by: Ghui/

Joachim Gay Chao Hui, husband of the infamous Rachelle Ann Beguai is currently being investigated by the Ministry of Education (MOE) for making “insensitive” comments against Singaporeans through his wife’s Facebook account. MOE has said through a spokesman that it “takes a serious view of Gay’s reported actions and statements on the internet”. They are currently investigating the case and will take appropriate disciplinary action against him.

MOE’s spokesman further stated that MOE expects its teachers to conduct themselves in a manner that upholds the high standing of the profession, both in a personal and professional capacity” and that the same expectations apply to the use of online platforms. I applaud the speed at which MOE has responded to the issue and if at the end of the investigations, MOE concludes that Gay had indeed made those comments and that the comments did contravene his terms of employment, they should have recourse to take whatever disciplinary actions necessary in accordance with their employment guidelines and his employment contract.

However, I would like to draw attention to another incident whereby teachers have made a similar faux pas.

Recently, some teachers came under fire for making indiscreet comments and making fun of a student on Facebook.

While the comments were seemingly innocuous, parents who have seen the comments have remarked that “it was obvious who the teachers were talking about”. While the teachers were ostensibly having a chat about work between colleagues,they should have been mindful of the fact that the chat was on a relatively public forum and that all of their “friends” would have been able to view the contents of that chat.

Some of the teachers were friends with their students and these students would in turn have known who they were discussing (see HERE). Parents who have been notified of the contents of the “chat” have raised concerns that this could lead to bullying.

Whether we like it or not, bullying does occur in schools. It may not be possible to eradicate its presence completely but measures can certainly be taken to alleviate it. The hazards of “chats” such as these would arguably hamper the school’s efforts to clamp down on bullying. One parent involved in the saga has remarked: “teachers are supposed to be inculcating values in our children, and here they are showing themselves to be doing the exact opposite.”

If Gay is to be investigated by MOE, it would only be fair if these teachers also face the same investigation. After all, both incidents involve teachers allegedly engaging in inappropriate discussions on Facebook. In fact, I would argue that what these teachers have done has far more serious repercussions than what Gay has allegedly done.

The teachers were talking about a specific individual who was easily identifiable while Gay was making disparaging remarks at Singaporeans in general. While Gay insulted our pride collectively, the teachers have caused immense heartache to the student they were talking about . They would also have caused undue stress on his parents.

When contacted, the boy’s father,who was trained as a psychologist and is actively involved in the school as a parent volunteer, said that he was “shocked” and “upset”by the incident.

These teachers could also have unwittingly incited other pupils into bullying this pupil! After all, if the teachers do not respect him, why should the other students?

In fact, the principal of South View Primary School, Jenny Yeo, noted that teachers needed to be careful when using social media, especially since students looked to them as role models.

So while I fully understand why Singaporeans are angry with Gay, I would urge people to also look at the bigger picture and be fair. If the issue is with teachers setting good examples to students, then these teachers should face the same consequences as Gay.

If the issue is with causing harm to Singaporeans, then these teachers have caused more harm because they have actually identified an individual to be picked on. Gay on the other hand, made derogatory statements against a mass of Singaporeans and no individual can be singled out and picked on as a result of his remarks.

In comparing these two cases, I would urge MOE to be consistent in meting out punishment and please, not a trial by media.


Picture credit: linkway88

Subscribe
Notify of
0 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
You May Also Like

新加坡特色匮乏的环球小姐“国服”

第67届环球小姐大决赛,将再本月17日于谈过曼谷举行。我国佳丽扎哈卡曼在上周四向媒体展示出赛“国服”时,却令大多数国人和网民震惊:蓝色礼服的半圆形群面上,裙底印有我国著名地标滨海湾花园、金沙等,但是最引人注目的,莫过于居中两只握着的手,个别印有美国和朝鲜国旗。 已连续三年设计“国服”的设计师末卡欣(Moe Kasim)解释,这件以“川金会”为主题的服装,旨在表达和平的概念。 在接受《亚洲新闻台》的访谈中,扎哈卡曼表示本身并未全程参与“国服”的设计,惟相信设计师透过今年中在我国成功举行的“川金会”,象征我国对促进和平的立场。 以下是设计师卡欣和佳丽扎哈合照: https://www.instagram.com/p/BqZiCjTnOhs/?utm_source=ig_web_button_share_sheet ”国服“出炉  网民惹议网络炸开锅 小编刚看到新闻,也是久久不能自己…….。左看右看,中间大剌剌的美朝握手图案太过吸睛,实在难以找到所谓的新加坡特色。 网民Clarice就直言,”国服“根本就无法带出新加坡特色,以”川金会“来代表国家,只会迎来他人耻笑,因为在象征佳丽祖国的”国服“,不该出现他国的旗帜。 他对佳丽扎哈必须穿着这样的”国服“出赛感到同情。 设计师盧緯豪就指出,川金会即便是我国在今年的成就之一,但还有更多更具代表性的新加坡地文化,来凸显我国作为独立、独一无二的国家特色。…

Hong Kong questions families of wanted activists: police source

Hong Kong national security police detained four people, including Dennis Kwok’s brother, accused of breaching national security. Eight fugitives with bounties on their heads face similar charges.

Thai parliament to hold another PM vote after reformist candidate falls short

Thailand’s parliament will hold a second vote for the new prime minister on 19 July after pro-royalist lawmakers blocked frontrunner Pita Limjaroenrat’s bid.

【选举】前进党西海岸竞选团队 被要求撤下50海报

前进党西海岸竞选团队昨晚(2日)发文称,该党被西海岸市镇会要求撤下50幅海报。 “数小时的汗水付诸东流,疑惑的是为何行动党的海报没有受影响。” 该党今早8时14分更新资讯,指他们联系选举局,并将更新事件进展。前进党表示,不管前方阻碍,前进党会继续为民奋斗。 前进党秘书长陈清木医生亲自领军,偕同梁文辉、邱宝忠、潘群勤和罗格纳登(Nadarajah Loganathan)等人攻打西海岸,对垒行动党两位部长易华仁、李智陞率领的团队。