TR EMERITUS

My name is Chua Qwong Meng and I am currently involved with a suit that affects all SBS Transit bus drivers. There are now 13 drivers in total in this suit and we had to commence this suit as we needed the courts to listen to our case because there were too many important points which the law had to address about the Employment Act. It would affect not just all current and future bus drivers, but we feel it would affect all employees under the Act in any sector. We are seeking to raise funds for our matter to pay for the legal fees which till now have been represented on a pro-bono basis. Background of Our Legal Matter Since the day we commenced the first group of employment suits against SBS Transit in September 2019. More bus drivers joined in our action and ended up with 13 of us bus drivers as plaintiffs, my lawyer and his team has had to study a huge number of documents for the 13 of us, including calculating the formula for overtime pay and work hours, as well as organising the workers and engaging experts in employment law. The matter got harder when we learned that SBS Transit hired one of the top lawyers in Singapore to defend themselves against our action and referred the matter to the Industrial Arbitration Court. In November 2019, the Industrial Arbitration Court ruled that SBS Transit’s collective agreements did not breach the Employment Act. Our lawyers had to make a judicial review application to challenge decision of the IAC as it may potentially affect our suits. This was a massive action as even the Attorney-General applied to intervene in the matter and took up quite a number of our lawyer’s time and resources. Subsequently, we attempted to settle the employment suits out of court through mediation. A lot of research and strategic work had to be done and all 13 of us turned up for the mediation. Sadly, the attempt to reach a settlement failed, and we moved on to the next step of preparing for the trial proper. Pro-Bono Representation At That Point Since March 2020, after the outbreak of COVID-19 in Singapore became more severe, several of our employment contracts had been terminated; and as some of us are Malaysians, it became difficult for us to keep up with paying the instalments of the legal fees to our lawyer Mr. M. Ravi on time. Thankfully, Mr. Ravi never gave up and continued with our representation on a pro-bono basis at that point. When the trial was set in May 2021, Mr. Ravi and we decided to take out an application to have the trial heard in the High Court instead of the State Courts. Once again, a lot of time and effort had been put in on this application which the lawyers from SBS Transit strongly resisted, but ultimately, the Honourable Judge ruled in our favour and decided that the trial would be better heard in the High Court as the case raises “important questions of law” and may be a “test case”. The case against SBS Transit is as important to everyone in the employment sector of Singapore as it is to me. As the Honourable Judge said when allowing our applications to have the employment suit heard in the High Court, there are important questions of law which affect not only myself, but also a larger group of employees, including those in the public transport sector who may potentially fall within the definition of employees “in any industrial undertaking essential to the economy of Singapore”. This case will have potential impact on how employment contracts are to be structured in terms of rest days, calculating overtime pay and determining work hours. Basis For Crowdfunding Funds After careful thinking, discussing with the other bus drivers and with the support of my family and friends, we have decided to crowdfund to help us with the continuance of this case in the High Court and even further to the Court of Appeal if needed. It is important that the rights of workers in Singapore be properly considered. If we call ourselves a first world country, we need to review our laws to see if our workers are looked after. It is important for them, and it is important for the economy. We must see this journey through. The trial is now going to being heard in the High Court which would require a lot of financial resources to continue the fight. We cannot expect our lawyer and his team at K. K. Cheng Law LLC to continue bearing all the costs of this suit especially with regard to the numerous extraneous filing and disbursement fees. Whilst we are certain that Mr Ravi will give us highly discounted fees for the trial, we want to thank him, and his team at K. K. Cheng Law LLC but we cannot expect them to continue this journey with us not being paid. We the 13 drivers are fighting for fairness so we must also be fair to our legal team too. Please therefore help us raise some money. We are simple men and we do not know much about the legal system or about challenging a big organisation like SBS Transit. We however know about the rights of hardworking workers like ourselves who are trying to live and feed our families. This case, we believe, is an opportunity to review the Employment Act and to ensure that it protects us and is fair. This suit will not just be about myself but also about the other 12 bus drivers' suits which is pending the outcome of my suit. It is also a suit which affects all the SBS Transit Drivers and other workers in situations like ourselves. I also have the mandate to raise this amount for the other 12 bus drivers' suits for which Mr Ravi is also acting for. We are trying to raise $90,000 to help with the High Court trial which might head up to the Court of Appeal. There is too much at stake to stop here now. Please donate however much you can so that we can reach this target. Thank you all for your very kind support. More information on the crowdfunding is available here: [LINK] [LINK]   To make a donation, please click here.        Read More →

