I've got a quickie for ya.
I read this interesting article in The Star about the extremely high number of applicants vs the number of civil service vacancies.
Actually, they might have a point. The ratio of applications vs vacancies is not the highest in Customs (69:1) and Immigration (90:1). It's the anti-drug officers (7,241:1) and research officers (15,000:1).
...startling figures in the PSC website: assistant anti-drug officers (7,241 applicants for one vacancy); research officers (15,000 applicants for one vacancy); science officers in the Chemist’s Department (14,608 applicants for 10 vacancies); technical assistants (14,636 applicants for 19 vacancies); and diplomatic and administrative officers (36,121 for 50 vacancies).
...about 76,662 people applied for 1,104 vacant positions for Immigration officers while another 78,113 vied for 867 posts of Asst Supt of Customs.
Both the PSD and Cuepacs have refuted suggestions that the jobs in these two departments provided the opportunity to make “easy money,” describing such talk as preposterous.
The ratios for Customs and Immigration are actually the lowest, because they offered the most jobs. If the number of vacancies was made known to the applicants at the time of application, then I think the PSD and Cuepacs are right. They were attracted to the higher number of vacancies ie. higher chances of getting the job.
So, you're saying that unlike the private sector, the public sector is looking for INCOMPETENCE and the WRONG ATTITUDES? Hmmm, based on their performance, the civil service might have found exactly what they're looking for.
"...Human Resources Minister Datuk Dr Fong Chan Onn believes that the majority of local graduates are shying away from the private sector because they lacked confidence, and preferred the comfort of government service. He said there were about 20,000 vacancies in the private sector, but local graduates were not confident enough, nor proficient in English, to apply for these jobs."
“Most of them don’t seem to understand the requirements of the private sector, which emphasises competence and right attitudes. They are more comfortable in the public sector,” he said."
This might be the most accurate, if none too intelligent, thing you've said all year, Dr Fong.