China workers not happy and protest on top of the crane
-
Activists slam S'pore crackdown on strikers
Reuters/REUTERS - A representative (L) from the Singapore Consulate receives a protest letter from labour union activists during a protest outside their offices in Hong Kong December 5, 2012. The group demanded
AFP News – Wed, Dec 5, 2012
Activists expressed outrage Wednesday over Singapore's crackdown on Chinese bus drivers who staged the city-state's first industrial strike in 26 years to demand better pay and conditions.
The two-day work stoppage last week at state-linked transport firm SMRT, declared illegal by the Singapore government, has resulted in the deportation of 29 drivers and a six-week jail term for one driver.
Four other arrested drivers, who have been remanded for a week, are expected to be produced in court on Thursday, with each facing a maximum one-year jail term and a possible Sg$2,000 ($1,640) penalty if found guilty of involvement in the strike.
The Asian Forum for Human Rights and Development, which represents 47 non-governmental organisations from 16 Asian countries, urged the release of the jailed and remanded drivers and demanded that charges against them be dropped.
"We condemn the Singapore government's criminalisation of the exercise of fundamental rights by the bus drivers who went on strike," said the Bangkok-based group's executive director Yap Swee Seng.
"The swift and harsh actions overlook the bases of their complaints about wage discrepancies and poor housing."
The crackdown was also denounced by dozens of labour rights activists in Hong Kong who protested outside the Singapore consulate, with minor scuffles breaking out with security guards as they tried to enter the property.
The protesters in the southern Chinese city called on Singapore to drop the charges against the strikers and free the jailed driver.
Alex Au, treasurer of labour rights group Transient Workers Count Too (TCW 2) in Singapore, expressed dismay at the "heavy-handedness involved in prosecuting five workers and deporting 29 others".
Au told AFP the government's "zero tolerance" for illegal strikes implies that it was "not prepared to recognise that the workers had legitimate grievances".
SMRT has promised to look into the Chinese strikers' demands, fumigate their bedbug-infested dormitory rooms and find them better housing but the government has vowed to take "firm action" against any future illegal strikes.
Last week's strike, the first in Singapore since 1986, has highlighted the country's heavy dependence on migrant labour to drive its economic growth amid a labour shortage resulting from falling birth rates.
Strikes are illegal for workers in "essential services" such as transport unless they give 14 days' prior notice and meet other requirements.
-
Look, what the strike has done, it has such great impact on the region!>
hahahahahahahuhhuh ..... headaches for the sg govt. Time to make them use more of their brain cells afterall they are paid milions.
-
The propaganda campaign against the striking bus drivers
Category: Perspective | Today Comments: 4 Vincent Wijeysingha 
It should come as no surprise to an informed Singaporean that the government, its agencies such as Reach Singapore and proxy agencies such as Media Corp are engaged in a massive public relations exercise to guide public response to the SMRT bus drivers' strike.
When 22 young persons were arrested under Operation Spectrum in May 1987, the then Singapore Broadcasting Corporation (SBC) used every means at its disposal to propagate the government’s case. We now know it to be propaganda designed to eliminate criticisms of government policy particularly in relation to labour and poverty.
The SBC doctored the sequence of Vincent Cheng’s television interview to make him sound like he was giving the answers they wished him to give. And the print media, day after day, reported verbatim the government statements which we now know to have been untrue.
Fast forward a quarter century later and identical areas of policy are motivating Singaporean social workers, lawyers and political activists to intervene in what is rapidly becoming a highly embarrassing moment for the government.
Last night about 30 prominent civil society veterans and newbies gathered to strategise a response to the incident. Hailing from all sections of civil society, they included established welfare organisations, research centres, well-known bloggers, writers, lawyers and social entrepreneurs.
On the table were a range of initiatives which are being timetabled for the coming period. It is understood they are hosting a forum on Saturday 8 December to explore trade unionism in our country. One attendee is quoted as saying that the trade union discourse became frozen in the "post-Hock Lee” bus strikes era [1955] and that the vast majority of Singaporeans, young and old, have an extremely limited meaningful understanding of trade unionism and its functions in a civilised society.
