GE2025: Universal minimum wage will scare businesses amid economic uncertainty, says Tan See Leng
Manpower Minister Tan See Leng (second from right), flanked by his fellow Chua Chu Kang GRC candidates (from left) Choo Pei Ling, Jeffrey Siow and Zhulkarnain Abdul Rahim, speaking to the media during a walkabout on April 30. ST PHOTO: MARK CHEONG
Follow our live coverage here.
SINGAPORE - Now is not the time to introduce a universal minimum wage policy as it will risk driving businesses away amid economic uncertainty in the light of the US tariffs, said Manpower Minister Tan See Leng on April 30.
'Currently, what is most important is to make sure that we are able to ensure that... our workers continue to have gainful, meaningful employment opportunities,' Dr Tan said during a walkabout at Chua Chu Kang GRC, which he is contesting.
'We think there's a storm that lies ahead, and whatever study that people propose, there is a timing for everything,' added the anchor minister for the PAP team.
Dr Tan was responding to calls for a universal minimum wage policy made by the opposition PSP on the campaign trail.
The PSP, which is running against Dr Tan's PAP team in the group representation constituency, has suggested setting a minimum monthly wage of $2,250 to help Singaporean workers cope with rising living costs.
One of PSP's candidates for Chua Chu Kang GRC, Mr Lawrence Pek, has criticised the Government's current wage policies as outdated and urged a review of the feasibility of implementing a universal minimum wage. Mr Pek was the former secretary-general of the Singapore Manufacturing Federation (SMF).
'Businesses are finding it very hard pressed, particularly with the uncertain economy, (to move) forward because of the tariff war,' said Dr Tan, speaking to reporters on the sidelines of a walkabout at Lot One. 'Now, if you impose anything, I think you're going to really scare a lot of the businesses away.'
He said the Government has assembled the Singapore Economic Resilience Taskforce, led by Deputy Prime Minister Gan Kim Yong, to look into the impacts that the tariffs imposed by US President Donald Trump would have on Singapore.
The priority now is to ensure businesses are supported and that workers continue to have meaningful employment opportunities, said Dr Tan, who is also the Second Minister for Trade and Industry.
He said that a one-size-fits-all approach will not work in Singapore. Instead, the Government has a toolbox of wage policies to work in tandem to support lower-income workers.
It includes the Progressive Wage Model (PWM), first introduced in 2014, which Dr Tan said is more robust than a minimum wage policy. The PWM is an initiative that aims to sustainably raise lower-wage workers' incomes by linking wage increases to skills upgrading, productivity improvements and career progression.
Dr Tan said: 'As a result, there's a very proper wage ladder, a career ladder which (businesses) can find is a more sustainable model.'
He added: 'Mr Pek, he was formerly in the SMF. I think he may have only understood, in part, but not much depth, as to what our PWM is all about.'
Dr Tan also highlighted the existing Workfare Income Supplement, which complements the PWM. The scheme is designed to encourage Singaporean workers to build their Central Provident Fund savings, earning them cash payments and additional fund contributions .
He said: 'We have a whole suite of measures available that we will be able to draw on very quickly.'
The salaries of lower-wage workers here have also risen faster compared with those of the workforce as a whole, said Dr Tan, referring to figures highlighted in Parliament in March to show the results of Singapore's progressive wage efforts.
PAP's candidate for Chua Chu Kang GRC Jeffrey Siow, who was formerly the permanent secretary at the trade and industry and manpower ministries, said the universal minimum wage risks raising business costs and could deter firms from hiring Singaporeans.
'I would suggest that it is worthwhile to ask companies themselves what they think of this proposal, perhaps ask the SMF,' said Mr Siow. Mr Siow had earlier referred to PSP's policy proposal as more of a 'political tool' than a practical solution.
With the hustings coming to its final day on May 1, Dr Tan said the PAP team, who are mostly new to the GRC, have focused on visiting markets, the MRT station and residents at their home to introduce themselves to voters.
His team includes incumbent Keat Hong MP Zhulkarnain Abdul Rahim and new faces Dr Choo Pei Ling and Mr Siow.
Dr Tan said the team will come up with a 100-day plan to see how concerns raised by residents can be addressed, such as connectivity issues in Tengah, which will be prioritised.
