This is derived from a blog post from Transitional Eternity.
It has confirmed my suspicion all along that the workers and drivers in SMRT have been short-changed by the management/Directors by allocating vastly disproportionate sharing of the increase in profits over the years. Director has increased their own fees by a whopping 970% over 11 years while the workers and drivers were given a mere 63% increment. These are derived from the costings found in the annual reports.
We have been talking about RISING Income gap or disparity all these while and PAP government just act blur when their own GLCs under their charge are practicing such blatant Ultra-Capitalism of exploitation and unfair distribution of earnings.
Such practice of Ultra-Capitalism is totally unacceptable and unsustainable. It will be a key of social dis-stabilizer in the mid to long term.
Fruits of earnings of any cooperation should be fairly distributed among the workers, management/directors and the capitalists/investors. The percentage of increment should not vary too much else the income gap or disparity will be widen substantially over time. If this is not kept in check, the whole system may just collapse and chaos may reign.
Fruits of earnings of any cooperation should be fairly distributed among the workers, management/directors and the capitalists/investors. The percentage of increment should not vary too much else the income gap or disparity will be widen substantially over time. If this is not kept in check, the whole system may just collapse and chaos may reign.
Goh Meng Seng
Dear Mr Lui recognizes the need of a pay rise for our bus drivers, has asked commuters last Friday where ¡°where is that money coming from¡±[Here]after two weeks of deliberate hibernation and expects commuters to pay for the persistent mistakes of SMRT¡¯s poorly-maintained train tracks and exploitation of foreign labour at the expense of wage depression for local workers. His first appearance and golden words came after the dust for the SMRT bus drivers¡¯ strike saga has settled.
I spent my Saturday afternoon scouting for possible sources of that ¡°money¡± that our transport minister Lui Tuck Yew demanded. And easily found the pool of money in:
(1) The Directors¡¯ Fees
Steady growth in directors¡¯ fees between 2002 to 2012 and 2007 is the exceptional year which sees a 0.26 million drop in directors¡¯ fees. There are certainly more years of upward growth in directors¡¯ fees than in SMRT¡¯s net profits. By 2012, directors¡¯ fees have grown to awhopping 970%in a span of 11 years.
Contrasting the generosity of SMRT on its directors, the growth of staff costs (excluding directors) is amere 67%.While directors have seen their fees increased in several folds in the last decade, staff below the directorial level who constitutes the bulk of SMRT¡¯s labour force and where a big majority of these people are directly involved in SMRT¡¯s daily core business, sees little growth in their income.
Not belittling the role of SMRT directors play, however, staff who operate SMRT¡¯s business are neither of negligible importance either. Without these people, directors will be deemed redundant! It is no surprise to see SMRT¡¯s deliberate maneuver of low wages for its operational staff to drive away Singaporean workers and thus, giving way to the excuse of seeking overseas labour at acheaperprice.
When we compare directors¡¯ fees with staff costs, it is not difficult to notice that the percentage growth in the former outruns the latter. Directors¡¯ fees grow at adouble digit ratefor most years except for 2006, 2007 and 2011, indicting an above-inflation rate of growth for this group with a greater absolute amount than the wages of the majority of non-directorial staff. A 10% increase of a $60 000 fees would result in $12 000 in absolute terms.
Between 2004 and 2005 and 2008 itself,non-directorial staff sustained an actual fall in costs despite SMRT operating at a positive gain in thos
__________________