This may appear to have been borne out by the results of a survey carried out by Reach Singapore – no doubt paid for by taxpayers’ money – over the first three days of the strike. What is interesting to note is that, while the relevant authorities were grappling with the strike, Reach had the presence of mind to mobilise its resources on the first day itself to rush out among the general public and attempt an exercise that would give greater support to the government’s action against the striking workers.
I am a sociologist by training. Among the settled principles of survey methodology, researchers seek, as far as possible, to minimise those factors which might skew the results of the survey. In A-Level Economics we learn the term ceteris paribus meaning ‘all things being held constant’. Research in general tends to try, as far as possible to keep other factors constant so that the results of the survey are trustworthy and can be replicated with a different sample of interviewees.
For example, surveys done in the heat of the action are to be avoided. Surveys conducted when people have had no access to alternative information with which to shape their conclusions are equally to be shunned. Surveys done in a constrained discursive climate are also shaky.
All of these factors were present when Reach carried out its survey. But perhaps most importantly, it committed the worst sin in the surveying world, that of the ‘leading question’. It is a well-established fact that you can elicit a desired answer by asking the question in a certain way. The setting of the interview, the inflection of the voice, the framing of the question can all impact upon the answer.
Take a look at the questions that were asked.
Question 1: Are you aware that a group of SMRT drivers from China staged an illegal strike on the 26th and 27th of November?
Immediately, the interviewee is put on his guard by way of the framing of the strike as ‘illegal’. If something is illegal, then I had better show the proper disdain for it lest I be seen as one who approves of illegal behaviour.
Also, bear in mind that at this point, the only information available to interviewees on which to base their opinion is the state press. Is it likely that they could have had the time to digest the information, explore different perspectives, talk to their friends and then gradually formulate an opinion?
Question 2: The Government has done the right thing by taking time to ascertain the facts before labelling the action as an illegal strike on the second day.
Question 2 then reiterates that the strike is illegal. The question, rather than asking ‘if’ the government had done the right thing, informs the interviewee that it has done so and to which you are simply invited to acquiesce. It also suggests that the government has acted in a measured and responsible way by examining all the facts before coming to a decision. Minister Tan Chuan Jin said exactly this at his press conference on Saturday.
Question 3: The Government has reacted swiftly to ensure that the situation is under control and there is minimum disruption to the public transport system.
Question 3 vaguely reminds the interview that the strike is a situation that could get out of control, without specifying what sort of chaos might arise. The word is dropped subtly into the question but the net result is to elicit the intuition of chaos and danger. The interviewee, opening his mental filing cabinet, hits upon the oft-repeated sentiment that strikes imply blood and riot and arrives at the expected attitude. And again, notice how it places the government in a positive light as having acted rapidly to contain the potential contagion. In fact, as we now know, the strikes resulted in nothing of the kind. The striking bus drivers stood quietly and peacefully outside their dormitory and refused their labour. That is all.
Question 4: The bus drivers from China should have gone through the proper channels to air their grievances instead of staging a strike.
Question 4 implies, without a shred of evidence, that the workers did not go through the proper channels. It is difficult to ascertain if Reach was in the know about the six months of proper channels the workers had tried without success (which I documented in a Facebook post on Sunday). Reach’s Supervisory Board is stacked with government MPs (including Dr Intan Azura Mochtar who is a member of the PM’s GRC), trade union officials, and grassroots leaders. Therefore, one could reasonably expect that they might have some knowledge of this; the survey question suggests otherwise.
Question 5: If the bus drivers from China are found to have breached Singapore’s law, they should be punished to the full extent of the law, as Singapore has zero tolerance for illegal strikes.
Question 5 commits an error of logic. It states that the bus drivers should be punished BECAUSE Singapore has zero tolerance. Punishment for an offence arises because the thing being punished for is against the law not because there is extreme intolerance for it. Otherwise, if we had, say 50% tolerance, then they should not be punished to the full extent?
