Boh keng boh chu beng?
THREE Singapore Armed Forces (SAF) officers have been granted early release from their scholarship bond since 2000 after the merits of their applications were assessed.
While the reasons for their leaving were not given, Deputy Prime Minister and Defence Minister Teo Chee Hean said those who joined the SAF and sought sponsorships were aware of their 'moral obligation to serve out the full period of their sponsorship bonds, which goes beyond the legal obligation to pay back liquidated damages if an officer does not fulfil the bond'.
He said yesterday that officers were also expected to do their best to fulfil their obligations to the organisation 'unless there are strong and extenuating circumstances, such as medical reasons, that prevent the officers from doing so'.
An officer who wanted an early release from his bond could apply formally. It would be assessed, and he would be counselled and interviewed by his superiors.
Mr Teo was responding to Ms Irene Ng (Tampines GRC), who asked if officers could apply to leave early, how approvals were granted, and about applications received and the number of approvals.
Her question was prompted by the death of Republic of Singapore Air Force medical officer Allan Ooi, 27, who was on a 12-year medicine scholarship bond.
He was also on a concurrent three-year bond for an aviation medicine course he attended in Britain last year.
He went absent without official leave (AWOL) for five months before being found dead in Melbourne last month.
Ms Ng asked if a review of contracts was needed so that before someone signs a bond, he and his parents are made aware of the terms and conditions.
And just as officers were obliged to serve their bond, the SAF had an obligation to create a conducive work environment for such officers, she added.
Turning to the late Captain Ooi, she asked about the Defence Ministry's (Mindef) inquiry into matters relating to his service and if the findings could be made public, or at least disclosed to his family.
Noting that Ms Ng cited the case, Mr Teo said he would make only some reference to it. This is even though his ministry 'much preferred to have conducted such exchanges in private with the family, out of consideration for the family'.
He said anyone who sought a scholarship or sponsorship and did not understand the terms and conditions can and should seek clarification - which the ministry would continue to provide.
'The individual signs the deed voluntarily and is not compelled to do so until he has fully understood the terms of the sponsorship or scholarship,' Mr Teo said.
'This is particularly the case when it is an in-service officer who may well already be in his 20s or 30s, and decides to take up a scholarship or a sponsorship to go on for a course for further career development.'
And as two sureties are also required - usually the parent, a relative or someone who knows the applicant well - clarifications are also provided to them.
Revisiting the issue of someone who wants to break his bond, Mr Teo reiterated that anyone who takes a scholarship or sponsorship knows his obligations.
The ministry fulfils 'a fairly major part' of its obligation by sponsoring someone for a course, and this could include continuing to pay his salary.
'These programmes may be six months or as long as six years in the case of medical scholarships,' he said.
'The SAF invests substantial public funds and time to train these officers. There is an expectation that such officers will serve out, will fulfil their moral obligation to serve the organisation in return.'
The SAF was 'not an unreasonable organisation', he added.
'The terms and conditions are quite fair and reasonable, and that is why we do have people who are prepared to come forward to serve the SAF.'
There are interesting and challenging jobs. In most cases, as those sponsored are its better officers, 'they do have a pick of the better positions available'.
'On balance, Mindef does discharge its responsibilities to the officers who choose to take up sponsorships, but it is also necessary for the officers to do their best to fulfil their moral obligation to serve the SAF and to serve the country,' he said.
The ministry has been in contact with Capt Ooi's family since October last year, when he went AWOL, he said.
And if they made a request about the findings of its inquiry, it 'will make available a summary of the findings to them'.
The family, in letters to the newspapers, sought answers from the ministry about the circumstances before Capt Ooi went AWOL and asked for an independent inquiry.
The ministry responded and noted, among other things, that Capt Ooi did not submit an application for early release and did not respond to his superior's offer to be posted to an appointment of his choice.
