Persuading Employers

I have just made an individual pledge to this wonderful private-sector initiative to beat the downturn. Add yours today!

In light of my own pledge, I have had applications from several highly qualified and talented candidates for some of the more recent roles made available here. 

They have not been able to secure jobs on the basis that they are "over-qualified".

What the employer really means is: "I want to give you this job but I am not convinced that you will remain with me as soon as the market turns for the better."

At the outset, candidates in such situations have an uphill task in persuading employers to take them onboard.

Most I meet haven't really thought about how to address this. Others see this as not their responsibilty to address.

As a result, they end up being invited for many interviews but not securing a position (until the market conditions improve).

Such candidates must take greater personal responsibility for their application. I encourage such candidates as follows:

1. Do not send in applications, unless you can see yourself in the job for at least 2-5 years and you accept that the role will actually help you develop as a person.

2. When you meet the employer, explain your commitment to the role as being part of your 5-year plan, and highlight how you see yourself adding value to the employer in the years to come.

3. Underscore to the employer that it should be a 'win-win' process. Acknowledge the limitations of the employer but impress upon the employer how they can still make a difference to your career. Usually, such employers cannot pay high salaries but they make up for it with training opportunities and less stressful working environments. Simply put, make the most of what is available to you.

If you have seriously thought about the role and addressed your "over-qualification" with the right level of humility, you will win over most employers and they will you make an offer of employment.

Happiness,
Dharmendra Yadav

Please consider the environment. Do you really need to print this?

When You Apply For A Job

It may be useful to share three things I have learnt from job-seekers for this role:

1. Recognise the difference between a resume and a "CV". Keep your resume brief, that is not more than 3 pages. Two pages are ideal. The resume should give a snapshot of you and its primary purpose is to give the employer a relevant basis to invite you for an interview. Address the requirements of the role in both your resume and cover note. If you need help with your resume, you may wish to write to me for assistance or seek help from career coaches.

2. Please be accessible at your contact number if you apply for a job. If for any reason you become unavailable at that number, give callers the option of leaving you a message. Check back every 1 - 2 hours for messages that may have been left for you by potential employers. It does not create a good impression if a potential employer attempts to contact you and is unable to get you for hours. When you do get in touch with the employer, do apologise for not being available to take the call earlier and offer a reasonable explanation to justify your unavailability.

3. When you send in an application for a job and do not receive an acknowledgement after 2 days, get in touch with the employer to check that the resume has been received. You can use the opportunity to find out if and when they will be getting in touch with you for a possible interview. Ensure you have a polite disposition when you make that call. Leave a positive impression on the person you speak to. The person may well turn out to be a person who plays a key role in influencing the decision to employ you or may even be the person who makes the decision to employ you.

Happiness,
Dharmendra Yadav

Please consider the environment. Do you really need to print this?

Help AWARE raise funds

I have been following developments in the AWARE saga from a distance, unlike other members of the legal fraternity. A non-exhaustive list of articles following this development is available here. Many, including the Honourable Nominated Member of Parliament Siew Kum Hong, have written about the lessons that we can draw out from this experience.

I have been particularly disturbed by the $90,000 spent by AWARE in the short period that its past executive committee was in power. I hope that this expenditure will be looked into by AWARE and more information will be shared about it with AWARE members. I also hope steps will be taken by the current executive committee to recover the money spent, either through legal action (if so advised by AWARE's lawyers) or other fund-raising activities.

In the same vein, I was particularly pleased to learn that a Singapore company, Archer Marketing & Development (S) Pte Ltd, has launched a special website, Printeet.com, to help AWARE raise some funds.

Initially, I was concerned about the credibility of the payment system on this website and whether the funds would eventually go to AWARE. I spoke to Dionis of Printeet.com today and sought to clarify these matters.

I have learnt that:
a. payments are being accepted by Paypal; and
b. buyers do not need to have or create an account to make purchases at Printeet.com; and
c. about 70% of profits from the sale of AWARESG t-shirts or $7 from the sale of each t-shirt will go to AWARE; and
d. Printeet.com will be providing a statement disclosing details of its donations to AWARE.

Having received this clarification, I feel assured enough to buy a t-shirt at Printeet.com. I hope others will consider doing the same too.

Let's help AWARE to recoup its losses and raise some funds to continue its good work in the community.

Happiness,
Dharmendra Yadav

Please consider the environment. Do you really need to print this?

