<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Questionable benchmarking formula</title>
	<atom:link href="http://theonlinecitizen.com/2007/04/questionable-benchmarking-formula/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://theonlinecitizen.com/2007/04/questionable-benchmarking-formula/</link>
	<description>a community of Singaporeans</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 10 Feb 2012 07:49:39 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: LKY's Mother</title>
		<link>http://theonlinecitizen.com/2007/04/questionable-benchmarking-formula/comment-page-1/#comment-544</link>
		<dc:creator>LKY's Mother</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 13 Apr 2007 15:33:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://theonlinecitizen.com/2007/04/06/questionable-benchmarking-formula/#comment-544</guid>
		<description>I agree with Teo Chee Hean that any increase
in Ministers&#039; salaries would not undermine
the moral authority of the government.

In the first place the PAP does not have moral
authority!  So how could moral authority that is not
there could be undermined?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I agree with Teo Chee Hean that any increase<br />
in Ministers&#8217; salaries would not undermine<br />
the moral authority of the government.</p>
<p>In the first place the PAP does not have moral<br />
authority!  So how could moral authority that is not<br />
there could be undermined?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mangy</title>
		<link>http://theonlinecitizen.com/2007/04/questionable-benchmarking-formula/comment-page-1/#comment-543</link>
		<dc:creator>Mangy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 11 Apr 2007 15:58:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://theonlinecitizen.com/2007/04/06/questionable-benchmarking-formula/#comment-543</guid>
		<description>Singapore is a &lt;b&gt;country&lt;/b&gt; and it should never ever be thought of as a &lt;b&gt;corporation&lt;/b&gt;. Based on this premise, comparison between the public and private sector should never have existed in the first place. Therefore, I feel that the existing benchmark should be scrapped altogether.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Singapore is a <b>country</b> and it should never ever be thought of as a <b>corporation</b>. Based on this premise, comparison between the public and private sector should never have existed in the first place. Therefore, I feel that the existing benchmark should be scrapped altogether.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Soc</title>
		<link>http://theonlinecitizen.com/2007/04/questionable-benchmarking-formula/comment-page-1/#comment-545</link>
		<dc:creator>Soc</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 08 Apr 2007 16:52:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://theonlinecitizen.com/2007/04/06/questionable-benchmarking-formula/#comment-545</guid>
		<description>This analogy is shooting yourself in the foot because the premise that Singapore is the company is wrong. It is the individual ministries that are the equivalent in size of corporations and so your argument instead supports the escalation of our PM&#039;s pay to an ungodly amount.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This analogy is shooting yourself in the foot because the premise that Singapore is the company is wrong. It is the individual ministries that are the equivalent in size of corporations and so your argument instead supports the escalation of our PM&#8217;s pay to an ungodly amount.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tan</title>
		<link>http://theonlinecitizen.com/2007/04/questionable-benchmarking-formula/comment-page-1/#comment-546</link>
		<dc:creator>Tan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 08 Apr 2007 09:14:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://theonlinecitizen.com/2007/04/06/questionable-benchmarking-formula/#comment-546</guid>
		<description>Agree, there is a logic for pay increase but no logic for the unbearable benchmark used to facilitate the incredible hike. Well, it is important to get the appropriate benchmarks that bridges the capitalist works perfomed by materialistic ministers with the socialist hearts of the people. The Benchmarking scales are best in Group B or C for Singapore.

An approximate example below
A. Valid and reasonable Benchmarks For Deserved High Pay (whichever is higher)
1. 20 to 30 times of the lowest paid Singaporean workers
2. 50th to 75th centile of the Singaporeans professionals pay


B. Arguable but not discomforting Benchmarks for More Than Deserving Higher Pay
1. 31 to 60 times of the lowest paid Singaporean workers
2. 76th to 90th centile of the Singaporeans professionals pay
3. Benchmarks of most countries government pay scales


C. Discomforting but Bearable Benchmarks for Materialistic High Pay
1. 90th to 97th centile of the Singaporeans professionals pay
2. 76th to 90th centile of selected high paying Singaporeans professionals pay
3. 50th to 75th centile of selected high paying private Singaporeans professionals pay
4. Benchmarks of some big successful countries government pay scales

D. Unbearable Benchmark of Top Richest Men Pay
1. 99.99 centile (only the TOP 8 or so outliers of the norms) of selected high paying private Singaporeans)
2. Absolute Top pay of 1 or 2 ministers prior to entering (disregarding the rest)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Agree, there is a logic for pay increase but no logic for the unbearable benchmark used to facilitate the incredible hike. Well, it is important to get the appropriate benchmarks that bridges the capitalist works perfomed by materialistic ministers with the socialist hearts of the people. The Benchmarking scales are best in Group B or C for Singapore.</p>
<p>An approximate example below<br />
A. Valid and reasonable Benchmarks For Deserved High Pay (whichever is higher)<br />
1. 20 to 30 times of the lowest paid Singaporean workers<br />
2. 50th to 75th centile of the Singaporeans professionals pay</p>
<p>B. Arguable but not discomforting Benchmarks for More Than Deserving Higher Pay<br />
1. 31 to 60 times of the lowest paid Singaporean workers<br />
2. 76th to 90th centile of the Singaporeans professionals pay<br />
3. Benchmarks of most countries government pay scales</p>
<p>C. Discomforting but Bearable Benchmarks for Materialistic High Pay<br />
1. 90th to 97th centile of the Singaporeans professionals pay<br />
2. 76th to 90th centile of selected high paying Singaporeans professionals pay<br />
3. 50th to 75th centile of selected high paying private Singaporeans professionals pay<br />
4. Benchmarks of some big successful countries government pay scales</p>
<p>D. Unbearable Benchmark of Top Richest Men Pay<br />
1. 99.99 centile (only the TOP 8 or so outliers of the norms) of selected high paying private Singaporeans)<br />
2. Absolute Top pay of 1 or 2 ministers prior to entering (disregarding the rest)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Quan Xi</title>
		<link>http://theonlinecitizen.com/2007/04/questionable-benchmarking-formula/comment-page-1/#comment-547</link>
		<dc:creator>Quan Xi</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 07 Apr 2007 10:20:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://theonlinecitizen.com/2007/04/06/questionable-benchmarking-formula/#comment-547</guid>
		<description>Monetary reward has an inverse incorruptible effect.In any case, it is call taking care of your loyalist - a common practice in business.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Monetary reward has an inverse incorruptible effect.In any case, it is call taking care of your loyalist &#8211; a common practice in business.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

