SMRT drivers' strike
-
yeh baby
-
2 issues on SMRT strike
1. How come SMRT can anyhow change the terms of the employment contract from five days week to 6 days week with lower renumeration ?
2. How come workers can suka suka get MCs especially issued by the government polyclincs to go on strike ?
-
they think if at least cover with MC, even if their illegal sit-in go wrong, they will just say this is medical benefits
but their 算盘 算错了
-
if the previously signed contract says employer can change the terms at any point deem fit, yes, the employer can change the terms at any point deem fit
-
tks to prc drivers strike, sg drivers will get pay hike.. so, now f the prc drivers or sg drivers?
-
Originally posted by FireIce:
if the previously signed contract says employer can change the terms at any point deem fit, yes, the employer can change the terms at any point deem fit
So, u mean SMRT can also change the renumeration of the PRC drivers to $400 per month if the PRC workers have previously signed the contract that says employer can change the terms at any point deem fit ? If that is the case, the PRC drivers will be very lugi leh.
-
normal in employment contract and appointment letters (if anyone bothered to read every fine print.........)
all orgs would protect their own ass. first.
-
Originally posted by Seowlah:
2 issues on SMRT strike
1. How come SMRT can anyhow change the terms of the employment contract from five days week to 6 days week with lower renumeration ?
2. How come workers can suka suka get MCs especially issued by the government polyclincs to go on strike ?
youmust not been working or never been an employee before. in all emploment letter of offering, HR will always state a cuase somewhere
'the company reserve teh rigt to admend, change or update working hours and positions for the employee within the company' or similar related clasue.
-
Originally posted by Seowlah:
So, u mean SMRT can also change the renumeration of the PRC drivers to $400 per month if the PRC workers have previously signed the contract that says employer can change the terms at any point deem fit ? If that is the case, the PRC drivers will be very lugi leh.
lugi go to court lor, not courts har. -
Originally posted by Tcsaaa:
tks to prc drivers strike, sg drivers will get pay hike.. so, now f the prc drivers or sg drivers?
that's why i am never happy with those foreign labor (esp prshits0 striking. they got no brinaas. anyhow strike. gahmen see the strike not seeely down backfire they waiting for any chance to giv silly excuses for hike only.to strike effectively and swee swee, the strikers have to be smart and need better coordination, so that the cause is not to casue public discomfort and disruption, and at the same time get what they want without gahmen givin excuse for hikes.
thse prs dont care about the economy or futre shit lifes of sgrena s and the aftermath at all, they oinoyl care for themselves!
-
Originally posted by FireIce:
they think if at least cover with MC, even if their illegal sit-in go wrong, they will just say this is medical benefits
but their 算盘 算错了
they the lowly commoners and greedy top politicians, are never good at anything. collectively maybe but they are very good at deception and lying, tech savy wise - they are good only and best only at hacking. -
Raise bus fares? No way, say most
Transport operators must bear cost of drivers' pay increase, say those polled
A Straits Times street and online poll of 325 commuters yesterday found that 92 per cent of respondents are opposed to the idea of raising fares to help cover the cost of increasing bus drivers' wages. -- ST PHOTO: STEPHANIE YEOW
By MARIA ALMENOAR
TRANSPORT CORRESPONDENTCOMMUTERS have overwhelmingly rejected the notion of increasing public transport fares to help improve the pay of bus drivers.
A Straits Times street and online poll of 325 commuters yesterday found that 92 per cent of respondents are opposed to the idea that Transport Minister Lui Tuck Yew strongly hinted at on Thursday.
The response of Mr Lau Yong Fong, an IT support engineer, was typical of the majority.
Said the 34-year-old: "It is good to increase salaries of bus drivers, but you can't just push it to commuters. The Government has to think of other alternatives before increasing fares."
Among the suggestions they made: Cut the bonus of top executives of the two public transport operators, require the operators SMRT and SBS Transit to use profits to pay the drivers more, or have the Government subsidise the increase in wages.
Mr Lui had hinted at the possibility of bus fares being raised when he commented on last week's illegal strike by 180 SMRT bus drivers from China over living conditions and pay.
He said fares might go up in future to help cover the cost of raising the wages of bus drivers. He also expressed hope that an ongoing fare review would allow the operators to increase drivers' pay.
Commuters acknowledged Mr Lui's point that the bus drivers deserve to be paid more, but were adamant that the cost be borne by SMRT and SBS Transit.
Undergraduate Frank Poh, 24, said the operators needed to play their part and bear the costs.
"It is ridiculous that the Government pays partially for infrastructure, the public pays for the pay rise - bearing in mind the operational profit is in the hundreds of millions of dollars - then what about the company?" he asked.
Commuters argued that the operators were making healthy profits and could well afford the additional cost. "If the companies are not making pro-fits, then it is fine to increase bus fares, but they make so much money," said restaurant manager Kamal Bashyal, 35.