Younger Lawyers Respond To Senior Lawyer

In the past week, I have received a range of reactions from different sections of the legal fraternity in relation to the AWARE coup.

Firstly, there are those who consider themselves "God's Children" and see it as their religious mandate to do all that they can to endorse the work of those who wash away their sins and of those around them.

Secondly, there are others who are absolutely appalled by the intolerance and immaturity displayed by some very senior members of the profession. The letter below is one example of those in this category.

Another lawyer is going further and initiating a customers' revolt. He writes, "I am going to call up DBS and terminate my credit cards. The DBS person on the line will ask me why (they always ask for that kind of customer feedback). And I am going to say that it's because of their Head of Marketing, Josie Lau. I will say that I have a very poor opinion of her behaviour in the Aware saga, and that for that reason, I have decided to stop using DBS credit cards. Furthermore I will request for my feedback to be given to DBS's senior management. It's a matter of principle. I am only one customer. But I will do what I think is right."

Thirdly, there are others who ask me, "Why should I care?"

Of the three categories of persons above, the third worries me the most. To these persons, I respond with a poem by Pastor Martin Niemöller:

When the Nazis came for the communists,
I remained silent;
I was not a communist.

Then they locked up the social democrats,
I remained silent;
I was not a social democrat.

Then they came for the trade unionists,
I did not speak out;
I was not a trade unionist.

Then they came for the Jews,
I did not speak out;
I was not a Jew.

When they came for me,
there was no one left to speak out for me.

It is important to care about what happens around us although I wouldn't go as far as the late Winston Churchill. He said, "You have enemies? Good. That means you've stood up for something, sometime in your life."

Another young lawyer, Sivarajan Sivalingam, has best summed up the importance of being taking an interest in such issues: "Be AWARE lest you be caught unAWARE."

Happiness,
Dharmendra Yadav

Please consider the environment. Do you really need to print this?

*****

I write in response to the article titled “Lawyer's key role in Aware coup” (ST, 24 Apr 2009) detailing Dr. Thio Su Mien’s involvement in the AWARE saga. I was disappointed with the contents of the report, and what Dr. Thio had to say on certain issues.

She feels that AWARE has given too much precedence to what she naively calls “promoting a homosexual agenda” – i.e. the fact that “homosexuality is regarded as a neutral word, not a negative word” in AWARE’s secondary school sex education programme. I think this misses the forest for the trees.

Dr. Thio (given her credentials) must be familiar with the ordinary linguistic difference between the passivity of a neutral stance and the element of “activeness” involved in "promoting a homosexual agenda" (quite frankly, a tired turn of phrase). More significantly, it ought to be noted that during the heated debate early last year surrounding the Petition to repeal section 377A of the Penal Code, AWARE unlike the Law Society did not comment on the matter. Most importantly, the examples Dr. Thio cites are all premised on hearsay and carry an element of scaremongering – i.e. “The suggestion is that in this programme, young girls from 12 to 18 are taught that it's okay to experiment with each other. And this is something which should concern parents in Singapore. Are we going to have an entire generation of lesbians?” This undeniably is nothing but hyperbole, and as such, I find it impossible to agree with Dr. Thio’s view.

Her insistence that AWARE “seems to be only very interested in lesbianism and the advancement of homosexuality” is a fallacy that does a great disservice to the previous committee, whose past reports to the CEDAW Committee have been comprehensive in addressing the discrimination that women in Singapore face, and how this can be addressed have been nothing short of impressive. Dr. Thio seems to fixate on the work of one of AWARE's sub-committees thereby effectively ignoring the wide-ranging support AWARE provides to women in Singapore. This is not only inaccurate, but unfair.

It has been repeatedly said that AWARE is a secular and non-partisan NGO premised on the equality of women and furthering the best interests of women. As a woman, I cannot condone an organisation that claims to speak for me while in the same breath claiming that all women are equal, but some are more equal than others.

Puja Varaprasad
25 April 2009

Educational Art From Family Doctor

In December 2008, I visited my family doctor. My family and I have been seeing him for over a decade now.

He's one of those doctors who takes great pride in what he does. He also likes to empower his patients with knowledge so that they may exercise greater personal responsibility about their health.

It is therefore normal for him to give little nuggets of information for his patients to take back and digest. Many of my family members or friends have had similar experiences with him.

During this visit, I inaccurately described my onset of sinus as a flu bug.

