The Workers’ Party youth wing president Nicole Seah recently visited the Bedok Food Centre at block 216 in Bedok after it reopened, having closed from September to late November for repair works. She interacted with residents and among the topics that were discussed were the funds used for the refurbishment of the hawker centre and a resident who lost her job due to alleged abuse at her workplace. 

“The hawker centre welcomed back many residents after a three-month renovation, and it was great to see the same snaking queues for stalls which have been around for decades. The redevelopment and rebuilding of hawker centres are funded by the government when the time is due,” said Seah.

Seah mentioned that one of her conversations with a resident was about who bears the cost of work done at the hawker centre. Is it the National Environment Agency (NEA), the Town Council or the Member of Parliament?

“Repair and redecoration works of hawker centres may be borne fully by NEA or the town council. It was a puzzling claim when we heard that the MPs fund the reparation of hawker centres from their own coffers, and the resident whom this was communicated to was similarly befuddled,” added the WP CEC member.

See also  Jamus Lim Shares Powerful Analogy in Support of Section 377A Repeal

In 2020, Andrew Low, NEA Director for Hawker Centres Division responded to a letter titled ‘Allow local hawkers a decent livelihood while providing affordable food options’ which was published by a media agency.

Parts of the reply include, “the Government fully funds the building programme of hawker centres, as well as the re-development of hawker centres when due. Repairs and redecoration works of hawker centres are typically carried out every five to seven years, with the costs also fully borne by NEA or respective Town Councils.”

“Stall rentals are not raised because of the costs of R&R works. Stallholders who are directly affected by these works and who are unable to operate their stalls due to the closure of the centres may be given rental remission for the duration of the works.”

Photo: Facebook screengrab / nicoleseah.wpsg

During the same visit at the hawker centre, she encountered a resident that teared up as she recounted an abusive supervisor who used the mop to vent his anger and was verbally abusive towards staff who were low-wage workers and could not afford to resign.

See also  MOM says FDWs should be given 3 meals a day, but many employers are not complying

“This individual was fortunate enough to leave the company and found another shift job. Mindful that there are always two sides to a story, I told her that we would be happy to help her file a written appeal to MOM as she was illiterate,” mentioned Seah.

“She declined and said that she was afraid of the potential consequences as she finds it difficult to land gainful employment. I was not able to ascertain at that stage if the anecdote could be substantiated further.”

Seah went on to add that it was a sombre reflection regardless that low-wage workers continue to be on the receiving end of a power imbalance in our workforce, and there needs to be more rights and safeguards in place to ensure their personal safety and dignity in the workplace.

In 2019, Leader of Opposition Pritam Singh filed a parliamentary question to ask the Minister for Manpower whether local or independent studies or surveys have been carried out on workplace bullying in Singapore in light of the findings of the inaugural Kantar Inclusion Index.

See also  Singapore saw 9 per cent more job openings in 2014 than in 2013

Then Minister for Manpower Josephine Teo gave a written reply, “Based on a Ministry of  Manpower survey conducted in 2018, 2.4% of Singapore’s resident labour force reported having personally experienced bullying or harassment in their workplace. The MOM survey’s definition of bullying and harassment was specific. It asked respondents to recall actual incidents where they were subjected to verbal abuse, threats or assault during the course of their work.”

The Minister said that Singapore takes a serious stance towards workplace bullying or harassment, against which we have stringent criminal laws.

For example, the sending of unwarranted lewd messages to co-workers with intent to cause harassment, alarm or distress, would be a criminal offence under the Protection from Harassment Act. The Police can investigate such cases. If workplace bullying amounts to criminal intimidation or involves physical violence, the Police can also take action under the Penal Code.

Individuals who face harassment at the workplace can call TAFEP at 6838 0969 or write to TAFEP for advice and assistance.