"Slowest growth" is a popular word our MSM likes to use when it concerns Singaporeans. I noticed they have use the same words again and again. For example, when it applies to their beloved foreign talent, they can use, "Slowest growth of foreign PMETS". Singapore has released population statistics, it is revealed by Mr Leong, the first man to be sued by his own leader for sharing FB article that alarming 38% of Singapore population are foreigners. The most alarming is when you add in the new citizens they have converted in the last thirty years, the Singaporean core is obviously below 50%. Every year, the government converts about 20,000 new citizens, many foreigners into PRs and import more foreigners into this tiny island. This explains why the forests are being hacked, land still being reclaimed and more and more BTOs are being built. They are not catering new migrants and population growth. They said there is no 10M plan but has refused to commit to any number and deflected all the questions and even POFMA those who suggested the number. So there is no 10M, how about 9.9M? 8.9M? or 10.9M? If we are converting foreigners into new citizens at 20,000 and importing 100,000 foreigners a year, we will reach 10M before 2050 using extrapolation theory. The Singapore core is seriously diluted with massive conversion of foreigners into locals, PRs and new citizens. This explains why more and more jobs are going to foreigners while many locals are starting to be discriminated by the new migrants. We have alarming numbers of ex Local PMETs that have been forced out of work or finding no job doing PHV and food delivery, some are in their early 30s. Singapore does not have jobs for so many unlike Dubai, locals are being sacrificed to make way for new migrants. Now with the Singaporean core being reduced to minority, the repercussion will be seen on the jobs and also higher and higher cost of living. The new migrants will continue to vote for the PAPPY, believing they should thank them for their VIP route to citizenship and lunches given to them on a silver platter. Remember Ramesh the Uptron graduate who owns 2 condos and makes $60,000 a month, also became a new citizen. However, when new citizen become old citizen, they become part of the boiling pot which contains the local frogs. The only one who gains from the equation is the party, they pay themselves handsomely and rewards themselves with GDP growth and supported by new migrants and stupid locals who cant think. God bless the dafts. VTO 2024 .  Read More →

Photo: Today It’s now been made official that Parti Liyani, the Indonesian maid who had been acquitted of theft by her former employer, the former Chairman of Changi Airport, Mr. Liew Mun Leong, will not be getting any compensation for the pain that she had to endure. The high court has dismissed her claim against the Attorney General’s Chambers (AGC) for compensation. The full report can be found at: [LINK] The Judge, Justice Chan Seng Onn, who had famously acquitted Ms. Liyani of theft last year, noted that she had failed to meet “the "high threshold" for proving that the prosecution was frivolous or vexatious.” Justice Chan, argued that the public prospectors would have reviewed the evidence and found that there were significant grounds to bring the matter to court and could not be swayed by hindsight. I am not a legal expert so I shall leave the technicalities of the findings to the better qualified. However, as a layman observing the course of justice, it would appear that the message is quite clear – Ms. Liyani was very lucky to get acquitted and the best thing she can do is to quit while she’s ahead. If last year’s acquittal was a victory for justice, who is the dismissal for compensation against the AGC a victory for? Well, the most obvious answer is that this is probably a victory for conspiracy theorist. One can only ask, how it was that the very same judge who found that evidence against Ms. Liyani was so lacking that it had to thrown out but a year later, that very same judge now found that the prosecutors who brought the case must have found enough to justify sending it to court. Another question that the conspiracy theorist will undoubtedly have a field day would be on the question of what went wrong. When Ms. Liyani was acquitted last year, our Minister of Home Affairs and Justice (In the Singapore Context, writing and enforcing the laws is somehow not a conflict of interest) made some comments about how “Something had gone wrong.” The cynics at that point asked “What exactly went wrong?” Was it the obvious “miscarriage of justice” or was it the fact that the wrong person won the court case? So, if Mr. Shanmugam was talking about the later, the question now is, did someone take Justice Chan out for a cup of coffee and had a quiet word with him about getting things right? The set back in Ms. Liyani’s quest for justice has only given conspiracy theorist plenty to talk about. The government should make an effort to get some clarity in its communication if it is to prove that we really are a society ruled by laws.   ang Li *Although I’ve been based mainly in Singapore for nearly two decades, I’ve had the privilege of being able meet people who have crossed borders and cultures. I’ve befriended ministers and ambassadors and worked on projects involving a former head of state. Yet, at the same time, I’ve had the privilege of befriending migrant labourers and former convicts. All of them have a story to tell. All of them add to the fabric of life. I hope to express the stories that inspire us to create life as it should be.      Read More →