NS termed as dangerous? Think again.
You go up to any insurance agent you can find in the market, ask them if they have an insurance that covers military training and maneuver. The answer is no. In my full 5 years of services, no one company do that kind of insurance in the market. When ever one agent comes up to me to try sell me a policy, I asked them " you cover accidents that occurs in my tour of duty?" the answer is no if I'm in the army, the policy don't covers me in military related training and activities. Its not just the army. It applies to police and SCDF and anything that comes with high risk job nature. And a good accident policy that gives high payout don't have returns!
Mr Edmund Ng wrote about a servicemen by the name of Lawrence Leow who was paralysed due to a heat injury incident during his NS days. While I fully empathised with Lawrence, i do not see whats wrong with $500 allowance with CSC card. $500 was a monthly allowance given to him till his death which could be easily 40 years? that's 40 x 12 x 500 = $240000. And in case Internet folks do not know what is a CSC card it meant Civil service card. The power of the card? Lawrence do not need to foot medical bills when he visits government clinics and hospitals with ailments caused by his heat injury and other minor ailments. If he were to purchase the group insurance paying 40 bucks a month, he would definitely gotten more than what he is getting now. I'm not sure what Mr Edmund understands by the term 500 bucks monthly allowance and CSC card. writer of insanepoly.com definitely don't know what is CSC card and i don't think he asked Lawerance how long is he getting the allowance for. And I certainly would like to find out from fellow bloggers that in their opinion what amount of monthly allowance is considered sufficient for Lawrence? Enough for him to hire a maid or two?
Its always easy to just look at the main cause of injury and shout out loud cursing SAF. If you were to look at each incidents on a case by case basis, was it a organisational problem or a individual problem? It was never a SAF never look after their servicemen problem. While SAF tried all means and ways to ensure safety, best coverage in terms of medical and insurance, individual has their own responsibilities.
I would like to ask fellow servicemen, when you were taught First Aid and CPR during your service days, how many of you took that lesson with a serious mind? What I've seen in my trainees, not much. Another question. How many of you ever gave our SAF medics your confidence in them whenever you step into your unit's medical center? I did. And for my 5 years in service, I have never met an incident where a medic, with me, has to poke a servicemen with a intravenous needle more than once, whenever that confidence was given to them. I would like to suggest to fellow bloggers to asked their nurse friends how long is their lesson to insert a intravenous needle in Nanyang Poly.
Maybe everyone of us should look back into how we started with our individual NS life. Was there ever a day where anyone of us took safety briefings lightly in what ever activity we do during our NSF lives and NSmen's life? Touch our own hearts and ask ourselves, how many time were we dozing off when a safety brief was conducted, playing a fool during demonstrations by instructors, and talking to our "brothers" while important safety messages were being told to us. And how many time did we choose the short way out (not drinking enough water, not sleeping/ resting enough) during high risk activity.
21 people just blabbered:
I'm sorry.
You put me in harm's way, and you expect me to pay for insurance if I am actually harmed?
So what if I am offered insurance policies in a captive market situation? And when one looks at an insurance policy that costs $30 (at a time when the NS allowance was $240), is it a significant portion?
The question that should be asked is :
WHY am I having to pay for my own financial/future protection through insurance, when it is you, the government that has requested of me to be put in harm's way?!
E.o.M.
I beg to differ. what SAF has is a compensation plan for every servicemen who is injured during training and medical bill are covered, as displyed in Lawerence's case he has the CSC card. And on top of this, SAF makes arrangement with company like AVIVA to provide group insurance. With 350 allowance a month to start with, i'm sure most guys would still prefer to purchase a PSP, MP3 Player or spend on Booze on a weekend than to take out 30 bucks a month for more coverage on top of what the government is going to give?
To add on. what is actually enough for a coverage? when it comes to insurance coverage, its pretty much individual. The rich would like their sons to be covered by the millions. The not so rich would ask for coverage of hundreds of thousands. The poor would ask for medical bills covered with monthly allowance.
Hi,
I am the writer from insanepoly. Thanks for clearing up the whole CSC matter.
In my office, all employees are covered pretty extensively by a group insurance plan and no, the company does not make us pay a single cent for it. And by no means are we a big or rich company. So, I don't see why Mindef has to make every serviceman pays $40 if he opts to take up insurance coverage. $40 may not be a lot to you and me, but for a serviceman who only makes a couple of hundred in monthly allowances, it is.
