Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Simon29

News: Unhappy bus drivers mass report sick 26nov2012

Recommended Posts

my wife took a cab last night.

 

she said that the cab uncle mentioned to her that while he was having break near a bus interchange, he heard some china drivers say Singapore cant do anything to them other than deporting them back, not to worry....

 

my Taiwan colleague who was oblivious of the strike told me yesterday afternoon that she notice that the china bus drivers were super rude yesterday...

 

HUAT AR!

 

I sincerely thanks the China drivers for the strikes. about time they give PAP headaches and lets see how well PAP "integrates" with the FW they so dear love.

↡ Advertisement

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Always enjoyed bavarian one liner. Quite rare to see a lengthier piece. Nice worded irony

 

"We are Singapore. We have the financial clout. We do as we please. 2 sets of rules. Try to make ourself look good. But after all, we are douchebags. But it is fine. Because we are Singapore. "

 

Just to add, eventually, u reap what u sow.

 

Arrogance is a transient feel good state.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Turbocharged

Maybe if you have a maid and she gets pregnant..perhaps u would like to foot her hospitalization fee which can costs anything from 10k and above without subsidy, after that you can also take care of her baby at your own cost. Whether free will or modern slavery...no one knows..but definetly..no one put a gun on their head and force them to be a maid.

 

That's taking the argument to a ridiculous level.

 

Does your boss pay for your delivery costs? Take care of your baby?

 

Send the maid home - that is perfectly fine and resonable.

 

Make the boss liable for the sex life of the maid = NOT REASONABLE.

 

How difficult is that to understand?

 

Who here would work for a boss that didn't let them go out and tika tika? Not very many I would bet.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hypersonic

Ya.... Let's call a spade, a spade and a strike, a strike. No need to beat about the bush.

 

garmen say things must be very careful......say strike means strike as defined by law, not commoner's notion of strike.... but now they call it a strike, means got evidence liao :D

 

http://motoring.asiaone.com/Motoring/News/...128-386223.html

 

Why it took time to label protest a strike

 

Mr Tan said the bus drivers had 'clearly crossed the line' by disrupting both public-transport services and Singapore?s industrial harmony.

Reico Wong and Jacqueline Woo

 

Wed, Nov 28, 2012

My Paper

 

FOR the first time, Acting Minister for Manpower Tan Chuan-Jin yesterday called the no-show at work by SMRT's China-born bus drivers on Monday and yesterday an "illegal strike".

 

On Monday, 102 mainland Chinese SMRT bus drivers staged a protest at their Woodlands dormitory over unhappiness on matters such as getting a lower pay increase than Malaysian drivers. Yesterday morning, 62 China-born SMRT bus drivers did not report for work.

 

The Government, various Members of Parliament and public-transport operator SMRT previously avoided labelling the incident a strike.

 

But at a media conference yesterday, Mr Tan called it as such, citing the Criminal Law (Temporary Provisions) Act.

 

The Act defines a strike as a group of workers employed for essential services - which Mr Tan said the bus drivers fall under - making a concerted refusal to work.

By taking matters into their own hands, the bus drivers had "clearly crossed the line", especially because they had disrupted both public-transport services and Singapore's industrial harmony, he said.

 

"The Government views these disruptions very seriously," said Mr Tan.

 

"We have zero tolerance for such unlawful action, because disrupted essential services not only affect the workers in the industry, but also affect the daily life of all in the community."

 

Mr Tan said that while the Ministry of Manpower understands the grievances of the drivers and expects SMRT to address them, there are "due processes to be followed".

 

Asked if the workers will be sacked or sent back to China, Mr Tan said police investigations are still ongoing and must be allowed to run their course.

 

On the Government's decision to label the workers' no-show as a strike only now, Mr Tan said the facts and circumstances surrounding the issue, together with the rules and regulations, had to be determined first.

 

"By labelling it as a strike or not, it will then open up a series of actions that will follow," he said.

 

Minister of State for Transport Josephine Teo, who was also at the media conference, said SMRT's bus services were restored to 95 per cent of normal levels yesterday.

 

Separately, the National Trades Union Congress (NTUC) said that "any action that is illegal must and will be dealt with firmly, regardless of whether the workers are local or foreign".