Similarly, supermarket cashier Jenny Wong, 34, said in Mandarin: "This is unreasonable. When they make profits, do they pass them on to commuters as discounts in fares? Why don't they use the profits to increase the salaries of drivers?"
SMRT's last full-year net profit was $119.9 million while that of ComfortDelGro, which runs SBS Transit, was $235.6 million. Both listed companies have rail and taxi operations in addition to buses.
National University of Singapore transport researcher Lee Der-Horng said that as public transport services were a public good, the operators should look for ways internally to increase their efficiency. "They should consider all other alternatives and cut their costs before approaching the commuters, as a last resort," he said.
He pointed out that the goal in privatising public transport was for the companies to run the service efficiently and profitably. "When they claim that fare revenue is not enough to cover their costs, I would have to disagree with that," he said.
For the small group of commuters in favour of a fare rise to help bus drivers, they were agreeable if the increase was between two and five cents.
But they said such an increase would be fair only if there was a corresponding improvement in bus services. Said hotel cleaner Pari Natasina, 50: "Bus drivers are very hard-working, and if the raise is only a bit, it's okay. It's understandable."
Top Of The News, The Straits Times, December 8 2012, Pg A8
-
Originally posted by Tcsaaa:
tks to prc drivers strike, sg drivers will get pay hike.. so, now f the prc drivers or sg drivers?
So you think who will PAID the pay hike? smrt or pap?
-
We are paying for the bus driver's pay raise...
What logic is that?
#LTAlogic -
GE2016, what better time to vote wisely. oincrease 1 2 cents yearly, see how much the increase is now within the space of less than 10 years? and we poor sgreans haveto take pubic transport everyday more than 1x its money god damn it!
-
Originally posted by FireIce:
normal in employment contract and appointment letters (if anyone bothered to read every fine print.........)
all orgs would protect their own ass. first.
However, the terms and conditions of the employment contract cannot be less favorable than what is stipulated in the Employment Act ie even if there is a clause inserted to protect the employer's own interests.
There is also the laws of contract.An unreasonable clause inserted to protect the employers' self interests can still be set aside if the judges have deemed it to be unreasonable.
-
I think govt. is thinking this way eh?
High bus fare = attract more S'porean drivers to drive buses cus can get free rides?
-
Why don't they use their million dollar salary to help cover the cost?
-
Originally posted by SMB195G:
Why don't they use their million dollar salary to help cover the cost?
it is senseless to pay them millions. when the only solution they offer is for sgreans to pay and pay and owe and owe.theyir actions of paying millions is inspiring sgreasn to also do the same,. in the end sgreans erode in the mind and lost in our virtue of life. are we gong to be slaves to the million dolalr dream or should we all stand up and do somethings our future generation can be proud of, ou of money and material needs and achievements?
-
Originally posted by Seowlah:
However, the terms and conditions of the employment contract cannot be less favorable than what is stipulated in the Employment Act ie even if there is a clause inserted to protect the employer's own interests.
There is also the laws of contract.An unreasonable clause inserted to protect the employers' self interests can still be set aside if the judges have deemed it to be unreasonable.
you wrote this yourself or what? -
Originally posted by troublemaker2005:
it is senseless to pay them millions. when the only solution they offer is for sgreans to pay and pay and owe and owe.theyir actions of paying millions is inspiring sgreasn to also do the same,. in the end sgreans erode in the mind and lost in our virtue of life. are we gong to be slaves to the million dolalr dream or should we all stand up and do somethings our future generation can be proud of, ou of money and material needs and achievements?
How stingy they are. Overpaid yet still need our help.
-
I feel sorry for those lawyers who are offering to help those Cheena bus drivers.
-
unreasonable?
it is perfectly reasonable to the ppl up there.
-
Originally posted by Red5xx:
So you think who will PAID the pay hike? smrt or pap?
dun be naive leh..of course the commuter pay la..sbs n smrt also got a bit fm the guarantee increase fare.. just a question of how much? nvm, pay until cannot tahan lor.. tks to pap.. we r now 1st class animal farm..
-
The movement has reached Avazz.
https://secure.avaaz.org/en/petition/Release_the_SMRT_Bus_Captains/?btmuYbb&v=20000
Quoted from site
Recently, it has been announced that bus fares will be increased in order to increase the wages of the bus drivers. This has led to many locals blaming the China bus drivers. This is a way for SMRT to divert attention from the real problem, and instigate Singaporeans to hate migrant workers. In actual fact, SMRT has made MILLIONS of dollars in revenue. Being a public service organisation, there isn't a need for SMRT to make so much profit. The pay of the directors and top management can be lowered while those of the bus drivers should be increased, and this should come without needing to raise the bus fares.
This is an attempt by the government to instigate hate, and push the blame around, while pocketing most of the money. The Singapore government is practicing LEGAL corruption.