For example, in the 1997 General Election, the then Prime Minister, his two deputies and former MP, Dr Vasoo, were found inside a polling station of a constituency they were not contesting – a clear breach of the Parliamentary Elections Act. The Attorney General, however, justified the action. Did we only have about 5% tolerance to that particular law?
Furthermore, the question leads the interviewee to the conclusion that this amorphous entity called ‘Singapore’ is opposed to this action and THEREFORE the interviewee should also have zero tolerance for it since he is part of Singapore. It is not made clear if ‘Singapore’ means the government, the legal system, the cultural settlement, the rules of trade union activity, the PAP, or the general public. The interviewee is led to the particular conclusion.
Question 6: The bus drivers from China were wrong to have held a strike, but SMRT also bears some responsibility for the situation as it did not manage the grievances of the Chinese well.
Again, a leading question which, if objectivity were the true intention, should have been rephrased as, "If the bus drivers were wrong…”. Furthermore, Question 6 is in direct contradiction to Question 4 for if the workers had not gone through any channels, how did Reach know, on the very day when the strike began, that the bus drivers had any grievances at all?
Over the course of these last five decades, the government has sought to co-opt all national entities such that they serve the government’s behest. In each decade it carried out at least one major swoop on its perceived detractors to impart a salutary lesson. In 1987 we saw the last major, wholesale attempt to do so. Last week it used Reach, again, I remind you, at taxpayers’ expense, to lead public opinion in a cynical and devious attempt to obtain, through covert means, antagonism towards the strikers.
The workers, as I wrote in my Facebook note last Sunday, had a string of concerns which they tried to remedy over a period of six months by talking to their bosses, their union, the NTUC, and the government (including a letter to the PM himself). Frustrated at every step of the way, they finally took what must have been a terrifying decision: to deliberately place themselves at the risk of losing their livelihood.
For Reach to conduct such a flawed survey is distasteful to me, both as a citizen and as an academic who hold close to the scientific principle of falsifiability, which Reach has violated.
In 1987, the state media prevented any alternative analyses of Operation Spectrum and, particularly, those which early and easily dismantled the government case – and I assure you there was a huge amount – from reaching the ears of Singaporeans. In 2012, we should not let this happen to us. Allow me to plead with you to form your own judgment of the bus drivers strike based on all the available information and not only on what the government determines is safe to publish. You may arrive at a very different conclusion than the one the government is so desirous of propagating.
Do avail yourself of attending the forum on 8 Dec (Saturday), 2-5pm at #04-01 Bras Basah Complex of 321 Bain Street. Bring your friends and family. You would have started the process which, in time, will help you to grow up from under Big Brother’s dark shade.Public Forum: The SMRT strike: Why should we care?
Date: 8 Dec 2012, Saturday
Time: 2-5pm
Venue: #04-01 Bras Basah Complex, 321 Bain Street
[More details at event's facebook]
Dr Vincent Wijeysingha is the Treasurer of the SDP and Head of the party's Communications Unit.http://yoursdp.org/publ/perspectives/2-1-0-1172
Worker' Party statement on bus drivers’ strike: SMRT must address workers’ grievances better
The Workers’ Party has been following with great concern the unfolding events surrounding the strike by SMRT bus drivers on 26-27 November 2012. As a result of the strike, some bus services were disrupted and commuters suffered inconveniences on our already-crowded public transport network.
This is the first strike in Singapore in more than 25 years. We are disappointed that it took a strike to bring to the forefront the bus drivers’ grievances about their pay and living conditions. We believe that workers’ rights to engage in industrial action (including strikes) must only be done within the bounds of the law. Strikes should be – and usually are – a measure of last resort by workers who have exhausted all other avenues to persuade management to address their concerns.
This strike signals a failure in the labour dispute settlement process within SMRT. By its own admission, the SMRT management needs to improve the way it engages its bus drivers. While much attention this week has focused on the grievances of the bus drivers from China, SMRT must address legitimate concerns that have been raised by all its bus drivers since the recent revision of salaries and work hours. We urge SMRT to keep its commitment to improve working conditions for all its workers and ensure channels of communication between workers and management remain open.