As for Lawrence Leow, what does $500 gets him? Sure the CSC card may cover his medical need, but what about transport to fetch him through and fro? And what happens when his parents are too old and weak to take proper care of him? Do you think $500 is enough for him and his entire family to survive on, not to mention hire a maid to handle his needs.
I think you misunderstand my point.
I work in a bank. No one forced me to join. And it is hardly a "perilous" occupation. Most of the time I am sitting on a chair facing a computer.
Nevertheless the bank pays money to ensure that every employee has life and medical insurance. It is compulsory - there is no option for the employee to say "No, I don't want it". And the bank pays for it. And there is automatic travel insurance in place if I travel on business.
Compare to NS. You have tens of thousands of people. It is compulsory that they do NS. You make them run; carry guns; jump off helicopters; work with artillery; charge around obstacle courses; train in jungles; work with bombs.
And you DON'T have insurance in place?!!
Btw, DON'T be ridiculous. You say:
"In actual fact, any servicemen who goes into NS is being offered an insurance policy from company like AVIVA which they pay a premium up to 40 bucks a month and they get covered up to 400k for accidents that is a result of SAF training and maneuver resulting in PD and death?"
Who DOESN'T know that you can go and buy personal accident insurance etc from Aviva (known as MSIG now) or NTUC or Prudential or AIA.
You DON'T have to be in the SAF to buy such a plan. Women can buy it. Foreigners can buy it. I can buy it for my 5-year-old child if I want to.
My point is that the SAF should buy it (ie pay for it) for every single NSman in a combat vocation.
And here is another silly argument by you:
Maybe everyone of us should look back into how we started with our individual NS life. Was there ever a day where anyone of us took safety briefings lightly in what ever activity we do during our NSF lives and NSmen's life? Touch our own hearts and ask ourselves, how many time were we dozing off when a safety brief was conducted, playing a fool during demonstrations by instructors, and talking to our "brothers" while important safety messages were being told to us. And how many time did we choose the short way out (not drinking enough water, not sleeping/ resting enough) during high risk activity.
I say it is a silly argument. Because most accidents happen because of negligence. This DOESN'T mean that insurance is not needed.
For example, most car accidents are caused by someone being careless (drove too fast; didn't signal; didn't stop at junction; didn't check blind spot; didn't keep safe distance from car in front etc).
Nevertheless it is COMPULSORY for every car owner to have motor insurance. Why? Please go and think about that.
To add on. what is actually enough for a coverage? when it comes to insurance coverage, its pretty much individual. The rich would like their sons to be covered by the millions. The not so rich would ask for coverage of hundreds of thousands. The poor would ask for medical bills covered with monthly allowance.
Quite easily done. Just draw a bright line. Eg you mention 40 bucks a month in your own example. Ok, then the SAF can pay 40 bucks per month per combat NSman and buy whatever life / accident / disability coverage is available for that 40 bucks.
Now please don't tell me that that is too expensive. YOU are the one who says that the individual should pay 40 bucks for his own insurance. If the individual can afford to pay, the state cannot? And again, bear in mind that the individual never volunteered for his NS. He had no choice. The state forced him.
You go up to any insurance agent you can find in the market, ask them if they have an insurance that covers military training and maneuver. The answer is no. In my full 5 years of services, no one company do that kind of insurance in the market.
Presumably you have no experience in the financial services sector (which is not your fault). I will share with you how this works.
If an organisation as massive as the SAF wants to buy insurance, it does not go to an insurance agent and ask: "Excuse me, can you sell me insurance?"
No, it goes to the CEOs of five insurance companies, and it says:
"I wish to purchase insurance for all servicemen in the SAF in combat vocations. It should cover life, accident and disability, during military training.
I am setting aside $15,000,000 in my defence budget for this per year, so that is the amount you stand to collect in your premiums. This will be a long-term relationship you can build with the Government of Singapore. The initial contract will be for five years, so you can expect to collect $75,000,000 in insurance premiums over 5 years.
Submit your proposals. Whoever submits the best proposal to cover my NSmen will get the deal."
Then the insurance companies will work on designing an appropriate insurance plan for covering NSmen in combat vocations. They will do their own maths, and due diligence, and they will collect stats from the SAF on training accidents etc, and project the size of the SAF over the next five years etc, and do their own financial modelling, and they will propose what they can, and say:
"Ok, for 75 million dollars, THIS is what I can offer you in coverage."
And the insurance company with the best offer, gets the deal.
That is all.
$240,000 for a lifetime of being completely paralyzed whilst being forced to serve in your country's military service isn't too much. The future of a bright, young man has been totally destroyed. And when you compare that amount to what the MINDEF budget over a single year is (S$10 billion), that $240k is just a drop in the ocean. Plus, you have failed to account for inflation over 40 years.
As I have written on my blog, S$500 a month is *less* than what an unemployed person in the US can collect. What we have here is a soldier who sacrificed for his country, and being offered less than what an unemployed person whould get.
Insurance policy or no, safety regulations followed or not is simply out of the point for him and others who have been left permanently disabled whilst serving the nation.
I cannot agree with you.
When you force someone to serve in the army against their own will, the least you can do is to cover them with insurance!
We are already paid way below the mkt wage and SAF expect us to pay for insurances ourselves?
This is really a slap on out face.
Pay us the f*cking mkt wage before asking us to pay for the insurance.
Please Change Your Post Title.
NS = POOR EMPLOYER. Many employers buy reasonable insurance for their employees. And mind you, these are employers who work in cush safe environments (read: sarcasm) in offices. As it is, in NS they only have a paltry sum of allowance, and it's a 30$ that they have to pay for the Harm's way they are put into to hedge their financial risk due to injury?
Maybe you need to put yourself in that person's shoes, being invalid and all before blaming the takeup rate of insurance.
I do feel for Lawrence as i've mentioned earlier on. Everyone met with a mishap of such degree deserves to be felt by any people. An I'm not saying the organisation do have an insurance in place. I guess fellow bloggers who read this article are pretty angry about this write up that i put up without understanding the full picture where i'm heading towards. My sincere apology if there is much anger delivered to the general public. With respect to all views in comments to my post. All is valid in its own way.
The main aim of the write up is to try to change perspectives of angry public to a more positive ones. True. any could have bought an insurance with any firm. I fully agree to this statement. a lady can buy. a boy can buy. even a baby can buy. But how many insurances in the public market covers a person in their NS life be it NSF or NSmen? My understanding is none.AIA agent once told me that they do have but it's "covered" thru "exclusion". Okie let me repaint another scenario. If the organisation annouces that they had purchase a monthly 40 bucks policy for every servicemen instead of "NS men gets $50 increase in allowance" would it have made a difference to fellow blogger's view on this issue? In my own view, like all who wrote before me, yes can be easily done.
But in the other side of the coin, would it be the same theory to say that I give you the 50 bucks. Commits this amount into insurance policy at your own discretion.
Will it yearn the same results? definately will. Thats the angle I'm coming from. Because I'm a civil servant, it would seemed that I'm standing on the government's side. actually, I'm seriously looking at the angle we can look at things from. Just a personal opinion.
not to agitate anyone. for reader's info I was one of those who bought a plan with the group insurance with my 240 a month allowance. before i turn regular with the force. I wasn't paid a regular pay from day 1 in army.
That's not really the point, is it?
No one is convinced by your argument, so perhaps there might be a flaw in it which you might like to look upon.
Or suspend your judgement and relook your mental model, if this lingo appeals to you more.
Methinks you have already have been convinced by everyone's argument actually, but you are unwilling to stand down.
My DS answer is: stand down, my friend, and reorganise your thoughts.
You may be fighting on the wrong objective.
I think you had missed the main point of discontentment and sidestep the issue by saying that insurance is each individual serviceman's own responsiblity.
The main point is that $500 and the CSC card is far from enough to sustain life in the present market. Not to mention the effects of further inflation down the years. It must be noted that the poor guy cannot fend for himself very well for the rest of his life and his future potential income is almost non existent.
The CSC card is not a silver bullet, it cannot pay for special needs for transportation, diet and lost of income from another family member to care for his special needs.
You had mentioned most guys would prefer to spend their money on the latest fab, PSP, MP3 etc. That's very true, why? Simply because they are teenagers! We cannot expect the mass majority of them to have the same level of maturity and thoughtfullness(as the good Sir yourself) to think far ahead and purhase prudent insurance coverage on their own initiative.
