Monday 31 August 2020

Why Delane Lim Embodies Everything Wrong With Singapore's Work Culture

Disclaimer: I have no intention of attacking Delane Lim or his organisation. This is a larger commentary about how we perceive value and how we work in Singapore. I will not partake in any hateful discourse surrounding Lim as a person, nor do I condone it. 

Unless you've been living under a rock, you probably would have seen a post by one Delane Lim making its rounds on social media. In his post, Lim talks about his experience interviewing candidates for a position in his company. He goes through 7 candidates, each with their own demands and conditions surrounding the offer. He concludes that millennials are entitled, "not hungry" and unrealistic for asking for such terms in the midst of a global pandemic. He even goes as far as to say that this is the reason why some companies prefer hiring foreigners. 

Somehow, his post ignited hoards of disillusioned millennials and we've used this an opportunity to unleash all of our frustrations about working in Singapore. It's obvious his post touched a raw nerve, and I think it's because Delane Lim's post embodies everything wrong with Singapore's work culture. 

Here's what I think we got wrong:  

1. SG bosses think they are doing employees/candidates a favour by providing them a job


when in fact employment is a contract; an exchange of goods and services between two parties.

Simply put, the company has work they need someone to do and someone is hired to do it in exchange for compensation. If either party does not agree to the terms, there is no obligation to proceed.

At the point of the interview, aren't both company and employee on equal standing in terms of the value they provide? Sure, one may be more desperate and thus more willing to agree to the other's terms, but I don't think it's fair for Lim to assume that candidates should agree to any terms he sets just because CORONA.  

He also says he "felt I was being interviewed as a employer not doing his job to interview potential employees".

Huh. Am I missing something?? Isn't that what an interview is?

Here's a lesson I learnt very quickly as a fresh grad: just as the interviewer's job is to assess if you are a good fit for the role, it is your job to assess if the company can meet your needs. I'm not saying that this gives job seekers the right to make unrealistic demands. Actually, you can, just don't expect many offers to come through.

The job interview process is much like a first date. I can tell a potential partner that I expect to be taken to fine dining restaurants weekly, and they might be turned off and we'll never meet again. But eventually, I might just find that person, a rich scion or an indulgent sugar daddy, who would happily meet those needs. My pool of potential partners will shrink for sure and I'll take longer to find them, but it is well within my right to ask for such things, just as it is well within my date's right to reject them.

Essentially, an interview should be fair game, pandemic or not. Both parties are doing each other a favour.

Bless Fadhil and his common sense

2. SG companies expect employees to suffer for the company without providing sufficient justification for that sacrifice 


Lim: "But these young talents are not hungry for a job. Many are not willing to be humble and not willing to suffer."

I agree that humility is a quality you should keep with you at any stage of your career, but I do not agree with the suffering.

Here's the thing about suffering/sacrifice - people accept suffering if they feel that there's something in it for them. Take having kids for example. There's a lot of suffering involved especially in the first few years of parenthood, but people accept it with the joy and financial benefits it may bring in the future.

But what was Lim offering? A 3k salary with no clearly defined job scope, no evidence of positive work culture (1 star review on Glassdoor), lack of benefits (as shown in the interviews), in a small company with no brand name. You cannot expect sacrifice and suffering when you don't have any bargaining chips.




This concept of suffering and sacrifice is something I witnessed personally at a previous job. Early on, my ex-boss said sacrifices had to be made in order to achieve goals. I agreed, thinking they were referring to the status, progression, benefits and compensation we sacrificed to work in a small outfit like this one, all in the name of our cause. If that was the case, I willingly accepted those terms because I was committed to the vision. 

But as time passed, I realised my ex-boss and I had different ideas of what that sacrifice meant. I had been giving my best to the role, but my ex-boss suggested I was lacking in commitment. Around me, my colleagues were constantly falling sick as a result of fatigue. They didn't have time to exercise, or for anything else they enjoyed. The ones who were married didn't have children and the singles had no energy to date. When I saw that the sacrifices that were expected of me were not what I was willing to give, I quit and never looked back.  

It is a common notion that young Singaporeans can't accept suffering. I don't think we can't - we simply don't want to. Some of us have seen our parents suffer for their jobs, only to be retrenched after decades of service. Others have witnessed how our parents passed on from illness in middle-age, never having had the chance to taste the fruits of their labour. We feel that it's better to invest in things that matter alongside your career from day 1, such as family, health and other passions.

3. SG companies want high-calibre candidates but aren't willing to pay the price


There's a phrase in Chinese my father likes to tell me (一分钱, 一分货), which translates to "you get what you pay for".

As I was scrolling through the comments of Lim's post, he revealed that the candidates he interviewed had decent CVs.


Their CV quite solid, quite good leh.

So, Lim wasn't interviewing low-calibre candidates who were lacking in qualifications and experience. I'm assuming these candidates knew their worth too, which is why they put across the terms that they did. Also please do yourself a favour and read Kirsten Han's piece on value, it is fantastic. 

I'm not here to judge whether they were out of line or not, but why is it so surprising to Lim that high-calibre candidates would want better benefits and compensation? Pls don't tell me "Hello.... now is economic crisis and pandemic... ". Do you go to LV and ask them to lower the price for you?? Since now is pandemic, so branded bags ought to be cheaper???

He then goes on to say "I am pro-singapore workforce but.... they make it harder for us to consider employing them. So stop blaming companies for considering non locals."

This is a common sentiment among many local employers. Foreigners (from Southeast Asia, not angmoh countries, apparently we hate the latter) are better, as they are willing to do the work at a cheaper price. 