 

At SMRT's rented dormitory in Woodlands, National Transport Workers' Union executive secretary Ong Chin Ang said that during a discussion with 40 to 50 China-born bus drivers yesterday, the union explained that their actions were not in line with Singapore's laws and urged them to return to work.

 

Of the 62 China-born bus drivers who did not turn up for work yesterday, SMRT said some had valid medical reasons.

 

To find out if all of them had legitimate medical reasons, a mobile clinic was called to the Woodlands dormitory to conduct medical check-ups.

 

Police cars were spotted at the dormitory compound.

 

myp@sph.com.sg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

my wife took a cab last night.

 

she said that the cab uncle mentioned to her that while he was having break near a bus interchange, he heard some china drivers say Singapore cant do anything to them other than deporting them back, not to worry....

 

my Taiwan colleague who was oblivious of the strike told me yesterday afternoon that she notice that the china bus drivers were super rude yesterday...

 

HUAT AR!

 

I sincerely thanks the China drivers for the strikes. about time they give PAP headaches and lets see how well PAP "integrates" with the FW they so dear love.

 

One thing for sure is that there will be no more China public bus drivers in a few years time. The govt is not going to approve their Work Permits for driving public buses anymore. The roads will become safer and more bus drivers who will be able to communicate in at least basic English.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Supercharged

I think the china drivers pay includes lodging which is "deducted" from thei basic pay.

Anyone can verify?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Turbocharged

Last night it was posted to my facebook wall (too lazy to go dig back) and will paraphrase here

 

China drivers, salary $1075, accomodation - $220, foreign worker levy

Boleh drivers, salary $1400, no accomodation, no levy

 

So if you add back in the accomodation, then the pay is very similar - does that change any opinions at all (when I saw the breakdown, my sympathies certainly shifted a little)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Turbocharged

garmen say things must be very careful......say strike means strike as defined by law, not commoner's notion of strike.... but now they call it a strike, means got evidence liao :D

 

http://motoring.asiaone.com/Motoring/News/...128-386223.html

 

Why it took time to label protest a strike

 

Mr Tan said the bus drivers had 'clearly crossed the line' by disrupting both public-transport services and Singapore?s industrial harmony.

Reico Wong and Jacqueline Woo

 

Wed, Nov 28, 2012

My Paper

 

FOR the first time, Acting Minister for Manpower Tan Chuan-Jin yesterday called the no-show at work by SMRT's China-born bus drivers on Monday and yesterday an "illegal strike".

 

On Monday, 102 mainland Chinese SMRT bus drivers staged a protest at their Woodlands dormitory over unhappiness on matters such as getting a lower pay increase than Malaysian drivers. Yesterday morning, 62 China-born SMRT bus drivers did not report for work.

 

The Government, various Members of Parliament and public-transport operator SMRT previously avoided labelling the incident a strike.

 

But at a media conference yesterday, Mr Tan called it as such, citing the Criminal Law (Temporary Provisions) Act.

 

The Act defines a strike as a group of workers employed for essential services - which Mr Tan said the bus drivers fall under - making a concerted refusal to work.

By taking matters into their own hands, the bus drivers had "clearly crossed the line", especially because they had disrupted both public-transport services and Singapore's industrial harmony, he said.

 

"The Government views these disruptions very seriously," said Mr Tan.

 

"We have zero tolerance for such unlawful action, because disrupted essential services not only affect the workers in the industry, but also affect the daily life of all in the community."

 

Mr Tan said that while the Ministry of Manpower understands the grievances of the drivers and expects SMRT to address them, there are "due processes to be followed".

 

Asked if the workers will be sacked or sent back to China, Mr Tan said police investigations are still ongoing and must be allowed to run their course.

 

On the Government's decision to label the workers' no-show as a strike only now, Mr Tan said the facts and circumstances surrounding the issue, together with the rules and regulations, had to be determined first.

 

"By labelling it as a strike or not, it will then open up a series of actions that will follow," he said.

 

Minister of State for Transport Josephine Teo, who was also at the media conference, said SMRT's bus services were restored to 95 per cent of normal levels yesterday.

 

Separately, the National Trades Union Congress (NTUC) said that "any action that is illegal must and will be dealt with firmly, regardless of whether the workers are local or foreign".

 

At SMRT's rented dormitory in Woodlands, National Transport Workers' Union executive secretary Ong Chin Ang said that during a discussion with 40 to 50 China-born bus drivers yesterday, the union explained that their actions were not in line with Singapore's laws and urged them to return to work.

 

Of the 62 China-born bus drivers who did not turn up for work yesterday, SMRT said some had valid medical reasons.

 

To find out if all of them had legitimate medical reasons, a mobile clinic was called to the Woodlands dormitory to conduct medical check-ups.

 

Police cars were spotted at the dormitory compound.

 

myp@sph.com.sg

More to the point, I have to wonder why it is a MP that labels it as a strike, and why his word is law rather than the police or the relevant authority?

 

Mean to say that once MP say, means they are guilty? He is a policeman?

 

Seems a bit funny to me.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Supersonic

i quote "you can take the man out of a farm but you can't take the farm out of a man"

 

I sincerely thanks the China drivers for the strikes. about time they give PAP headaches and lets see how well PAP "integrates" with the FW they so dear love.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Moderator

Last night it was posted to my facebook wall (too lazy to go dig back) and will paraphrase here

 

China drivers, salary $1075, accomodation - $220, foreign worker levy

Boleh drivers, salary $1400, no accomodation, no levy

 

So if you add back in the accomodation, then the pay is very similar - does that change any opinions at all (when I saw the breakdown, my sympathies certainly shifted a little)

 

 

MY driver have levy but lower compared to PRC.

 

the maths in the book of the company is they will try to hire each driver around the same cost, so the gross wages of PRC and MY are about the same.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Supersonic

I think the china drivers pay includes lodging which is "deducted" from thei basic pay.

Anyone can verify?

How is this basic pay? Ask yourself.

 

Lodging, transport, food, etc are under allowance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Giving maids off on a Sunday is a fatal mistake...they will return with a pregnant body and guess who bear the costs of semding them back...!!

 

 

How about you trying to work everyday with an off day? Being concerned over them getting into trouble while on their off days does not justify them not getting their rest. It is plain irresponsible and selfish. The loophole here is the setting of the policy of who should ultimately bear the consequences and costs. Please get your fundamental concern right.

 

P.S. I am not a maid. :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Moderator

Maybe if you have a maid and she gets pregnant..perhaps u would like to foot her hospitalization fee which can costs anything from 10k and above without subsidy, after that you can also take care of her baby at your own cost. Whether free will or modern slavery...no one knows..but definetly..no one put a gun on their head and force them to be a maid.

 

Ditto when you employed one. ^_^

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Turbocharged

How about you trying to work everyday with an off day? Being concerned over them getting into trouble while on their off days does not justify them not getting their rest. It is plain irresponsible and selfish. The loophole here is the setting of the policy of who should ultimately bear the consequences and costs. Please get your fundamental concern right.

 

P.S. I am not a maid. :D

 

AGREE -

 

this is what always surprises me, how many people just quietly accept what appears to be a "wrong" policy and turn their homes into what are effectively prisons for maids.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hypersonic

Last night it was posted to my facebook wall (too lazy to go dig back) and will paraphrase here

 

China drivers, salary $1075, accomodation - $220, foreign worker levy

Boleh drivers, salary $1400, no accomodation, no levy

 

So if you add back in the accomodation, then the pay is very similar - does that change any opinions at all (when I saw the breakdown, my sympathies certainly shifted a little)

 

not so simple lah..... if the manpower cost is roughly the same, why dont they get more MY chaps in and yet have to pay for recruitment costs in CN? i think: with the current MY salary, it is not sufficient to attract sufficient numbers of MY workers to fill the vancies

 

SMRT should look into its entire entire organisational structure/process/blah blah and cut fats. obviously the fats are not at the driver level [rolleyes]

 

i dont recall transport battalion having so many colonels and generals :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Supercharged

Agree fully. That's why businesses are only concern with profit not the salary so they will balance the numbers between MY and PRC. So that's why PRCs tend to get lower pay.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hypersonic

More to the point, I have to wonder why it is a MP that labels it as a strike, and why his word is law rather than the police or the relevant authority?

 

Mean to say that once MP say, means they are guilty? He is a policeman?

 

Seems a bit funny to me.

 

he is selected spokesman for garmen lah and obviously he would have checked with the police or garmen lawyer

↡ Advertisement

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×