Time to catch the bus/train cheats

Public transport companies are going all out to catch these petty thieves for cheating the transport giants for a few cents or a few dollars per trip. These are big monies to lose and it is estimated that the total amount lost is $9 mil annually. At $1 a trip cheated, that is 9 mil trips or roughly 25,000 trips daily. Either we have so many cheapskate buggers or cheats, it is still no good. Cheating is cheating, even for a few cents. It is now like a war against these petty thieves, and manpower and all resources, including satellite technology will be harnessed to save the $9 mil and to teach these useless buggers to be honest. People who have to cheat for a few dollars are not worth living. And worst still, there is a higher justification for the huge amount of money going to be spent to tackle this cheating problem. If not because of the cheating, transport companies need not keep on raising transport fares. So the cheating hurts the majority of the honest fare paying commuters. All fare paying commuters must be grateful and should lend a helping hand to catch all these cheats. And when the problem is solved, they can expect fares to be lowered. Or at least there will be lesser fare hikes. The moral of the story is that if these people want to cheat, they must cheat big and in style. And they would not even be called cheats if they are smart enough to do it. They will even be respected for being able to collect hundreds of thousands or millions of dollars without anyone knowing what is happening. The real and big cheats always get away and it is the small petty thieves that are caught and embarrassed.

We don't need subsidies

Just like we don't need help from the govt, we also do not need subsidies if the real cost of inflation is arrested. Many of the high costs can be attributed to inflation and 'market value.' Both need not be the case and need not add to the high cost of living. One angry example is the high price of HDB flats, priced at a subsidy to market value or market price instead of the actual cost of building the flat. And the govt feel damn good, and expect the people to feel damn grateful because it is giving the people a subsidy. When has this mindset of really serving the people's interests been changed to one where, 'the people would be worst off without the govt subsidies and have to pay real market prices' while allowing market prices to runaway? HDB pricing is not the only area that the people are made to pay much more than the cost of goods. Medical services is another sore point. Why must HDB insists that medical practitioners pay market rate rentals of space that were built donkey years ago at a fraction of current day prices? Essential services should be charged or cost at as low a price as possible to keep the price of such goods and services down. Why can't the govt identify specific essential services and charge them at minimum profits so that the service providers need not pass the cost to the consumers? It is time to shut those who keep trumpeting about how much subsidies are given to help the needy. They are not subsidies. The people are charged with inflated market prices with a little discount called subsidies. The high cost of living must be tackled at its root. Many services and goods must not be treated simply as a business to make profits. In certain areas, making obscene profits from the users is criminal or morally unacceptable, disgraceful. As costs keep going up, cost of public transport and many essential services must be brought down to help the poor communities. The high transport cost is going to take its toll on the tertiary students and their parents. These are the country's assets, young people being educated to come into the workforce and having to pay like hell to go through their years as students/undergraduates without any income. Do away with subsidies like clamping down on those who are scheming to help the people with their obscene schemes when the people become worst off and may not even benefit from their schemes.

Classic material

Leadership lessons from a sub-contractor

Lim Chih Yang It is not often that one can learn leadership lessons from The New Paper. While our local tabloid is a surprisingly good resource on how to manage one’s finances, enjoy fine dining, get the latest gossip, and contains the most comprehensive coverage of football news, it rarely comes up with soul-inspiring stuff...(until this comes along).

Mr Lam Teck Foo, a sub-contractor, was fined a total of $150,000 for “failing to take reasonable and adequate fall protection measures, under the Workplace Safety and Health Act”. He was fined as a fatal accident had occurred to one of his workers, who fell to his death while working on the rooftop on September 2006. While his workers had been wearing safety helmets, safety goggles, gloves, safety harnesses and belts, they had no lifelines to secure their harnesses to.

The fine of $150,000 is huge when we look at Lam’s income tax return of a little over $43,000. He had not contested the charge and had in fact acknowledged his responsibility for the worker:

…I was not around the work site, but my foreman said that the worker was feeling dizzy. He was walking backwards when he fell off the roof. But, he admitted, that as the boss of the company, he is responsible for the safety of his workers….

While we are in no position to gauge Lam’s financial means, I am nevertheless touched by his gesture and sincere apology to the family. Feelings aside, though, a few questions are still in my mind.

