consistency in HR policies and job creation

Over the last few days we have seen two conflicting models of human resource management put on the showcase. The first case was the halfing of the pay of a professor at NTU, working for the same number of hours, but the HR dept claimed that his workload is half and thus deserved half pay, at the age of 55. Then we have another model from the PAP. This model emphasises the creation of many high paying jobs. So, other than being an MP, a candidate can be a Prime Minister, Senior Minister, Minister of State or Parliamentary Secretary. In addition to these positions, more are created like Senior Minister of State, Senior Parliamentary of State and Minister without Portfolio. And if that is not enough, they can have more than one minister in one ministry and more that one minister of state or parliamentary secretary. Not to mention that MPs can also be appointed as Mayors. Between the two models, understandably the second model is better as it is a very creative way of creating more high paying jobs. The NTU model is not only dissecting high paying jobs into halves, but also goes against the govt policies of keeping people gainfully employed after 55. It is also against the trend of people being able to live longer and be economically active till past 80 years. But the important thing is consistency. The govt must be consistent in its policy of encouraging employment past 55 years and to support its call to create more high paying quality jobs. And by setting a good example with its models of having multiple ministers in a ministry and creating more jobs at minister or junior minister levels, other govt or govt link organisations should follow the lead. On the other hand, if each organisation is deemed different and has their own peculiarities like after 55 years, professors and academics will suffer from dementia and their mental faculties will degenerate, then all the professors and academics reaching 55 should also have their workload halves and their pay also halves. Then people cannot cry discrimination or inconsistency. Fairness must be seen, and application of HR policies must be transparent.