- Joined
- Jul 24, 2008
- Messages
- 33,627
- Points
- 0
[h=2]Reveal salaries of CEOs & Management[/h]
January 10th, 2012
The salaries of MPs have gone through a review only because the public knew what range it was in. In fact it is still not clear what were the exact ranges after bonuses in the last few years.
However one set of salaries in Singapore society that remains under deliberate tight secrecy is the salaries of CEOs. One might argue there is no need for such salaries to be reveal to public. However it is salaries of CEOs of companies that are wholly owned by non-government that do not require public to know. Instead as long as their shareholders know about it, there is no reason to reveal them to the public.
Statutory boards, agencies, companies and organizations that are wholly owned by government however must disclose all salaries of their CEOs and management to the public.
Companies such as SMRT, which are majority owned by government, are said to be paying their CEOs million dollar salaries. The public is aware of the salary of SMRT CEO. However the public is still in the dark as to the salaries of CEOs of JTC, Singhealth, National Healthcare Group, ComfortDelgro and the numerous other government fully owned or government majority owned companies. These were companies that were once totally public companies. The question is how much change has privatisation brought to warrant these CEOs and
management to be paid such high salaries. Anyway privatisation itself has been only in the name. Many of these companies remained wholly owned by government.
According to unverified but reliable sources, CEOs of statutory boards such as PA, are said to be earning somewhere between $500K to $1million. The directors of those organisations are said to be paid somewhere between $200K-$500K. What is problematic about statutory board management earning such incomes is that we must understand that these statutory boards were departments in ministries till 1990s, before they were were branched out as seperate organisations during which course the position of CEO and directors were created. Before 1990s when they were still departments of ministries and after 1990s when they became statutory boards, their output have not transformed dramatically to warrant their management to be paid such large salaries. Furthermore the CEOs of statutory boards in Singapore are rotated every 3-6 years. Often the CEOs are of totally irrelavant background, lacking domain knowledge pertinent to run the statutory boards. Instead they spend much of their time in restructuring, marketing campaigns etc.
Likewise there are organisations that used to be public organisations before 1990s such as PUB, hospitals, library. They were then run by a director paid as a civil servant. PAP claimed it was going to privatise them but instead changed their legal status from public to private, while wholly owning the organisations in most cases. As part of the dramatic circus, they created new positions such as CEOs and directors of divisions and they start paying them similar to the pay structure for statutory boards.
When one look at the whole scheme of things, one will realise that the top 1000 earners are likely to come from all these group of companies that government fully or majority owns. This then is recently used to benchmark MPs salaries. It is without doubt a very elaborate scheme by PAP. There is nothing illegal about it. However it is highly
questionable.
Anyone must be paid according to their productivity level. All these positions of CEOs and management directors were created only after these organisations were carved out of government departments and companies as part of a superficial privatisation program. The productivity level of these CEOs and management directors is highly questionable to warrant such high salaries they are being paid.
One can tomorrow convert these companies into non-profit trusts owned not by government but by Singaporeans and have the CEO and director posts changed into positions that NGOs tend to have and be remunerated accordingly. Such remunerations will be similar to civil servants salaries. Should that happen, these organisations and companies will not crash nor will the productivity drop.
Likewise Singapore can transform these companies back to being public ones, remove the CEO/management posts and replace with positions consistent with public companies. Here the remuneration will be based on civil service far different from what these CEO/directors currently command.
.
Civilian
However one set of salaries in Singapore society that remains under deliberate tight secrecy is the salaries of CEOs. One might argue there is no need for such salaries to be reveal to public. However it is salaries of CEOs of companies that are wholly owned by non-government that do not require public to know. Instead as long as their shareholders know about it, there is no reason to reveal them to the public.
Statutory boards, agencies, companies and organizations that are wholly owned by government however must disclose all salaries of their CEOs and management to the public.
Companies such as SMRT, which are majority owned by government, are said to be paying their CEOs million dollar salaries. The public is aware of the salary of SMRT CEO. However the public is still in the dark as to the salaries of CEOs of JTC, Singhealth, National Healthcare Group, ComfortDelgro and the numerous other government fully owned or government majority owned companies. These were companies that were once totally public companies. The question is how much change has privatisation brought to warrant these CEOs and
management to be paid such high salaries. Anyway privatisation itself has been only in the name. Many of these companies remained wholly owned by government.
According to unverified but reliable sources, CEOs of statutory boards such as PA, are said to be earning somewhere between $500K to $1million. The directors of those organisations are said to be paid somewhere between $200K-$500K. What is problematic about statutory board management earning such incomes is that we must understand that these statutory boards were departments in ministries till 1990s, before they were were branched out as seperate organisations during which course the position of CEO and directors were created. Before 1990s when they were still departments of ministries and after 1990s when they became statutory boards, their output have not transformed dramatically to warrant their management to be paid such large salaries. Furthermore the CEOs of statutory boards in Singapore are rotated every 3-6 years. Often the CEOs are of totally irrelavant background, lacking domain knowledge pertinent to run the statutory boards. Instead they spend much of their time in restructuring, marketing campaigns etc.
Likewise there are organisations that used to be public organisations before 1990s such as PUB, hospitals, library. They were then run by a director paid as a civil servant. PAP claimed it was going to privatise them but instead changed their legal status from public to private, while wholly owning the organisations in most cases. As part of the dramatic circus, they created new positions such as CEOs and directors of divisions and they start paying them similar to the pay structure for statutory boards.
When one look at the whole scheme of things, one will realise that the top 1000 earners are likely to come from all these group of companies that government fully or majority owns. This then is recently used to benchmark MPs salaries. It is without doubt a very elaborate scheme by PAP. There is nothing illegal about it. However it is highly
questionable.
Anyone must be paid according to their productivity level. All these positions of CEOs and management directors were created only after these organisations were carved out of government departments and companies as part of a superficial privatisation program. The productivity level of these CEOs and management directors is highly questionable to warrant such high salaries they are being paid.
One can tomorrow convert these companies into non-profit trusts owned not by government but by Singaporeans and have the CEO and director posts changed into positions that NGOs tend to have and be remunerated accordingly. Such remunerations will be similar to civil servants salaries. Should that happen, these organisations and companies will not crash nor will the productivity drop.
Likewise Singapore can transform these companies back to being public ones, remove the CEO/management posts and replace with positions consistent with public companies. Here the remuneration will be based on civil service far different from what these CEO/directors currently command.
.
Civilian
