Dear Mr. Tan,
I am an ex-employee, Somebody posted above that staff who left are staff that Income do not want anyway. This is not true. When I was with Income, I was among the 10% of the staff who obtained A grade every year. I was assessed an A grade by my superior, my peers and my subordinates. My work and achievements were measurable and every year I met or exceeded the expectations.
Ironically, I decided to resign from an organisation and a work that I was very dedicated to. For 8 months I tired my best to work under the new management. I finally decided to leave as I knew that I could not fit into the new management style. I was not in sync.
Many of the things I had to do, I did not agree. Things that were right before became dicey or wrong under the new management. I could not go on if I did not believe in what I was doing.
For example, I believe that Income, like Fairprice for groceries, have to set the benchmark for the basic insurance products for the mass market such as term life cover, medical insurance and motor insurance. Income's products cannot be more expensive than those offered by the commercial insurers.
Hence, recent statement from Income's management that they need not be cheaper than the commercial insurance companies for motor insurance gave me the shudder.
Sometimes due to company restructuring, a good employee may be required to leave.
ReplyDeleteSometimes, its hard to decide if what they tell you to do is right or wrong because we may not see what our bosses see.
Sometimes items in NTUC Fairprice may not be the cheapest in Singapore.
I think premiums of Insurance Plans in NTUC Income are generally lower than the rest. It is unlikely that they will win everything.
It's true many things in NTUC Fairprice, even some essentials are not cheaper than other places.
ReplyDeleteIt is also true that even some medical services in NHG hospitals are not cheaper than private ones. For public transport (bus, MRT)cannot say because no equivalent competitor. For petrol there is a cartel and so is the price.
Now INCOME also wants to be like commercial although it is intrinsically still a cooperative.
END result the customer is worse off than before. If not for MR Tan KL, I don't think there will be even any organised protest petitions on this annual bonus cut. Singaporeans are just too passive and very easily managed or governed. But whether this can succeed or not is another thing because INCOME is doing something perfectly legal and within their authority. Sometimes it can be hard to win on the moral (fairness, reasonable expectation) aspect. You can be morally wrong but legally right and so get away with it.
We are not expecting NTUC Income Insurance to sell the most cheapest insurance plans in town.
ReplyDeleteHowever, while some of the previous gain in the cooperative was shared and distributed among policyholders and reinvestment (even making loss in Snow City but supporting family bonding), the new management wasted a large portion of the monies for luxury renovations and giving themselves fat salaries and, or bonuses instead. This remind me of Taiwan under Chen Shui-bian.
In my opinion, the management has seriously neglected the principal of a cooperative - and this is no thanks to the junior Tan.
So is the current NTUC Income still acting like a cooperative or not? That is the question.
ReplyDeletewhat are your expectations of a cooperative? No frill insurer? No need for free gifts during sign up?
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete