Jump to content

Flyover collapses at Upper Changi, PIE


Showster
 Share

Recommended Posts

Turbocharged

The problem is these 'authorities' juz collect fee but the developer is the one that has to employ the checker.

 

And if anything goes wrong, the authorities role is to go after the checker. The rightful process is that the checking should be done by the authorities themselves, not outsourced to the lowest bidder by the developer. Same with fire compliance checking

 

Damn screwed up system that needs to be changed

not saying what you mentioned above is incorrect but it is the same practice in the commercial world eg privately hired auditors to audit a company and give an audit opinion, upon which forms part of your due diligence process when you invest in that said company.

 

so if based on your suggestion, it will mean the auditor-general office has to perform the role of the private auditors. but in that same case, who audits the auditor-general office?

 

Ultimately, the checker (whether private or govt) has to be certified, learned, experienced and dedicated to doing their job. The checking is done by humans and this human can either be employed by a private or govt organisation. It's all about the checker.

 

In the company i work for, it is not always the lowest bidder will get the job. Other factors eg our prior experience with them, their experience in our industry etc are also part of the decision making process.

↡ Advertisement
  • Praise 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

When there are too many projects and not as many checkers this is the result.

 

The planners are way too ambitious to build so many projects at the same time. They can penalise the developers they have appointed. They can also punish the ppl who are suppose to do the checks. The planners are also the ones who give the dateline and penalties for not meeting the dateline. May be it's time to relook the overly ambitious plans.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Supersonic

not saying what you mentioned above is incorrect but it is the same practice in the commercial world eg privately hired auditors to audit a company and give an audit opinion, upon which forms part of your due diligence process when you invest in that said company.

 

so if based on your suggestion, it will mean the auditor-general office has to perform the role of the private auditors. but in that same case, who audits the auditor-general office?

 

Ultimately, the checker (whether private or govt) has to be certified, learned, experienced and dedicated to doing their job. The checking is done by humans and this human can either be employed by a private or govt organisation. It's all about the checker.

 

In the company i work for, it is not always the lowest bidder will get the job. Other factors eg our prior experience with them, their experience in our industry etc are also part of the decision making process.

Big difference

 

Lapses by auditor in the commercial world isn't a life and death matter

 

Authorities are there to ensure public safety. Not for them to tai chi that public responsibility to the developer or contractor who in turn may juz outsource it to the lowest bidder

Link to post
Share on other sites

Turbocharged

not saying what you mentioned above is incorrect but it is the same practice in the commercial world eg privately hired auditors to audit a company and give an audit opinion, upon which forms part of your due diligence process when you invest in that said company.

 

so if based on your suggestion, it will mean the auditor-general office has to perform the role of the private auditors. but in that same case, who audits the auditor-general office?

 

Ultimately, the checker (whether private or govt) has to be certified, learned, experienced and dedicated to doing their job. The checking is done by humans and this human can either be employed by a private or govt organisation. It's all about the checker.

 

In the company i work for, it is not always the lowest bidder will get the job. Other factors eg our prior experience with them, their experience in our industry etc are also part of the decision making process.

While it is true that it is very difficult for authorities to check on all projects and outsourcing this role is the simplest way. Why then for electrical, water and gas, the authorities are still the last defence despite having so many QP? It is very common for RI to check each other works. This is very unhealthy.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Supersonic

While it is true that it is very difficult for authorities to check on all projects and outsourcing this role is the simplest way. Why then for electrical, water and gas, the authorities are still the last defence despite having so many QP? It is very common for RI to check each other works. This is very unhealthy.

Apparently the public's 'last defence' is an outsourced 3rd party engaged by the developer/contractor. This realli is ownself check ownself

 

Liddat wat is the authorities role ah?

  • Praise 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Turbocharged

Apparently the public's 'last defence' is an outsourced 3rd party engaged by the developer/contractor. This realli is ownself check ownself

 

Liddat wat is the authorities role ah?

Yes, who allow developer/contractor to outsource to a private individual leh? Who issue final permit leh?
  • Praise 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

Yes, who allow developer/contractor to outsource to a private individual leh? Who issue final permit leh?

 

he's the MD-cum-engineer lah

Edited by Othello
Link to post
Share on other sites

From what I know, electrical, plumbing/sanitary, gas all required authorities to check/test before approval given. Why structural and fire safety no leh?

 

When you have 2 private individuals checking each other works, then the penalty for failure to carry out such check should be jail and immediate cancellation of their licence. This is about life not just material losses.

 

Yes, now not only his previous works should be checked, those he has certified and those checkers for his projects must be included.

If say his previous work need recheck..

 

Many many ex bosses in various agencies will sweat.. usually these things is quietly quietly.. don't sabo people..

Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually. Maybe such structural plans should be divided into two sets given to blinded checkers or inspectors. Both submit the answers to authorities. Calculations and answers the same, then considered pass.

  • Praise 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Turbocharged

Actually. Maybe such structural plans should be divided into two sets given to blinded checkers or inspectors. Both submit the answers to authorities. Calculations and answers the same, then considered pass.

good suggestion. feasible or not, don't know. but it's good. if 2 separate sets of submissions are ok, should be a pass.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Turbocharged

If say his previous work need recheck..

 

Many many ex bosses in various agencies will sweat.. usually these things is quietly quietly.. don't sabo people..

Link to post
Share on other sites

more like a escape goat ........... the big boys go free ?

Abuden.. This is the whole point of delegation and subcontracting... Isn't it?

 

:p

  • Praise 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem is these 'authorities' juz collect fee but the developer is the one that has to employ the checker.

 

And if anything goes wrong, the authorities role is to go after the checker. The rightful process is that the checking should be done by the authorities themselves, not outsourced to the lowest bidder by the developer. Same with fire compliance checking

 

Damn screwed up system that needs to be changed

 

 

Yes totally agree!

When we outsource to 3rd party.

It meant all the repetitive tasks, menial task, backbreaking tasks, non-strategic tasks have "ka Gia" junior staff or external to handle.

But that doesn't meant we should relinquish our duty to check on quality of work done.

 

I remember someone ever said ," We can outsource tasks to 3rd party, but we cannot outsource our responsibility."

The culture of passing the buck must change or else we will be really in deep shit.

Actually. Maybe such structural plans should be divided into two sets given to blinded checkers or inspectors. Both submit the answers to authorities. Calculations and answers the same, then considered pass.

 

Yes just like in medical check-up result.

 

Sometimes it's good to get a 2nd opinion. 

Having too much trust to one party may have lapses.

  • Praise 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

Supercharged

Yes totally agree!

When we outsource to 3rd party.

It meant all the repetitive tasks, menial task, backbreaking tasks, non-strategic tasks have "ka Gia" junior staff or external to handle.

But that doesn't meant we should relinquish our duty to check on quality of work done.

 

I remember someone ever said ," We can outsource tasks to 3rd party, but we cannot outsource our responsibility."

The culture of passing the buck must change or else we will be really in deep shit.

 

Yes just like in medical check-up result.

 

Sometimes it's good to get a 2nd opinion. 

Having too much trust to one party may have lapses.

 

unfortunately the whole world especially singapore is rapidly adopting the "outsourcing" approach..

 

just like HR, employees are outsourced too..

Yes totally agree!

When we outsource to 3rd party.

It meant all the repetitive tasks, menial task, backbreaking tasks, non-strategic tasks have "ka Gia" junior staff or external to handle.

But that doesn't meant we should relinquish our duty to check on quality of work done.

 

I remember someone ever said ," We can outsource tasks to 3rd party, but we cannot outsource our responsibility."

The culture of passing the buck must change or else we will be really in deep shit.

 

Yes just like in medical check-up result.

 

Sometimes it's good to get a 2nd opinion. 

Having too much trust to one party may have lapses.

 

unfortunately the whole world especially singapore is rapidly adopting the "outsourcing" approach..

 

just like HR, employees are outsourced too..

Link to post
Share on other sites

Supersonic

unfortunately the whole world especially singapore is rapidly adopting the "outsourcing" approach..

 

just like HR, employees are outsourced too..

 

 

unfortunately the whole world especially singapore is rapidly adopting the "outsourcing" approach..

 

just like HR, employees are outsourced too..

The disturbing trend here is that our authorities are outsourcing their 'last defence' role
Link to post
Share on other sites

Supercharged

The disturbing trend here is that our authorities are outsourcing their 'last defence' role

 

what to do.. there is no other way that they can easily allow them to point finger when things go south..

 

funny that i don't see people publicly speaking up against outsourcing and questioning the sustainability of it..

↡ Advertisement
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
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...