It is in Singapore’s interests, and in line with our nation’s values, that all workers are treated fairly, so that they are motivated to perform their jobs with excellence. This is especially so for workers providing essential public services as it affects not just the local public but also Singapore’s international reputation.
As the cases of four SMRT bus drivers who have been charged with instigating the illegal strike are now before the courts, it would not be appropriate to comment on these specific cases. Our MPs will be asking the Government questions on this issue during the next sitting of Parliament.
THE WORKERS’ PARTY
30 November 2012http://wp.sg/2012/11/wp-statement-on-bus-drivers-strike-smrt-must-address-workers-grievances-better/
-
Have SMRT taken into consideration PRCs can possibly use their strong character to go all the way to get what they want when recruiting them?
It is not a day or two we can change their strong will and character. I doubt they can be changed at all. Unlike Singaporeans who are docile and law abiding they are much more determine to be firm to stand on and insist on their rights.
O oooooo ... so moral of the story is please treasure, appreciate and take good care of your own kind those who are born and bred in Singapore and stop slamming and commanding us to do this and that, PAPooooooooooo!
-
Originally posted by SJS6638:
Unlike Singaporeans who are docile and law abiding they are much more determine to be firm to stand on and insist on their rights.
This is after decades of repression and terrorising by the PAP regime and anglicisation and de-sinonization.
-
Now the PRC employees giving problems. I recall the govt did say that foreigners or PRC employees are better than locals, so now ............... they slap their own cheeks!! knn!~
-
Originally posted by SJS6638:
I recall the govt did say that foreigners or PRC employees are better than locals, so now ...............
I think Harry Lee Kuan Yew said that.
-
Originally posted by SJS6638:
Now the PRC employees giving problems. I recall the govt did say that foreigners or PRC employees are better than locals, so now ............... they slap their own cheeks!! knn!~
-
Originally posted by Dalforce 1941:
I think Harry Lee Kuan Yew said that.
OOOOOOO ..... no wonder he keep quiet about this strike by PRCs. He did not step in like he did to the strike by SIA pilots. Unfair!!!!!!!!!! Boooooooooooo !
-
Originally posted by SJS6638:
OOOOOOO ..... no wonder he keep quiet about this strike by PRCs. He did not step in like he did to the strike by SIA pilots. Unfair!!!!!!!!!! Boooooooooooo !
But now that old bastard no longer holds state or party positions, can he still mouth off as he likes? You know, whenever that bastard opens his mouth, shit is bound to come out.
Harry Lee Kuan Yew's mouth is like an arsehole - shit comes out.
-
Originally posted by Dalforce 1941:
But now that old bastard no longer holds state or party positions, can he still mouth off as he likes? You know, whenever that bastard opens his mouth, shit is bound to come out.
Harry Lee Kuan Yew's mouth is like an arsehole - shit comes out.
He is still in control behind he scene.
Even if he passes on I believe he will still care. Remember he said before.......... he will jump from his grave yard ...................
-
hire sgreans lah. problem solved. somany cheena for what. history has shon they are babarians and savages. youincrease their numbers they massed they like very powerdeful already. if so good they can work in their country alreadyl prices rock bottom even they compete amongst themselvers in teh country to beat each other's cheapo price.
amry soldiers workers there's nothing like our very own people.
price war is over already, its time to cut operating costs by lookin into reducdant areas of service that for show only people dont need, and focus more on value add services that will not blow the operating cost hole. for once i think the cheena workers number sin spore has to be cut down, to a tolerable level.
-
these few fuck face if got chance cum here singapore i will gladly use my rifle butt and hammer their heads and brains out good good.
-
These Pricians atop the crane went to Manpower to lodge their complain. But Manpower asked for proof that they were not paid. How to get the proof? If the employer didn't pay up , they are not about to give these workers the documentary proof or the "I OWE YOU" to show they were not paid. And this is a re-caltriant employer who has been doing the same thing. It is therefore unfair and ethically very wrong to penalise those workers who in their simple mindedness were desperate to get some attention to their problems . And that was their cry for help! The employer should be JAILED - a simple fine is ineffective to deal with such bad employers!
