I FULLY agree with Mr James Ang ("'Foreign' doesn't always mean
'talent'"; last Tuesday).
I was with a foreign derivatives brokerage from 1998, building
up a solid portfolio of customers over more than a decade. In 2009,
there was a restructuring engineered by talent from outside
Singapore, leading to foreign Asia-Pacific heads being located
here.
While it was good for the Singapore economy and property market,
it was detrimental to talented Singaporeans. Why? The so-called
foreign talent who came in were not cheap, commanding high salaries
and housing allowances.
If they had brought in new business and customers, one could
have appreciated their value. But most did not.
In fairness, there were a few good foreign talent whom I really
respected because I found meaning and motivation in working with or
for them.
I also concur with Ms Laurelle Ho ("Employment enclaves"; also
last Tuesday). A foreigner tends to hire staff from his own
country. My previous Australian head hired two other Australians as
supervisors. I have since tendered my resignation in
frustration.
When one is above 50 years of age, where can one find a job in
another industry that will pay the same level of benefits?
I am a middle-income Singaporean with a wife and three children
to support. Furthermore, my older children are entering higher
institutes of learning, whose fees are not cheap.
I feel that our policy of attracting "foreign talent" needs to
be properly managed. There must be an avenue for recourse if
Singaporeans are unfairly disadvantaged.
Teoh Charn Hong
