ST Forum May 4, 2010: Puzzle over airline’s transit ticket demand

The Straits Times | Tue, May 4 2010

I BOUGHT a one-month return ticket for my maid for her home leave to Palembang on Lion Air on April 17, transiting at Jakarta.

But when I called her that night, I was shocked to find out that the airline’s counter staff in Jakarta would not let her fly to Palembang, saying her employer had paid for her ticket only to Jakarta, when it was clearly stated on the e-ticket that she was to take the 2.25pm connection flight.

My maid said she showed the ticket to the counter staff but they said “no” and made her pay another one million rupiah ($150) for a one-way ticket from Jakarta to Palembang. It was a lot of money for an internal flight, but she paid as there was no other way.

When buying the ticket, I was told at Lion Air’s Singapore office that it could not process a check-in all the way, but was given the assurance that the airline’s Jakarta staff would take care of transit arrangements for my maid.

The confusion could have been avoided easily if Lion Air had allowed boarding passes for the connection flight to be issued at the airport of origin (in this case Singapore).

Now I dread to think of her return trip a month from now.

I hope Lion Air will do more to ensure that its processes do not inconvenience passengers.

Yee Jenn Jong

ST Forum Jun 15, 2004: Entrepreneurs from public sector: Quality, not quantity

 

http://www.pscscholarships.gov.sg/COMMON/Entrepreneurs+from+public+sector.htm

Entrepreneurs from public sector: Quality, not quantity

 SENIOR Minister Lee Kuan Yew recently brought up the issue of releasing civil service scholars into the workforce as entrepreneurs.

 I was awarded a bond-free bank scholarship and am now an entrepreneur. I also spent six years in government service, with two of these at a statutory board.

 As I was not a scholar in the civil service, it was easier for me to leave the board and set up a technology start-up.

 Scholars who do well will find it extremely hard after six years to move out of their comfort zone into the risky world of entrepreneurship.

 Their methods of management are also very much tied to the civil service way. It is efficient, structured but bureaucratic. The ways of the private world, especially in an entrepreneurial setting, are totally different and only the flexible can survive.

 I had set out with a goal of being an entrepreneur one day, so I was ready to make sacrifices. Even so, I was not prepared for my experiences as a new entrepreneur.

 Competitors with funding 10 to 50 times greater than mine offered free services. Players with established products controlled the market well. However, my firm has survived.

 My fear is that in its enthusiasm to meet SM Lee’s objective of sending up to half of its scholars into the private sector as entrepreneurs, the public sector will create mini government-linked companies.

 Reluctant scholars may be pushed into starting businesses tied to the apron strings of these organisations and be given easy contracts to get their businesses started.

 Singapore would have created many entrepreneurs but of the wrong type. They would not succeed outside Singapore, or even in Singapore without support.

 Because I had no such privileges and came close to running out of funds several times, the business had to succeed or I would have been bankrupt. There is no greater motivation to succeed.

 The move to encourage scholars to become entrepreneurs is a positive one. Singapore needs entrepreneurs, the type that helped Hong Kong and Taiwan succeed, and the type that China and India are churning out daily.

 However, I recommend that it be done this way:

 Encourage the younger scholars to become entrepreneurs, particularly those with around two years’ experience. They would have enough exposure to government operations but not have the fear of losing their high salaries

 Award some bond-free government scholarships. Give the graduating scholars the choice of joining statutory boards that deal with private sector, such as the Economic Development Board. But limit their contract to two years.

 Do not count how many scholars become entrepreneurs. This may start a trend of creating reluctant entrepreneurs.

 Do not create artificial incentives for them to leave. If they want to become entrepreneurs, wish them luck and leave them alone.

 If they fail, there should not be a government job waiting. Never mind that this may prompt only 10 per cent of the scholars to become entrepreneurs. It is quality we want, not quantity.

 

Mr Yee Jenn Jong

————————— Reply ——————————- 

The Straits Times 19 Jun, 04

Would-be entrepreneurs have ways to pay for studies

We refer to the letter, ‘Entrepreneurs from public sector: quality, not quantity’ (ST, June 15), by Mr Yee Jenn Jong. We would like to thank him for his thoughtful letter and for sharing his experience with us.

The Government awards scholarships to about one-third of the top talent of each Alevel cohort (defined as those in the top 10 per cent in terms of results).

About half of each cohort of scholars eventually leave the civil service, although we do not know how many of them become entrepreneurs.

 The Government will not stand in the way of scholars who wish to leave after a few years if they do not see themselves making the civil service their lifelong career.

 We agree with Mr Yee it should not provide incentives, support or fall-back job guarantees to encourage more scholars to go into business. Doing so is against the enterprising spirit.

 However, we do not believe the Government should award bond-free scholarships, and encourage the scholars to become entrepreneurs after spending two years in the Government.