While Lam is the boss, he was not physically present at the worksite to personally supervise the workers, and ensure that his workers had their life-lines secured. So why, then, is he being held responsible for the accident?

Perhaps Lam should have taken a leaf out of our Deputy Prime Minister Wong Kan Seng’s example. Here is how the scenario would have played out had Lam been an attentive student in Wong’s leadership class.

1) Upon knowing that the accident had happened, Lam would have made a gesture of apology by telling the deceased family, “This should not have happened. I am sorry that it has.”

2) Then, he would have convened a Commission of Inquiry (COI), including one of his own safety officers as part of the committee.

3) Thirdly, he would then have released the COI’s findings and absolved himself of all blame, since he is the boss and he is reasonably not expected to be on site to check all lifelines.

4) Fourthly, he would have gotten his colleagues to be both cheerleader and defence attorney, and exhort everyone to “move on”.

5) Lastly, he would have lain low and waited for it to blow over.

Hey if Lam had learned his lesson, he would have saved his company a whopping $150,000 in fines, plus all the other costs he incurred in compensating the deceased’s family.

But no, Lam did not evade responsibility. In fact, he did just the opposite. He stood up, accepted his part of the blame, apologised to the family of the deceased, paid the $150,000 fine, paid for the funeral and even pledged to give the family $3,000 for the next three years at Hari Raya.

Now that, dear readers, is true leadership – from a sub-contractor.

Mr Lam has, according to The New Paper report, five children aged 3, 11, 12, 14 and 15. His request to pay the $150,000 fine over ten months was rejected by the authorities.

[The above should be copied, bounded and included as a module in management studies in our universities. It can be used as an SOP by top executives in both public and private companies as an efficient and effective way of crisis management, and keep the job.]

Celebrating the Civil Service

The Civil Service as an entity deserves special mention as the backbone that holds Singapore together as a nation. Not only that the Civil Service is the storehouse of talents, not many in Parliament can match the academic and intellectual talents of the civil servants, it is also the longest, continuous surviving organisation in the history of Singapore. Political masters and politicians come and go, the Civil Service will stay and continue to serve the people, through the politicians. Without the Civil Service, the politicians will be more like a bunch of magicians pulling white rabbits from a hat. It will simply be magic for a show. It is the civil servants that turn magic into reality. What is important and vital for Singapore is for a Civil Service to remain politically neutral, not beholden to anyone or political party, to do what it should do, as the non political govt organisation, looking after and managing the country's affair. An independent Civil Service shall be there to provide the continuity of govt as govt will change overtime. And it is this independence of people and mind and purpose that will ensure its legitimacy and continued existence, traversing different govts. A Civil Service that has compromised its independence and neutrality will only see to its own demise whenever there is a change of govt. Singapore should count itself lucky to have maintained the Civil Service as an independent institution of govt, uncorrupted by politicians and the swing of political powers. The sanctity and independence of the Civil Service must be protected and the tradition preserved for the long term viability not only of the Civil Service/Servants but also of the nation.

Breaking the religious armour

Lian He Zao Bao reported that the abbot of Leong Hua Monastry, Sek Meow Ee earns $660,000 a year, owns a condo and 4 companies. And he is a monk! What is a monk? A monk is one who has taken a vow to detach himself from the attachment to worldly material things. A $660k salary, a condo and 4 companies are material things that monks are not supposed to crave or own. Any monks want to dispute this fact? What looks wrong, usually becomes wrong. The services at the monastry, from my experience, is anything but cheap. It is a monastry to relieve the pains and sufferings of ordinary beans. The last thing is to relieve them of their money for services at commercial market prices. We are seeing more and more of money grabbing religious organisations among us. It is time that the govt takes a tough stand on such money grabbing organisations and tear away the religious armour of protection. No one shall be allowed to hide behind a belief to fleece money from the unthinking believers and worshippers. Religions are innocent. It is the human beans who are exploiting religions and the blind believers to line themselves with money and more money. As these are public organisations, feeding from the generosities of simple and sincere beans, accountability and transparency must be absolute. They are not private organisations established to make some people rich and earning money legitimately as a business organisations. In such religious organisations, the money were given in most cases, to the religion to do good for the sufferring transient beans.