Mr Pek, who was also at Lot One doing a walkabout with the PSP team in the evening of April 30, said he hoped the ongoing debate between parties during the hustings would raise greater awareness of the minimum wage policy.
'I stress, the socioeconomic situation in Singapore has changed dramatically over the last five years and is very different from all the labor policies that we had 10 years ago,' he said, repeating his call for a feasibility review on the universal minimum wage policy.
He was speaking alongside PSP teammates Ms Wendy Low, Mr A'bas Kasmani and Mr S. Nallakaruppan.
The team also pledged to tackle the rising cost of living and shortage of job opportunities — key concerns frequently raised by residents.
Ms Low, a lawyer, said the team plans to set up a studio to support both job seekers and mental well-being, and will tap on their networks of companies and contacts to connect residents with employment opportunities.
Join ST's WhatsApp Channel and get the latest news and must-reads.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Straits Times
32 minutes ago
- Straits Times
S'pore embassy in Washington seeking US clarification on Harvard's visa ban
SINGAPORE - Singapore's embassy in Washington has been seeking clarification from the US State Department and Department of Homeland Security on President Donald Trump's directive prohibiting foreigners from entering the country to study at Harvard University. The embassy is hoping for clarity from US authorities in the next few days, including on whether there will be any delay in the processing of visas for Singaporeans hoping to study in the US, Foreign Minister Vivian Balakrishnan said on June 7. In a zoom call with Singapore media to wrap up his five-day visit to Washington, he noted that many current and prospective students looking to study in the United States had expressed their concern to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs over potential visa delays. Asked to elaborate on contingencies being planned should Singaporean students find themselves unable to proceeds with their plans to study in the US, he said the Government is trying to find solutions to deal with the worst case scenario where students are not able to physically study in Boston. 'We've got some ideas for how we can help them to, in a sense, deal with that eventuality without impairing their academic and professional progress,' said Dr Balakrishnan. 'For others who are not yet here, who have not yet secured visas, you may also need to have backup plans, but my main point is we will stay in touch, and we will continue to keep you informed.' Dr Balakrishnan noted that Singapore's ambassador to the US Lui Tuck Yew has also held a virtual town hall with students currently studying in Harvard. In the virtual town hall on May 30, Mr Lui told Singaporean students at Harvard that the Republic's autonomous universities can offer them placements if they wish to discontinue their studies in the US and return home. A Ministry of Education spokesperson said this message was shared with affected students so they could consider returning to Singapore as a possible option to continue their studies. There are six autonomous universities here: National University of Singapore, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore Management University, Singapore University of Social Sciences, Singapore University of Technology and Design and Singapore Institute of Technology. University statistics show that there are currently 151 Singaporean students in Harvard. Among them are 12 Public Service Commission scholarship holders. Foreign students at Harvard were thrown into limbo after Mr Trump's administration announced on May 22 that it had revoked Harvard's Student and Exchange Visitor Programme certification with immediate effect. The nearly 6,800 international students in the Ivy League college were given an ultimatum to either transfer to another institution, or face deportation. A federal judge later blocked the move, with the Trump administration rolling back its stance on May 29 and giving Harvard 30 days to submit evidence contesting the administration's plan to revoke the school's right to enrol international students. International students make up more than a quarter of Harvard's student body, but Mr Trump said the university should cap its international intake at 15 per cent. Dr Balakrishnan said the situation confronting international students stems from domestic political issues within the US. But students, including from Singapore, can become affected as collateral damage, and there will be a period of uncertainty of at least a few days or weeks. 'Nevertheless, we will continue to pursue this with the American authorities, and I hope we'll be able to find suitable solutions for our students who want to pursue educational opportunities in the United States.' At a macro level, it remains in both Singapore and the US' interests to keep opportunities open for Singaporeans who want to study and work in the US to expand their domain experience and their networks, he added. 'So this is an issue that we will continue to pursue with the State Department.' Join ST's WhatsApp Channel and get the latest news and must-reads.
