[Raj_Copi_Jin]

The issue is not fraud. I am sure fraud happens in both countries. In Australia, there must be a proven skill shortage for that vocation before anything happens. There must be consultation with various bodies. Not in Singapore.

What it means is that job displacement does not take place based on cost.

Our company hired a migrant "sys-admin" from Burma 2 months ago. With supposedly 10 years of experience. From the first day I knew he was not qualified for the job. Most of the time I have to "cover", "advise" him what and how to do his job. It was reaching a point of frustration for me and my colleague. Last week, I took a couple of days off, boss informed me he is leaving while I was on leave and asked if I could take over his job. Employers here are not as dumb as what pple say, but I'm sure there are heaps of people with fake qualifications around as well. Sometimes, you have to "helped" them to fail as well. They probably migrated with the same fake qualification like in Singapore but the bar to fake it is probably higher. Most people will find that if you do not "buck" up or show genuine skills they won't last long here. Most degree, managers ends up doing servicing, cab drivers here as well and long to migrate back.

[Fegasderty]

Yes, gone within a few days of my leave. Boss actually call me up to ask when I can come back, I was perplexed as I thought I already told him. Later on, he told me he was leaving hence the urgency. He did try to "establish" some sort of relationship throughout the time. I don't know how is your work place, but we are pretty technical in our department, so even with good relationship if you don't deliver you get into trouble. I just stop helping him as much, keep my work separate, if he needs help, CC my boss and spread what he can't do to my other colleague. Problem solve, for a moment I thought he would be "entrenched", me taking a leave and this happened shows that you need to plan to use your annual leave wisely.

Go Kevin 13!!!!

Is he gone? Good for you. Unfortunately, my place still have a dumb blonde earning close to $150k but have backing from a superior. It is OK, the backer will be retiring, but trying to to move her to a more secured position. Difficult!

When people are not matched to their job, it is quite stressful for everyone. If this Burmese is good at building relationships and has the smarts, he still stand a chance and move to a non-technical area while keeping his job. Otherwise, he will be "isolated" and fade away eventually. Not many people have a thick hide like Julia Gillard.

Actually, JG managed to get a few things done correctly in the public service before she turned toxic.

[Ifroham4]

Also don't forget that in Aussieland the people has a chance to vote out the ruling party if things got bad. Remember the Howard years? Tafe qualification for cooks, hairdressers, waitressing were allowed to migrate, comes Kevin07, this was revised and gotten rid off. Things will only change if the PAP gets voted out, until then its business as usual, don't get deluded by the "we are sorry", "its an honest mistake" comment. They will never change until the people ask for change themselves in who governs them. As to when and if this would happen, hard to say. I'll say another 50 years would be the minimum given the current circumstances.

The issue is not fraud. I am sure fraud happens in both countries. In Australia, there must be a proven skill shortage for that vocation before anything happens. There must be consultation with various bodies. Not in Singapore.

What it means is that job displacement does not take place based on cost.

[Peptobismol]

Things have gone past the point of no return. Those of us who were there at the begininng have to live with the guilt that we helped destroy our country. This is regardless of whether it was active participation because of ambition or silent obedience because of fear.

I remember when Chao and PapSmearer first came into this forum, my first impression was how these guys were raised. Use of expletives, machine gun approach, shoot from the hip, take no prisoners attitude etc. The only thing that held me back was that beyond all that debris and with the smoke clearing, the arguments were solid, mostly supported by good facts and like the best of us, some are flawed.

So how does the above got to do with our flag being carried by a PRC chic who got instant citizenship predicated on a good contract covering personal financials rewards.

Then there is the rest of Singapore - generally compliant, wholly cautious, need directions and raised on a generational belief that any awkward or sudden movement will lead to riots. We were told that its a small island, a fragile economy and therefore, it could not handle any jolts, displacement or even minor tremors. Laws were built around it.

Isn't it a bit too late to now talk about the PRC flagbearer now.

By the way, no fault at the feet of those born from 1980s onwards. So how did we get it terribly wrong?