-
Originally posted by troublemaker2005:
hire sgreans lah. problem solved. somany cheena for what. history has shon they are babarians and savages. youincrease their numbers they massed they like very powerdeful already. if so good they can work in their country alreadyl prices rock bottom even they compete amongst themselvers in teh country to beat each other's cheapo price.
amry soldiers workers there's nothing like our very own people.
price war is over already, its time to cut operating costs by lookin into reducdant areas of service that for show only people dont need, and focus more on value add services that will not blow the operating cost hole. for once i think the cheena workers number sin spore has to be cut down, to a tolerable level.
not many singaporeans want be bus drivers
-
If CHINA tell all its China workers to go home to China immediately. Forget about working in Singapore . Will Spore come to a stand still? Can we get enough Banglas to take over jobs which the Prcians are now doing? As it is even restaurants are employing Banglas to work as kitchen hands chopping up food and doing simple cooking. At least over 30 restaurants including 3 peranakan restaurants I know employ bangladeshis as assistant cooks and kitchen hands!
-
Originally posted by Bikeforceful:
These Pricians atop the crane went to Manpower to lodge their complain. But Manpower asked for proof that they were not paid. How to get the proof? If the employer didn’t pay up , they are not about to give these workers the documentary proof or the “I OWE YOU” to show they were not paid. And this is a re-caltriant employer who has been doing the same thing. It is therefore unfair and ethically very wrong to penalise those workers who in their simple mindedness were desperate to get some attention to their problems . And that was their cry for help!
The employer should be JAILED – a simple fine is ineffective to deal with such bad employers!
show them the bank account balance lah. every month how emplyer pay them?if not then just takenote of the worker's particulars and company contact person. call and drp and email to company to show proof of paying the workers.
this serve 2 purpose. if company able to show proofs, then the china workers shall be sued for falsifying claiims. if the company not able to provid proofs within satted timeframe, MOM step in.
no matter what happen people cannot take matters into their own hands and do gangnam style stuff just becasue they have problems of their own.
-
Originally posted by Bikeforceful:
If CHINA tell all its China workers to go home to China immediately. Forget about working in Singapore . Will Spore come to a stand still?
Can we get enough Banglas to take over jobs which the Prcians are now doing? As it is even restaurants are employing Banglas to work as kitchen hands chopping up food and doing simple cooking. At least over 30 restaurants including 3 peranakan restaurants I know employ bangladeshis as assistant cooks and kitchen hands!
come on, i look forward to this day.we might just emerge stronger with this incident.
wy are we so affraid of a disaster? we need one once in a while to emerge stronger.
lets not tok abour banglas. we now look at what we can do if all prcs are fucked out of the iskland.
-
Originally posted by Bikeforceful:
If CHINA tell all its China workers to go home to China immediately. Forget about working in Singapore . Will Spore come to a stand still?
Can we get enough Banglas to take over jobs which the Prcians are now doing? As it is even restaurants are employing Banglas to work as kitchen hands chopping up food and doing simple cooking. At least over 30 restaurants including 3 peranakan restaurants I know employ bangladeshis as assistant cooks and kitchen hands!
It wouldn't affect Singapore so much if compare to the event should all the Malaysian workers go on strike against Singapore. That would really make Singapore employers and Singapore Government panicked because the Singapore economy would be greatly affected. -
Originally posted by zulkifli mahmood:
It wouldn't affect Singapore so much if compare to the event should all the Malaysian workers go on strike against Singapore. That would really make Singapore employers and Singapore Government panicked because the Singapore economy would be greatly affected.You have got a point.
-
Originally posted by Army 21:
the china bus drivere strike today featured in australian news on television!!
they had the china bus drivers go off in taxi n chased by reporter,,,,one ran down steps covered his face...another focus on china worker at crane incident ...waa...new yellow shiny boots.think also got the opposition leader vincent widgeysa fighting for their rights.