AsiaOne
4 hours ago
- AsiaOne
The surprising reasons some Singaporean buyers are choosing smaller condo units (even when they can afford more), Money News
Whether it's an HDB flat or a condo, the Singaporean mentality is to grab the biggest possible unit in budgetary range. Chalk it up to the lingering paranoia that - if we don't seize every square foot we can get now - it will just cost us more tomorrow. So it's always a surprise when some homebuyers, despite being able to afford a larger unit, decide to keep it modest. In the following, we talk to some realtors about these rare cases, and why it could make sense for the buyer: 1. Sometimes it's about layout and location, over square footage One agent shared that in a recent transaction, the clients were torn between a three-bedder (around 1,200 sq ft) and a two-bedder (around 700 sq ft). It was clear, from the earlier budget, that the client had the means to purchase the three-bedder. Instead however, the client eventually opted for the smaller unit. According to the agent: "For the project they wanted, there was nothing bigger than 700 sq ft, so we looked at other projects within the same idea. We found another three-bedder that was around 1,000 sq ft, but after the viewing they rejected it. The three-bedder unit was further from the MRT station, and the layout was not as good: No enclosed kitchen, quite stuffy inside, and no proper-sized service yard. The other alternative was to expand the search radius, but they didn't want to go further beyond the neighbourhood. So in the end, they still bought the 700 sq ft, even though they could have bought a bigger one elsewhere." These cases are also becoming more common in 2025, due to tighter resale supply. Buyers sometimes find an ideally positioned resale project; but then they find there's no availability of three-bedders, four-bedders, or larger sizes. This can pressure them into buying a smaller two-bedder unit, while they pocket the savings and look for another upgrading opportunity later. 2. Preparing for changes to the family structure Another reason for picking a smaller unit is a step toward right-sizing. Some agents said that, among older homebuyers, there's a possibility the children will soon be moving out. One example of this was a couple who recently sold a terrace house, where they'd been living with two of their children. The sale of the landed property left them more than enough to purchase a three or four-bedder condo unit. Instead, they rejected the recommendations and sought out a two-bedder unit. The agent said that: "One child was getting married and moving out within a year or two, the other child already had his own place. And one of their reasons for moving from landed was that they were older, and it was harder to upkeep a bigger home. So instead they went for a smaller unit, within walking distance to one of their children." From the couple's financial planning, opting for a two-bedder also helped to build a bigger retirement account. This made them confident enough to buy a condo, instead of right-sizing to a flat. 3. Getting a new launch instead of a resale unit One agent shared a case of a couple who opted for a new launch two-bedder at ELTA, instead of a three-bedder at the resale Clement Canopy. In this instance, both projects were quite close in the Clementi area, so location was not a key differentiating factor. The key difference was that the two-bedder ELTA unit was around $1.94 million, whereas the three-bedder Clement Canopy unit was around $2.18 million; a difference of around $240,000. For paying $240,000 less however, they got: A more efficient layout, as ELTA is a post-harmonisation project Better potential appreciation, as ELTA is a newer project by about six years No need to worry about renovation costs, as the savings from the price gap more than covers that need There's also fewer issues involving valuation. For new launches, the developer's price is taken to be the fair valuation. For resale, there's a possibility that the valuation may fall below the asking price, thus prompting a cash top-up. Coupled with the lack of urgency (the couple had a place to stay until ELTA would be completed), the smaller but newer two-bedder was the better choice. 4. For landlords, a smaller unit improves yields and lowers capital commitment An agent told us about a "sell one, buy two" scenario, where a couple were deciding on the second property. The sale proceeds, coupled with their savings, were enough to let them purchase a three-bedder (approx. 1,050+ sq ft) at DUO Residences. Upon further viewings nearby however, they changed their minds and opted for a smaller two-bedder (approx. 678+ sq ft) at The M. The reasoning was that the DUO Residences three-bedder cost about $2.1 million; and with projected rental income of $6,000 to $6,500 a month, it was a gross rental yield of 3.4 to 3.7 per cent. Conversely, the two-bedder at The M would only have come up to about $1.4 million. With projected rental rates of $5,200 to $5,800 per month, this is a higher yield of 4.4 to 4.9 per cent. Furthermore, the loss of living space was not a real issue to these buyers. They had already decided that the second unit was to be rented out for income; so it made no difference to their personal comfort. On top of the higher yields, the lower capital commitment also meant lower risk. This was a significant benefit, as the couple were nervous about each party taking on a separate mortgage. In these cases, foresight and clear intent - rather than an impulsive grab at the biggest unit - served the buyers' benefits. This is why it's important to talk through your intentions for the property. If the goal is long-term rental income, flexibility, or simply a lower-risk entry point, a smaller unit may serve you better even if it means giving up some space. Rather than just ask "What can I afford?" We suggest you ask: "What am I trying to achieve by buying this property?" Don't maximise square footage over maximising comfort or returns. [[nid:718516]] This article was first published in Stackedhomes .