Thus, it's more the reason, not less for SAF to provide group insurance for ALL servicemen.
To be reflective, just imagine yourself in his shoes. You would understand better why $500 and CSC card is totally insufficent for his needs.
Okie let me repaint another scenario. If the organisation annouces that they had purchase a monthly 40 bucks policy for every servicemen instead of "NS men gets $50 increase in allowance" would it have made a difference to fellow blogger's view on this issue? In my own view, like all who wrote before me, yes can be easily done.
But in the other side of the coin, would it be the same theory to say that I give you the 50 bucks. Commits this amount into insurance policy at your own discretion.
Will it yearn the same results? definately will.
I will give you an example of how this works, in organisations more enlightened than the SAF. I use my own employer as an example again.
Basically my employer is prepared to spend X dollars per employee. Out of this X, a certain amount Y is used to purchase a certain minimum amount of life / medical insurance, for every employee.
For the rest of the money (X-Y), the employee is given the option on how he wants to use it. For example, he can use it to purchase more life insurance (ie higher coverage), or accident insurance, or more hospitalisation coverage, or extend any of these insurance plans to his dependents (spouse and kids).
This is already very common among employers. The SAF, as I said, is backward.
this blogger need to hav a taste of his own medicine to be more understanding ??
maybe years later when something happen to his children ??
He never think wad happens when he got old and die wif a handicap child wif no one to take care of...
To answer to most questions, I choose to stand down from an argument from the majority and stick to my stand. As what I've mentioned in all my replies. Its hard to convince the major population who thinks NS is a flop from the on start.
I strongly stand by my believe of ask not what others can do for you. ask what you can do for yourself. To forced an idea into another is never my aim. Its my voice as part of the public and i reserve that personal right.
"Up the wrong objective" like 100 percent of you said in my comments. None who commented is able to tell me how much is enough? 40 bucks? I put up another scenario and i have people saying I just refuse to backed up. Its childish. To correct Laremy's DS answer, to everyone who hated the NS system no amount of compensation is enough. Its just how things are done in organizational level.
IF everybody's company change their policy one day, cancel the insurance purchase and factor this purchase amount into your pay scale. Probably you would be left with zero compensation.
same decision would have happened. you would have taken that amount and purchase something that covers you.
Let's face it. Today, if Mindef is to go into a bulk purchase of insurance plan for its service men. Tomorrow someone will scream that the amount is too little. and when Mindef puts up the amount of purchase someone will still scream that too little is being done.
In fact there isn't a DS answer to this issue. Its a you stand where say what issue.
To the last comment by some one who didn't want to leave a name. I did think about the 500 bucks. Thats why I change the situation by buying my own cover. 500 is miserable I agree with both hands up. But could Lawerence have led a better life spending additional 40 bucks on additional coverage? He definately would have.
National policy can be sucky at times. Being national policy it isn't easy to change. Our government has an agenda to every policy made and you and i would not know. Given such nature are you going to wait out for things to happen to you before you decide to part with that 40 bucks??
If anyone still think things should be as what they say, fine. No contest. differences in value. common. You stay your way. I stay mine and we see the differences (if any) in time to come.
Have you heard of the law called Workmen's Compensation Act? If soldiers are not exempt, Lawrence could sue for millions from SAF. That is why ordinary employers buy group insurance, to protect themselves.
SAF is irresponsible in allowing such grievous injury to occur. If SAF is liable for millions, I am sure officers will be careful not to turn their men into paraplegics.
SAF is irresponsible again in undercompensating for the loss.
I think I've brought the arguement far enough. If this blows big enough, the media would have capture this . The general public's point would be noted. If NS review committee is to read all this, all the point would have been noted and be considered as their next report to government. Its a good debate. I ain't a spokes person for MINDEF or SAF. Just a spokes person for myself and my personal values. And for the internet community, hurdling abuses is still a no no like what the latest comments includes. To VincentQuatre be mature enough like Mr Wang Say So. Argue towards a event without pulling in outsiders (i.e. family members?). I might sound silly to most with what i write. Thats your view. I stick to mine. To all, have a nice evening. Feel free to comment further.
Even students get free insurance under MOE's insurance policy. Army must pay one meh?
humm.. students get allowance? anyway i'm not going to carry on arguing like this. There is always people who is against the 2 year NS system and the 10 year reservist cycle.
Post a Comment