The image of Singaporean employers and Singapore has been seen now like a place that is nice to come for a visit as tourists only but when foreigners come to Singapore to work, it would be working like a slave without any compassion by the employers. -
Originally posted by zulkifli mahmood:
It wouldn't affect Singapore so much if compare to the event should all the Malaysian workers go on strike against Singapore. That would really make Singapore employers and Singapore Government panicked because the Singapore economy would be greatly affected.
most cheena cannot speak english. reallyproblem. they gone wounldn't hurt us. shoudl reduce their numbers graduatly / -
2 China workers protesting on crane arrested
By Fann Sim | Yahoo! Newsroom – 20 hours agoBoth Chinese workers have been arrested for "unlawfully remaining at the place and intentionally causing alarm". (AFP Photo)
Two crane operators from mainland China who staged a protest at a construction site on Thursday have been arrested for unlawfully remaining at the place and intentionally causing alarm.
Zhu Gui Lei, 24, and Wu Xiao Lin, 47, stood on separate cranes to demand back wages before their return to China, AFP reported. Both worked at Zhong Jiang (Singapore) International Pte Ltd.
The police said in a statement that it received a call at about 6.30am requesting for assistance at a construction site near 31 Jurong Port Road.
Upon arrival, two men were seen sitting on top of two construction cranes, which were about 10 storeys high. It was subsequently established that they had an ongoing pay dispute with their employer, the police said.
The Police Crisis Negotiation Unit was activated to get the two men to come down to safety.
After more than four hours of negotiation, Zhu came down from the crane at 2.20pm. This was followed by Wu, at 3:30pm.
"They can be expected to face imprisonment and/or fine upon conviction," said the police in statement.
Ministry of Manpower (MOM) said in a separate statement that the two workers had previously approached MOM for help. Zhu first approached MOM in July last year to enquire how he and his friend could resign and return home. Zhu was then working for a different company.
On 5 Dec, Zhu approached MOM's customer relations officer at the MOM Services Centre together with Wu as they had tendered their resignations and planned to go home.
"They claimed they had outstanding salaries owed to them, howeever, the workers did not have the necessary documents to suport these claims," MOM said.
MOM officers asked them to return with the documents so that MOM could investigate and both workers agreed to do so.
MOM added that it will not hesitate to take action against employers who fail to pay their workers on time.
This is the second labour protest in a week in Singapore after over 170 bus drivers from SMRT went on strike. -
As per any foreign workers that are employed by Singapore employers in the construction industry, they are daily rated. I think for China foreign workers, they are being paid around $25 to $27 per day. Malaysian workers in construction industry are also daily rated, its around $27 to $28 per day. However, for any Malaysians who wish to work in the construction industry in Singapore, they must at least have a SPM certificate which is equivalent to Singapore G.C.E 'O' Level certificate or at least a welding certificate that they have successfully attained in Singapore. If the Malaysian workers have none of those certificate, they are not allowed to work in the construction industry at all. Whereas for China construction workers, they do not have to produce any educational certificate while the company applied for their work permits. The companies that employed China construction workers, they have to pay high monthly levy to the Singapore Government and prior to the China construction workers arrival to Singapore, the Singapore employers must secured a $5000 Security Bond if not the foreign workers from China would be refuse from entering Singapore. As for Malaysian construction workers, the Singapore employers do not have to secure any bonds when they work in Singapore but the companies have to pay quite a high monthly levy for employing Malaysian workers. In the recent years, many Singapore employers prefer to hire foreign workers who are not Malaysians due to the fact that they are not only cheap labour but its rather too far for them to run and return to their own country; and further they are bonded. Unlike Malaysian workers in Singapore, there are many cases when they are not happy with their management, they could simply run back into JB-Malaysia by bus.
-
Just for general information here. Quite a number of China construction workers are formerly soldiers from the People Republic Of China....maybe they are daring and courageous enough to show their dissatisfaction and disagreement due to their former ideology as being soldiers, to do or die kind of thing lols. I'm sure some of the SMRT bus drivers may have been soldiers too with the People Republic Of China.