Straits Times
4 hours ago
- Straits Times
Oversharing, AI posts and other faux pas: Why you're using LinkedIn wrong
Be mindful of the pitfalls of posting on LinkedIn, or it could lead to cringeworthy content. PHOTO: ISTOCKPHOTO Oversharing, AI posts and other faux pas: Why you're using LinkedIn wrong SINGAPORE – A widely circulated meme mocking LinkedIn entries goes like this: 'When I was a little girl, I always dreamed of growing up to satisfy user needs in a way that meets business goals for transformative outcomes.' While the post is satirical, its virality hints at how it captures the unique – and often cringeworthy – way that people write on LinkedIn. The professional networking platform, which launched in 2003, is where humble-bragging routinely meets oversharing . U sers find ways to draw leadership life lesson s from the most mundane of daily activities, such as conversations with a taxi driver or doing a presentation. Such oversharing is not without consequences. In May, Singaporean LinkedIn user Janney Hujic, who runs tour agency Elysian Expeditions, posted about a life lesson learnt from meeting former DBS Group chief executive Piyush Gupta – only for Mr Gupta to later comment: 'Sorry to disillusion you. That isn't me!' I f not for the mistaken identity, Ms Hujic's post would probably have gone unnoticed on the platform. LinkedIn has over one billion users worldwide – more than four million of whom are based in Singapore – all plugging their own professional and personal pursuits. Many of the initial comments lauded her for writing about this fortuitous 'chance encounter'. Even after Mr Gupta weighed in to dispute the account , some commenters suggested that the post , left up for a week, could draw attention to Ms Hujic's tour company. But at the end of May, her LinkedIn account was gone. What is the line between authenticity and misreading the room? Between clout-chasing and networking? Being vulnerable and oversharing? The Straits Times spoke to recruiters, public relations experts and LinkedIn's 'top voices' to find out why you are likely using LinkedIn wrong. Here are five questions to ask before you post. 1. Is it cringe or 'context collapse'? When you post on LinkedIn, for whom should you be writing ? Y our future boss? A potential recruiter or hiring manager? Your current colleagues? Perhaps your old schoolmates or industry acquaintances? While you might imagine a particular audience, the answer is really: 'All of the above.' Internet researchers have coined the term 'context collapse' to refer to how social media creates a form of communication that collapses many distinct social contexts into one. Offline, it is an easy feat to change your tone and language when schmoozing with your boss, sharing workplace gossip with a confidant or impressing a recruiter. Online, these contexts are flattened into a single feed that all of these potential audiences – and your mum and mother-in-law – can access. This partly explains why many LinkedIn posts feel 'cringe'. Users often post to impress future hiring managers or build a specific follower base, which is perhaps an expectation that current colleagues or general audiences might not share. It also explains why certain posts land their creators in hot water. Posts on LinkedIn are visible not only to one's target audience, but also to the public. PHOTO: LINKEDINLUNATICS Ms Bethany Bloch, managing editor at public relations firm Mutant Communications, says leaders need to be mindful of the opinions they share, as well as prevailing public sentiment. 'We saw what happened with the now former vice-president of the Law Society of Singapore , which is a classic example of oversharing that led to a PR crisis for them and a personal crisis for him ,' she says, referring to Mr Chia Boon Teck, who resigned from his position after he penned a LinkedIn post in March which was seen as casting blame on a rape survivor. Mr Chia likely expected his post to stay within a small circle of friends in the legal fraternity. However, context collapse meant that strangers – including those on Facebook and Instagram – who held divergent viewpoints became his audience, judge and jury. Recruitment experts speaking to ST affirm the importance of being wary about one's LinkedIn activity, noting that it is now common practice for recruiters to look through a candidate's posts to assess his or her personality and values , and identify potential red flags . 2. Are you authentic enough? Nearly all experts speaking to ST identified 'authenticity' as an important trait to project on LinkedIn , but it is an amorphous concept that defies definition. 