What ensued was something I least expected. He gave me an artistic lesson on the subtle differences between a flu, cold and sinus. Then, he kindly allowed me to take his art piece back royalty-free:




*****

Based on what I can recall, this is how we read my family doctor's illustration:

FLU

Usually caused by a virus. Symptoms may include fever; body ache muscle ache (BAMA); sore throat (itchy, scratchy, pokey); running nose; cough; and phlegm.

COLD

Usually caused by a virus. Slight fever or BAMA, but less likely. Other symptoms may include sore throat (itchy, scratchy, pokey); running nose; cough; and phlegm.

SINUS

Usually caused by an allergy, which may lead to an infection. No fever or BAMA. Symptoms may include sore throat and cough (dry and ticklish); running nose; and phlegm.

*****

But please do read what I have shared here with some caution. This may not apply to your individual circumstances. It is in your interest to seek independent medical advice.

Happiness,
Dharmendra Yadav

Please consider the environment. Do you really need to print this?

Reader's Question: 2009 Salaries For Newly Qualifed Lawyers

QUESTION

In relation to this:
A. Wonder if there is any truth or merit to the figures posted?
B. Are young lawyers really willing to sacrifice all their waking hours for a few hundred/thousand dollars more?

Read more about the above question here.

ANSWER (A)

In the past, the United Kingdom Singapore Law Students Society used to publish detailed statistics about the salary and benefit packages offered by law firms to pupils offered retention contracts. This was useful not just to law graduates or pupils admitted to the profession but employers within the profession. I don't think the UKSLSS does so any more. I intend to write to the Law Society of Singapore to see if their Young Lawyers Committee can look into doing so. I think it is important to give young lawyers access to such information, at least in the first three years of legal practice.

The figures provided by me earlier are based on information received from current pupils at the firms or announcements made by these firms at public events. This is a developing story. Some of these figures were revised by the firms and an update was given here.

Most firms are paying their newly qualified lawyers between $3,500 - $4,500 per month. Successful boutique practices lead the pack in paying such lawyers more than what they would get in a large firm, since these practices will not be able to match the additional benefits that large firms provide. An exception is Tan Peng Chin LLC, which I understand is offering its newly qualified lawyers $3,200 per month.

I stand by my earlier position. A young lawyer receiving offers of less than $4,000 should consider alternative careers in public service or other positions in the private sector. They will probably be paid similarly, and will also be in a better position to pursue their respective interests.

They should also ask themselves if law is really what they want to do. If they do wish to court the law, a lower starting salary is a good trade-off to make for the experience to be gained. However, they should not let employers offering legal work experience exploit them, since there are several employers in the profession that appear to have no qualms doing so.

This year, I understand the Legal Service has received unprecedented applications from young lawyers. It is likely that these young lawyers have chosen this option because it has now become a good substitute to a career in the private sector. It will be interesting to see if they choose to remain public servants when the market picks up.

ANSWER (B)

Firstly, it's not a "few hundred/thousand dollars more". It is not unheard of successful practices to pay between 3 - 9 months in bonuses, if not more. Based on current figures, this works out between $12,000 and $48,000 per year.

Plus, these firms provide a range of benefits including annual leave of over 21 days; medical and other health benefits such as use of a fitness centre; memberships to exclusive clubs like Zouk; and various other allowances for mobile phone, clothes, etc.

Having a strong firm name on your resume also helps if one is thinking of future career progression like joining an offshore law firm or an employer of similar standing.

Naturally, this attracts many persons into the law and to these firms. Some may argue that these are the wrong reasons to join the profession and that law graduates should look beyond the material. But I don't see this trend changing. The longer I am in the legal profession, the more I realise that this has to do with the kind of persons that our law schools admit and the pragmatic indoctrination that a Singapore education system provides.

Secondly, despite the carrots that successful practices offer, there are young lawyers who join the profession for something more or who opt not to "sacrifice all their waking hours for a few hundred/thousand dollars more".

Unfortunately, these young lawyers are in the minority.

These lawyers more often than not join the public service or a law firm that offers lower perks and better working hours. If they do join the latter, they tend to go to a law firm with a track record for valuing and taking care of their young lawyers. But what a pity it is that these other law firms are not doing enough to reach out early to such young persons joining the profession.

Happiness,
Dharmendra Yadav

Please consider the environment. Do you really need to print this?