Untitled Document
    
    Contact Info Feedback Site Map
    
     
     
    I am @ Your Say » Blog Us Register  Login   12 Mar 2010    
      
banner_blogus.gif
Want to air your piece about issues that affect you? Meet fellow Singaporeans online at our blog! Choose from any of the blog categories and let your ideas flow. Come on now, blog us!

Disclaimer:  By using "Blog Us" on REACH, you are solely responsible for your conduct and any data, graphics, photos, profiles, audio and video clips, links that you submit, post and display under your display name. Content on the "Blog Us" is for your information only and may not be used, copied, reproduced, or used for any other purposes without the prior permission of the respective owners.

 Blog Minimize

Current Articles | Categories | Search | Syndication

Articles from Tiam Chai
16/07/2009
Fair Employment policy coverage for mature workers terminated in a Private limited company
By Tiam Chai @ 10:02 AM :: 732 Views :: 0 Comments :: General
I am a 50 yrs old Skilled worker in the Marine Industry for more than 12 yrs of experience. My last company, also dealing in Marine Industry, was a private, single owner company. After working for a year and half, he decided to teminate me. Reason given verbally was that the sister does not like me and that as she is his only sister, he had to look after her welfare. Officially, he informed me that there was nothing wrong with my work performances, working attitude with my other engineers, etc. so that will make out the termination letter as company downsized due to less work inflow.
Now, I was drawing a pay about 3K and my termination monetray compensation was initially 2 week pay in lieu of the 2 week notice and 1 month pay out of compassion that I will have a very difficult time at this time when current economic is very bleak. Even though I offer to take a pay cut and even a downgrade to technician pay, he refused simply because his sister is not coming to work as long as I am still in his employment.
The spate with her sister, which I believed started because I had numerous times reject the follwoing:-
1. Her offer of drinks and cakes due tea break time when I am around in the office.
2. Refusal to fetch her home after work as she stay very near my home. I had once fetch her home but end up accompanying her to buy her purchases and carry it for her up to her unit.

I had seek MOM and Tripartitate for unfair employment. Both government agencies had informed me that there is nothing they can do about this as first, his is a private owned company and he had follow accordingly to the basic rules set out by the Employment Act and although they (counter staff of MOM and the Tripartiate Agency) agreed with me that this is not quite right way to do there is nothing else they can do about it.

I just wish to stated that shouldn't it be time to review the Employment Act to plug this loop hole which private owner can take advantage of ? I understand that with my departure as due to "official version of reason", he is actually looking out for another Manymar worker to take over my place after maybe a period gap fo 2 to 3 months.

Employment Act covers unfair treatment of workers for various reasons of termination such as racial and sexual discrimination; poor treatment of worker's benefits and non payment of salaries, etc Is there one for code of conduct to cover cases like mine? even if it is poor performances or bad working attitude, I understand that there will also be a period of counselling taken for the worker concerned but in my case, it is simply because of "blood thicker than water" situation.
It had been almost 3 weeks and I just got a reply for another job but with more than a 30% percent cut in pay. Is this fair to me?

Can someone stand up for workers with cases as such like us?
 
      

      
        Copyright@ 2009 REACH. All rights reserved.
  Privacy Policy | Terms Of Use | Rate This Site 		Your Say | Talk Abuzz | Youth Vibes | Consultation   
News & Events | Resources | eTownHall | About Us | Home   		     
     Best viewed at 1024*768 resolution with IE 7.0 or FireFox 3.0