Is netizen "CJ" telling the truth?

Posted on 30 Jul 2013 |

In recent weeks, a netizen identifying himself as “CJ” has been publishing personal accounts of his time in HDB, where he claims to have previously worked. Many of his posts are wrongful accounts of the organisation’s internal practices and processes, and clearly reveal the disgruntlement of an individual with an axe to grind.

While it is understandable for discontented ex-employees of any organisation to harbour some degree of unhappiness, “CJ” has clearly crossed the line with the many mistruths, misconceptions and misinformation that he has persisted to publish about HDB.

These are just some of the false and wrong claims that “CJ” has made about HDB in his online accounts:


“CJ”: HDB pays legal officers high starting salaries to match the private sector. Most officers are promoted to “Senior” level after just four years in service, and fresh graduate scholars were even promoted to department heads within four years.

HDB: “CJ” is wrong. The pay scales and promotion criteria adopted by HDB are in line with wider public service guidelines. Employees are not promoted based on the single factor of time spent on the job. They are required to amass the necessary experience and prove their capabilities over time before they are promoted and appointed leadership positions. These criteria apply to HDB scholars as well.


“CJ”: Selected high-ranking HDB officers are given priority in the balloting of HDB flats.

HDB: “CJ” is wrong. All employees of HDB, regardless of their appointments, go through the same process as any other Singaporean applying for an HDB flat. They do not get any special priority in balloting for flats, nor any other perks related to purchasing an HDB flat. All applications are also put through a computer ballot to determine the queue number for flat application, and every ballot is witnessed and endorsed by auditors.


“CJ”: HDB officers do not perform background checks with flat applicants’ previous employers to ascertain employment status, and would only do reference checks on diploma holders applying for housing loans.

HDB: “CJ” is wrong. Flat applicants and occupiers are required to submit documentary proof of their current ability to sustain loan repayments, which includes payslips bearing the company stamp and CPF contribution history. If the officer assessing the case has any doubt, they will not hesitate to contact the employer directly for clarification. When conducting credit assessment, all applicants are assessed equitably, and their education level is not a specific point of assessment.


Singaporeans are entitled to share their opinions on various aspects of HDB policies, and many do so actively online. HDB respects that. But it is entirely unjustifiable for someone claiming to be an ex-employee to furnish untruths publicly and statements that may breach conditions of confidentiality which govern employment at HDB.

“CJ” should be responsible for what he says and be mindful not to spew unsubstantiated misinformation online.