This is problematic because: 

1. I would not put it past some employers to pay foreign employees less than locals just because of the strength of the SGD. They might think it's ok to pay foreigners less since the money counts for more back home. The confidentiality of salaries also means newer foreign workers don't know what their local counterparts are being paid, and may thus be more easily lowballed by employers.

2. I don't think foreign employees work harder because they are naturally more diligent or "hungry", but because their circumstances force them to. Singapore's immigration policies are tight af. Losing a job for them doesn't just mean a loss of livelihood, it means repatriation - a costly process (in more ways than one) that they may simply be unable to afford. They may also be unfamiliar with SG labour laws and public holidays, putting them in a vulnerable position. 

Basically, foreign workers are more easily exploited than local workers. If this is the reason they're more attractive to local companies, it's not a good thing.  

4. SG companies are unwilling to improve their business practices to compete with MNCs/ Civil Service


It's no secret that MNCs and government jobs continue to attract the most young talents. Aside from the usual reasons, these organisations are also starting to emphasise mental health, family time and personal development for their employees. 

Local companies may not be able to provide the same kind of prestige and progression as MNCs and the civil service, but they can remain competitive by offering other benefits that would actually improve working culture. What some local firms get wrong is introducing frills like hammocks or Nespresso machines when what employees want is just to go. home. on. time.  

When you see this, be afraid. Be very afraid. 

I've heard and experienced things like local employers expecting their workers to keep an HOURLY LOG of their work, having meetings about non-urgent matters lasting up to 5 hours, and other things that make day-to-day work difficult for employees. Sometimes the problems are more serious, like a lack of transparency from management, abusive and sexist language, etc. 

These questionable business practices are most obvious in Lim's now infamous email to his staff, where he faked that they would be retrenched. Apparently, this was an exercise to teach them "the meaning of value, and the value of meaning"??? Somebody please enlighten me as to what this means, even my postgraduate degree in lit isn't helping me here. 

As many people have pointed out, this is straight-up emotional manipulation. It's like having a partner who pretends to break up with you for no other reason than to teach you "the meaning of value". The fact Lim shared the email online suggests he was proud of it. I'm assuming he was looking for praise for his ~maverick~ brand of leadership. 

In comparison, I've hardly heard about such practices from folks working in MNCs and the civil service. I don't want to generalise because my sample size is limited, but I predict these actions wouldn't fly in a larger company with more layers of accountability. 

Now, I don't think anyone is expecting local companies to match MNCs benefit for benefit. But perhaps they could consider their selling points and capitalise on them. For example, a boss of a small company might offer one-on-one mentorship opportunities or allow more flexible working hours for staff. Better yet, they could directly ask their employees what they need.  

Why Delane Lim Represents Everything Wrong With Singapore's Work Culture


Whew. This took way longer that I expected, and I'm honestly kind of afraid of putting this out. I'm sure there are many blindspots from the employer's POV that I haven't considered.

But this is not to say that I think young Singaporeans are blameless. Some of us are guilty of quitting jobs with nothing more than a text to our bosses, which is unacceptable by any measure. Others think that a degree from a local university means you deserve more than others because of that very fact. Those are instances of entitlement.

Personally, I know that I have many things I want to work on as an employee. I still have a long way to go in becoming someone who takes feedback and criticism well. I am also learning how to be more patient in seeing results, and I'm training myself not to rely on recognition and validation from authority figures for my self-worth. I just want to do all these things while working for an employer that appreciates my strengths and efforts.

Ultimately, my intention of writing this was to show how our workforce can and should do better. There's so much noise out there from employers on entitled, young employees, but victims of toxic workplaces are much less likely to be vocal about their experiences because we're afraid it will jeopardise our career in the future. I hope that speaking up about these things becomes the norm as our culture becomes more familiar with the concept of accountability.

Ok, that's it for tonight. Let me know what you think about all of this in the comments below or drop me a DM on Instagram! Have a good week at work everyone :) 


2 comments :

  1. Thank you for writing this, really well written with balanced view points. I was going "yes... yess and yesssssss!" while reading. I am a recruiter in a local firm and seeing the way candidates are being low balled and then badmouthed about for rejecting the offer which is so damn ridiculous. Why is there this shaming for asking for what you want? If the company can offer, great. If not, move on. Nobody owes anybody anything.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Now, Delane did not state how much he was paying for probation and the duration of the probabtion. In 2018/2019, it was $1,000 per month and the probation period is 6 months. If that was the similar offer to these candidates, it makes perfect sense for them to inquire more. Back then, staff have to stay-in at ITE hostel(workplace/training place) from Monday to Friday (or even till Saturday). These staff can hardly go out of the workplace except for a quick lunch (30 to 45 minutes). Staff have to start the training session from 730am/8am till 10pm. In addition, staff have to conduct interview sessions with the ITE students which can stretch till 12am or 1am. Furthermore, if there are no interns, permanent staff have to take turns to guard the place(main training area) throughout the night.So, what was Delane's reason for the $1,000/month salary during probation? Staff have to learn how to manage resources. Now, perhaps the working conditions and probation rules have changed. Based on Delane's post, $3,000 after probation is indeed higher than what was offered in year 2018. Diploma holders were offered $2250 and degree holders were offered $2,500 after probation.Due to covid, I doubt physical training sessions are conducted at ITE. This means that the working conditions are much better. So yes, the pay is higher and the working conditions might be way better now.

    ReplyDelete