 A young Singaporean wanting to become an entrepreneur has many avenues to fund his university education. No Singaporean has to forgo a university education for lack of funds.

 The Government cannot justify funding scholarships without requiring a bond, or only to release the scholars two years later.

 

If we did so, how would we explain to taxpayers if the scholars later decide not to become entrepreneurs? 

Mr Yee deserves respect for having taken the plunge to become an entrepreneur, overcoming the many difficulties and making a success of his business.

 

However, scholars who remain in the civil service also deserve respect. They contribute in a different but equally vital way to the Government and the prosperity of the country. 

We need an efficient civil service, staffed by properly paid, capable civil servants, for entrepreneurs such as Mr Yee to prosper in Singapore.

 Joyce Chia

Assistant Director (Public Affairs)

for Permanent Secretary

Prime Minister’s Office

ST Forum Mar 8, 2011: Change This Attitude – School sports is about winning, not passion

 
The debate over the Singapore Sports School’s (SSP) overwhelming dominance in interschool sports (ST, 4 March 2011 Sports School Bugbear) highlights a problem persisting in schools currently: schools only want to pick sports that they can win trophies in and not to provide students with opportunities to develop in a sports they like.
 
My son loves basketball and table tennis. His school does not offer these as they have done badly in the sports in earlier years. From speaking with parents whose children are in other schools, this is a common trend. Even when a school does offer a sports, it only want children to be in it for winning competitions. Those who wants to join a sports for the love of it but are not good enough for the school team will be sidelined. The trophies add to the KPIs of the school.
 
We are sending a wrong signal to children. Singapore is trying to encourage entrepeneurship and start-up companies. In any industry, a start-up will face giants in the form of MNCs and GLCs. Do we then take a defeatist attitude that because there are already giants in the field, we should therefore not be in it? Giants can be defeated with hardwork, passion and innovation, as I have personally experienced in my work taking on established companies as a start-up. We want Singapore to export our businesses internationally. You will face much bigger giants overseas. Do we then stop trying? Israel has a high concentration of innovative companies with world-beating products and they are a small country. Why not Singapore? We lack the resilence and self belief they have. Our kiasu mentality tells us to play only when we have an advantage and to back off when the challenge is too great.
 
Sure, SSP has lots of resources. All the more, other schools should see that as a mountain they have to climb, as a giant they have to overcome. Motivate your athletes to develop self determination. SSP’s dominance is good for sports in Singapore. Embrace the competition.
 
regards
 
Yee Jenn Jong
(Note:  This is original unedited version sent to ST Forum )
—————————— Replies ——————————

 ST Forum, Mar 16, 2011

It’s about love of sport, not winning

IN HIS letter, Mr Yee Jenn Jong bemoaned the fact that many schools tend to drop sports that their pupils do not excel in (“School sport is about winning, not passion”; March 8) . He further suggested that schools should take on “giants” like the Singapore Sports School (SSP) to nurture an entrepreneurial spirit.

The SSP athletes have a distinct and unfair advantage when it comes to national competitions. Aside from the fact that they are a select group, the creme de la creme from primary schools, the environment in SSP is almost ideal for producing champions – top-notch coaches, fine facilities, supportive teachers, tutors, sports psychologists, counsellors, trainers and what have you.

The talented athletes there live sports day in and day out, unlike their counterparts in other secondary schools where developing champions is not a high priority.

While it is true that we must encourage our athletes to be positive and not adopt a defeatist attitude, the conditions must be conducive and reasonably challenging. The presence of SSP in inter-school competition detracts from this and could well have a detrimental effect on the self-esteem of the athletes from other schools.

It is enough for school sports programmes to inculcate in the young a love for the outdoors and physical activity, to develop sports skills and motivation to pursue an active life. That should be their main focus.

Competition and winning are important aspects of sport participation but they should not be the raison d’etre of teaching sports.

Lee Seck Kay

——————————————————-

 ST FORUM, Mar 16, 2011

Losing can be as important as winning

SPORTS administrators and management must understand that past glory does not guarantee future success (“Sports School bugbear”, March 4; “School sports is about winning, not passion” by Mr Yee Jenn Jong, March 8).

Every batch is different, just as every student is different. Schools should focus on investing in future potential, not past records. Building a track record takes time.

Basketball superstar Michael Jordan once remarked: “I have failed over and over and over again in my life. And that is why I succeed.”

Under the current system, if Jordan were born in Singapore, he would not have been allowed to fail so many times and might not become the legend he is today.

I think the selection policies behind many sports are flawed and should be reviewed. Students require time and experience to grow and develop in the sports they like. They need to be recognised for their efforts and improvements, more than their chances of winning on their first try.

Do sports administrators understand that losing can be as important as winning?

Tay Xiong Sheng

ST Forum Mar 4, 2011 – Serve up more Stefanie Tans, please

Mar 4, 2011

Serve up more Stefanie Tans, please

 

I APPLAUD student tennis player Stefanie Tan (“Tan serves surprise”; Wednesday) for quitting Raffles Institution to play professionally.

