity.And I find her very self-centered. Even her subordinates had to sing her tune. I did that too because I was under her. The only time I didn’t sing her tune was the previously mentioned incident about me refusing to implement one of her orders because that might contravene our laws. Her definition of quality is simply whether she agrees or disagrees to something. Interestingly, when managers of the same level as her looked at her work, they gave criticisms on its lack of quality, and this email was circulated to us subordinates! Maybe, when she called others stubborn, she didn’t use a mirror.
-
hey, the discussion has gone off course!
-
All still talking about work what.
-
Originally posted by angel3070:
So, should we finish off his mother now?
He must take the lead in this since he proposed the idea of telling people to go and die.
Wow, this further proves he is really shitty, heartless.
Since he suggested this, why doesn't he as a leader lead by example by ending his mother's life.
With such ill , evil character - I will never respect it called lhl.
-
Originally posted by tan reborn:
PM Lee urged Singaporeans who are terminally ill to consider end-of-life options
From our Correspondent
Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong said during a speech at Assisi Hospice last night that terminally ill patients should not treat death as a taboo subject.
He was speaking as the guest of honour at Assisi Hospice’s 40th anniversary charity dinner. His wife, Ms Ho Ching, is the patron of the hospice.
PM Lee urged them to discuss with their families and doctors plans for dying with dignity and under the best possible care.
He also said he felt more public education was needed about what hospice and home palliative care can do to provide comfort for patients in their last days.
With medical advances, people are living longer, but with terminal illnesses, lives can be prolonged only up to a point when ‘more aggressive treatment will likely do more harm than good’, he said.
Palliative care is a field of medicine that helps terminally ill patients live the remaining days of their lives with minimal pain and suffering. There are few specialist palliative-care physicians in Singapore.
Singapore’s aging population will put more strain on its public healthcare system which was rated one of the best in the world by the World Health Organization.
Unlike Australia, Canada or the United Kingdom, palliative care is not a recognized specialty in Singapore. The current palliative care physicians are mostly geriatricians or internists whose postgraduate training is in internal medicine.
The Ministry of Health (MOH) is recruiting and training more doctors, nurses and social workers who can provide palliative care which will also be introduced to nursing homes.
Earlier this year, Health Minister Khaw Boon Wan caused a furore when he suggested that Singaporeans send their aged parents to live in nursing homes in Johor Baru where medical expenses are lower. It is not sure if there are any hospices in Johor Baru which can accept Singapore patients in the future.
Should the state let me choose how and when I die?
Tuesday, 4 November 2008, 12:54 pm | 774 views
Andrew Loh / Deputy Editor
“We need to overcome taboos about death and communicate better — both among ourselves as well as between doctors and their patients,” said Health Minister Khaw Boon Wan last month. (See here).I agree with the minister.
More often than not, we would rather not talk about death, or the possibility of our dying. It is indeed still quite a taboo subject. It is a cultural thing, some say. Couple this with our religious beliefs and it gets very personal, emotional and spiritual as well.
Yet, looking at what the minister has said over the last few years on the issue, I do believe that he is not just looking, simply, to letting Singaporeans choose to die – whether it is through the Advance Medical Directive or legalised mercy-killing, to put it another way. Rather, Mr Khaw has obviously adopted more of a holistic approach than just a simplistic one of whether one should take one’s own life or allow another to do so on one’s behalf.
The main point I believe he is trying to get across, perhaps not very well so far, is one of dying with dignity.
In this, there can be little argument or disagreement with the principle. It is in the definition of the word “dignity” itself, however, which is the bone of contention. Some say that taking one’s own life is not dignified no matter how it is achieved. That the act of suicide or assisted-suicide, whether legal or illegal, through the AMD or legalised euthanasia, is just plain wrong.
“We will go down a slippery slope”, is a phrase used.
While I do agree that there are many – many – issues involved, I am in agreement with Mr Khaw that we should be allowed to “die with dignity”. And that, in my opinion, should be one of the main points of this debate. In this respect, I am glad that the minister is looking into palliative care and palliative medicine and making these more easily-available. A pilot scheme to bring such care to nursing homes will be implemented next year.
More needs to be done, of course. Besides getting doctors themselves to understand the AMD better, the bigger challenge, I feel, is getting the average Singaporean (especially the less-educated and literate) to know what the issues are.
The one thing which we should not fail to address is the notion, already in some people’s minds, that assisted-suicide is directed at the “less-able” or that it is the less-literate and less-educated who will be targeted for “elimination”.
My hope is that the minister will not rush through any changes in legislation but allow as much time as possible for discussion, debate and feedback to take place.
Every life is precious. When the time arrives, and each of us will face this, we will have to decide (if we are able to) how we will die. Personally, to have the choice to decide how I would die is a gift as not everyone gets to have this choice.
Thus, if there were legislation in place which would allow me to do this, to make this choice, and it gives me dignity in my death, I welcome it.
But first, lets address the many issues involved for the concerns are real and important.