[email protected]
http://www.straitstimes.com/ST+Forum/Story/STIStory_363216.html
Youth committed to bonds, but job satisfaction crucial too, Forum
THREE Singapore Armed Forces (SAF) officers have been granted early release from their scholarship bond since 2000 after the merits of their applications were assessed.
While the reasons for their leaving were not given, Deputy Prime Minister and Defence Minister Teo Chee Hean said those who joined the SAF and sought sponsorships were aware of their 'moral obligation to serve out the full period of their sponsorship bonds, which goes beyond the legal obligation to pay back liquidated damages if an officer does not fulfil the bond'.
He said yesterday that officers were also expected to do their best to fulfil their obligations to the organisation 'unless there are strong and extenuating circumstances, such as medical reasons, that prevent the officers from doing so'.
An officer who wanted an early release from his bond could apply formally. It would be assessed, and he would be counselled and interviewed by his superiors.
Mr Teo was responding to Ms Irene Ng (Tampines GRC), who asked if officers could apply to leave early, how approvals were granted, and about applications received and the number of approvals.
Her question was prompted by the death of Republic of Singapore Air Force medical officer Allan Ooi, 27, who was on a 12-year medicine scholarship bond.
He was also on a concurrent three-year bond for an aviation medicine course he attended in Britain last year.
He went absent without official leave (AWOL) for five months before being found dead in Melbourne last month.
Ms Ng asked if a review of contracts was needed so that before someone signs a bond, he and his parents are made aware of the terms and conditions.
And just as officers were obliged to serve their bond, the SAF had an obligation to create a conducive work environment for such officers, she added.
Turning to the late Captain Ooi, she asked about the Defence Ministry's (Mindef) inquiry into matters relating to his service and if the findings could be made public, or at least disclosed to his family.
Noting that Ms Ng cited the case, Mr Teo said he would make only some reference to it. This is even though his ministry 'much preferred to have conducted such exchanges in private with the family, out of consideration for the family'.
He said anyone who sought a scholarship or sponsorship and did not understand the terms and conditions can and should seek clarification - which the ministry would continue to provide.
'The individual signs the deed voluntarily and is not compelled to do so until he has fully understood the terms of the sponsorship or scholarship,' Mr Teo said.
'This is particularly the case when it is an in-service officer who may well already be in his 20s or 30s, and decides to take up a scholarship or a sponsorship to go on for a course for further career development.'
And as two sureties are also required - usually the parent, a relative or someone who knows the applicant well - clarifications are also provided to them.
Revisiting the issue of someone who wants to break his bond, Mr Teo reiterated that anyone who takes a scholarship or sponsorship knows his obligations.
The ministry fulfils 'a fairly major part' of its obligation by sponsoring someone for a course, and this could include continuing to pay his salary.
'These programmes may be six months or as long as six years in the case of medical scholarships,' he said.
'The SAF invests substantial public funds and time to train these officers. There is an expectation that such officers will serve out, will fulfil their moral obligation to serve the organisation in return.'
The SAF was 'not an unreasonable organisation', he added.
'The terms and conditions are quite fair and reasonable, and that is why we do have people who are prepared to come forward to serve the SAF.'
There are interesting and challenging jobs. In most cases, as those sponsored are its better officers, 'they do have a pick of the better positions available'.
'On balance, Mindef does discharge its responsibilities to the officers who choose to take up sponsorships, but it is also necessary for the officers to do their best to fulfil their moral obligation to serve the SAF and to serve the country,' he said.
The ministry has been in contact with Capt Ooi's family since October last year, when he went AWOL, he said.
And if they made a request about the findings of its inquiry, it 'will make available a summary of the findings to them'.
The family, in letters to the newspapers, sought answers from the ministry about the circumstances before Capt Ooi went AWOL and asked for an independent inquiry.
The ministry responded and noted, among other things, that Capt Ooi did not submit an application for early release and did not respond to his superior's offer to be posted to an appointment of his choice.
[email protected]
http://www.straitstimes.com/ST+Forum/Story/STIStory_363216.html
Youth committed to bonds, but job satisfaction crucial too, Forum