'Beyond qualifications, cultural and personality fit are critical factors in the hiring process,' says Ms Jaya Dass, Asia-Pacific managing director at human resources firm Randstad Enterprise, who notes that she sees inappropriate jokes and personal rants as red flags. On the other hand, insightful content about personal takeaways – instead of merely posting often – and posts showing appreciation for colleagues are her green flags. Content that drives the most engagement on LinkedIn includes business news – earnings, mergers and organisational changes – as well as career advice and industry trend perspectives, says Ms Serla Rusli, a LinkedIn career expert and senior editor at LinkedIn News. Who is posting matters. She notes that more business leaders are using LinkedIn to explain the how and why behind major professional decisions, citing a 52 per cent increase in posts from chief executives over the past two years. These average eight times more impressions and four times more engagement than posts from others. There has been a 52 per cent increase in posts from chief executives in recent years, though engagement may not always be positive. PHOTO: LINKEDINLUNATICS Sharing videos is another approach to consider. Ms Rusli notes that video is a fast-growing format on LinkedIn, with time spent watching videos up by 36 per cent as at April. Ms Christel Goh, chief executive of local public relations agency Grow Public Relations, warns against overusing personal stories , a common trope on LinkedIn. 'There's a fine line between meaningful sharing and oversharing. When every moment becomes a 'teachable lesson', it can feel forced, cringey or overly dramatic,' she adds. An overemphasis on achievements, using the platform to shame and blame others, and an excessive dependence on artificial intelligence (AI) to generate content are other common mistakes on the platform . LinkedIn users' frequent overemphasis on achievements and 'teachable' moments is often satirised. PHOTO: LINKEDINLUNATICS 'LinkedIn is a professional networking space, and because of its nature, many users feel compelled to present a highly polished, positive image of themselves,' Ms Goh says. 'While this might seem appropriate for a professional platform, the overly curated and idealised tone can come across as unrealistic. People don't typically communicate in such a polished manner in everyday life. ' The key is setting editorial guidelines for yourself, says Dr Juliana Chan, a LinkedIn Top Voice with more than 100,000 followers, and former Massachusetts Institute of Technology scientist-turned-branding-coach who prides herself on speaking 'fluent LinkedInese' . ''Does this story serve my professional audience? Does it add value or context to my expertise and job as a branding coach?' If yes, I'll share it authentically. If it's just unnecessary personal drama or random life updates, it stays private,' she says. She points to a post she made in November about her father's death in 2024 because she had written about him on LinkedIn in the past. She sees this as professionally relevant context because it 'helped people see that I am only human and not some digital avatar'. The challenge lies in where to draw these lines. What constitutes oversharing versus insight? Bluntness versus offence? The inherent risk of using LinkedIn as a platform is that not everyone agrees on boundaries. Unfortunately, any misjudgments are linked to your employer and a detailed resume. For another LinkedIn Top Voice and founder of career development organisation The Mindgem, Ms Ratna Juita, the answer lies in understanding that you cannot please everyone. 'In today's attention economy, appealing to everybody means appealing to nobody,' she says. ' Embrace strategic polarisation. Take clear stands on industry issues, share your unique perspectives and don't be afraid to repel the wrong audience while attracting the right one.' 3. How are you using your connections? One of LinkedIn's most important functions is the ability to connect with others. But this, too, can be a potential source of networking faux pas. Ms Yeo Sha-En, a professional speaker and LinkedIn Top Voice, considers immediately asking for something upon reaching out to be a networking red flag. 'In the case of networking or mentorship, this is equivalent to meeting someone for the first time and expecting him or her to give you something,' she says. 'People need time to get to know you before they can mentor you.' Similarly, Dr Chan thinks it is a common networking mistake to send connection requests without adding a custom note. 'If I receive 100 connection requests, often only two to three of them have a thoughtfully written custom note attached to it,' she says. ' Every single time, I consider these requests first.' Ms Juita says: 'Strategic networking isn't about collecting contacts. It's about building a community of mutual support and shared professional growth.' She highlights the importance of finding ways to turn online connections into offline ones and setting healthy boundaries on what you should share . Being retrenched in 2018, she adds, taught her a hard lesson on the importance of establishing a personal brand that extends beyond a single company or employer . 'The traditional employment contract where loyalty guaranteed job security no longer exists,' she says. 'Companies restructure, industries evolve and even the most dedicated employees can find themselves unexpectedly looking for new opportunities. 'When that happens, your LinkedIn network isn't just helpful, but it can also be your lifeline.' 