We have placed too much emphasis on only one route for success – via the paper chase. This is perpetuated by the way schools and parents drive children to prioritise examination results about everything else. Having been in the education industry for nearly 20 years, I strongly believe that there are alternative ways to be successful in life.

Not many youngsters are as certain as Miss Tan about her choice. It is not the eventual tennis ranking that she achieves that we should use to measure her success, but by how hard and how passionately she pursues her goal.

I have employed staff with good academic results and testimonials from elsewhere. But when the passion is missing, they do not achieve what is expected. Eight years ago, while running a fast-growing e-learning business, I could not hire the right people with the passion to continue to drive the growth. I switched strategy and challenged selected passionate staff at the junior ranks to join the head office.

It worked and these employees continue to stay driven in the business today. Their academic qualifications and prior job experiences were inferior to that of those we hired earlier, but their job performances were far superior. Today, as an employer, I look carefully beyond academic results to see what drives the person.

The rigour of competitive sports will provide Miss Tan with something school cannot teach her.

People often tell me they cannot do certain things because they are not trained for it. Our education system sometimes stifles people and leads them to rely on only what is taught in the classroom, making them lack confidence in themselves, There are so many more things one can learn outside of school if they are pursued with a passion, be it in sports, the arts or business.

I hope Singapore will have more Stefanie Tans, and more of the type of parents that support their child’s pursuit of something good, albeit outside of academic achievements.

Yee Jenn Jong

ST Forum 10 Mar 2011: Level the playing field for private and VWO preschools

Include private centres in preschool push

I AM curious about how the $290 million investment in the preschool sector, over five years, will be implemented. (‘Preschools: Funds to boost teaching quality’; Tuesday).

Minister of State for Education Masagos Zulkifli said the funding will also go towards keeping fees affordable, and upgrading centres and programmes. Preschools are either privately owned or operated by organisations such as the National Trades Union Congress (NTUC) and PAP Community Foundation (PCF).

In my 15-year involvement in the industry, I have not known of any government funding for upgrading the facilities of privately owned centres, so I cannot see how this can lower the cost of preschool education in such centres.

There is also no reason for the Government to fund the upgrading of centres run by NTUC and PCF as they have their own fund sources and are usually already paying rent that is below market rates.

As for upgrading programmes, I hope efforts to boost the curriculum and resources will be extended to private centres to alleviate their costs.

When I visited Western Australia to study its system of preschool education support, I discovered that the centres could borrow toys, puppets, educational games, drama costumes and other resources they needed for teaching and learning from community libraries.

These are useful resources that are infrequently used by a centre and which public institutions can lend out.

The massive funding announced in Parliament should also be used to help private preschool centres keep costs down and thereby keep their fees affordable.

Yee Jenn Jong

Footnote: My original letter had asked the Ministry to specifically explain the breakdown of the $290 million and how it can be used to keep cost of preschool  affordable. This portion was unfortunately deleted by the Forum editor. It was the main purpose of my letter, to ask for the breakdown.

———————– Reply by MOE & MCYS ——————

ST Forum, March 16, 2011

Why preschool subsidy is selective

WE THANK Ms Yvonne Lee (‘Private centres left out: Shouldn’t all preschoolers be eligible for aid?’) and Mr Yee Jenn Jong (‘Include private centres in preschool push’) for their feedback last Thursday.

The Kindergarten Financial Assistance Scheme, disbursed by the Ministry of Community Development, Youth and Sports (MCYS), aims to ensure that children are not deprived of a preschool education because of the family’s financial circumstances.

The increase in the eligible monthly household income criterion from $1,800 to $3,500 from April 1 will let more families benefit from the scheme’s subsidies.

Eligibility requires kindergartens to be registered with the Ministry of Education (MOE), be non-profit, secular and in a good financial position to provide quality preschool education.

These criteria serve to ensure that assistance is targeted at kindergartens which serve lower- and middle- income households. There are about 240 eligible kindergartens which are well-distributed across Singapore.

MCYS and MOE are committed to enhancing the quality, accessibility and affordability of preschool education. We make available a range of resources to all preschools. These include funding to uplift the quality of preschool educators and the Singapore Preschool Accreditation Framework, which helps preschools appraise and improve their teaching, learning and management practices.

MOE also provides resources for curriculum development and opportunities for professional development, such as seminars, learning journeys and overseas work attachment programmes, to all preschool teachers.

Choo Lee See (Mrs)
Director of ComCare and
Social Support Division
Ministry of Community Development, Youth and Sports

Sum Chee Wah (Miss)
Director, Education Programmes
Ministry of Education

—————————————————-

Former NMP Siew Kum Hong’s comments in his blog:

http://siewkumhong.blogspot.com/2011/03/answering-question-you-wish-had-been.html