4. Is sharing your layoff a good idea? Posting about being #opentowork or a recent layoff has become a common LinkedIn trope, but is sharing such news online a good idea? Nearly all recruitment experts who spoke to ST say being open about a layoff is a useful way to put yourself on the radar of recruiters – and get some much-needed support from others . 'From a recruiter's perspective, layoffs are rarely seen as a negative mark, especially given today's economic climate,' says Ms Kris Tan, an associate partner at recruitment firm Page Executive. 'Authenticity is a valued quality in candidates, and many employers appreciate when individuals are transparent about their job search efforts.' Recruiters say it often comes down to discoverability. 'Recruiters monitor these posts, and such announcements can increase visibility and encourage referrals,' says Ms Ilse Clement, senior consultant for human resources and business support at recruitment agency Robert Walters Singapore. ' Be tactful and forward-looking. Frame it as a transition rather than a setback,' she adds. Ms Clement also notes that active LinkedIn users who post regularly and engage with others are more likely to appear in search results due to the platform's algorithm. As recruiters use keywords to find candidates, it is important that your profile includes relevant industry terms, skills and certifications. Candidates can also use LinkedIn's built-in 'Open to Work' feature to discreetly signal to recruiters that they are open to opportunities. Not everyone agrees with this approach. Dr Leon Qiu, a PhD graduate from the Singapore Management University and prolific LinkedIn poster , believes that signalling you are #opentowork – using the platform's built-in profile frame – can be 'self-sabotage '. 'It hurts your chances and negotiating power. It signals to the job market you are of poorer labour quality,' he says. ' Conversely, if you are open to hire, you have greater power and are perceived to be more capable. But it's just my hypothesis.' 5. Falling for the 'thought leadership' trap? Considering the effort required and the many reputational risks, why post on LinkedIn at all? The answer usually revolves around 'thought leadership', one of LinkedIn's most persistent buzzwords. The term refers to establishing oneself as an authority in a field. Advocates see it as genuine expertise that influences industries and drives change. Sceptics argue it is little more than dressed-up self-promotion, recycled ideas and meaningless business jargon. The desire for 'thought leadership' has created a lucrative industry around it , where it has become common practice for public relations agencies to sell thought leadership as a service – meaning the creation of op-eds and, at times, LinkedIn posts for a tidy sum . Ms Charu Srivastava, co-founder of communications consultancy firm TriOn & Co, says her firm works with clients on LinkedIn strategy and thought leadership content development. 'The main reason they come to us is to ensure quality, authenticity and a consistency of LinkedIn engagement,' she says. 'The clients have full oversight of the content, and we incorporate their personal voice and nuances in the content development process. This provides our clients with the balance of strategy and guidance with full ownership of their profiles.' But AI also adds a new dimension to this , with many users turning to generative AI tools like ChatGPT to create posts and insights. Nearly all experts ST spoke to highlighted mindlessly using AI without supervision to create a flood of generic content as a flaming red flag. 'One of the biggest mistakes is posting content just for the sake of it,' says Ms Srivastava. 'There is more of this happening on LinkedIn these days, due to the increasing use of GenAI to create content.' 'There is a running joke about how people post about the most mundane professional developments with a 'LinkedIn flair',' she adds, noting that many users inflate achievements, and conflate their personal and professional lives. Recognising the reality that many posts are not written by users themselves – the platform has even introduced a feature to use AI-generated responses as comments – is key to understanding that not all engagement on the platform is meaningful. As such, the quest for engagement on the platform can sometimes be a performative trap, reinforcing that virality is far from the equivalent of becoming a thought leader. This is especially true for those who create generic listicles and inspirational quotes without a clear point of view, say experts. Dr Chan says 'not everyone needs to build an audience on LinkedIn'. For entrepreneurs, consultants and executive coaches – as well as those seeking speaking opportunities or board positions, or being headhunted – active engagement makes sense. For others, it may not. Her advice: Focus on 'signature content' that stems from your unique experience and cannot be replicated by others . 'Likes on LinkedIn don't pay the bills,' she says. 'It is more financially productive to attract people who want to collaborate with you. Every post should increase your 'surface area of luck' if done correctly.' Check out the Headstart chatbot for answers to your questions on careers and work trends.
