injuries from escalator
Microfilm of escalator mishap report by The Straits Times on 14 May 2003

On 13 May 2003, an escalator accident involving 20 over people took place at City Hall MRT station. The escalator had suddenly reversed direction and threw commuters off balance, causing injuries to a few.

“SMRT never publicly revealed the cause. It was officially revealed to us staff as being due to the main drive chain sprocket key shearing off due to galvanic corrosion.” said Jack (not his real name)

Speaking on the case, “That was this asshole’s fault. The bastard implemented the “Keep left on the escalator” despite objections from myself and a few others that this will cause uneven wear resulting in premature equipment failure.”

Jack is the engineer who shared his resignation letter with The Online Citizen (TOC) and the alleged cover-ups by the SMRT management on maintenance issues.

He pointed out this particular incident at Cityhall MRT station to TOC, saying to be a classic example of the issues with SMRT’s maintenance system.

“True enough, the step chain, the mechanism that moves the steps all became elongated on one side. This forced us to overtension one side to ensure that the steps remained straight. This caused severe loading and shear stress on the gear box. End result, the sprocket drive key sheared off, causing the escalator to slip backwards by gravity. The report officially stated corrosion, but it was a cover-up.”

Jack added that increased breakdowns of escalators over the years was a likely resultant of the courtesy campaign to keep left on escalators by SMRT since 2002.

“Overhauls themselves are routine. However, the keep left policy has caused an upsurge in overhauls, including escalators that were just overhauled a few years earlier.”

“That’s because LTA has planned the direction of the escalator direction based upon passenger loading. Remember, in the city area, morning peak most are moving up out of the stations to go to work while in the evening, most are moving down. This plan was approved by Ong Teng Cheong himself after careful study, back when the government was still honest and competent.”

According to an article on Escalator World, “Authoritative policies and signage such as “Stand on the right” do not encourage uniform wear in the chains over the width of the machine, because one chain is subjected to a higher force and more wear than the other.”

Jack said that after this particular incident, all the gearboxes were replaced by new ones with main drive chain sprockets molded in one piece to the drive shaft so that it cannot shear off. However, a few years later, the same thing happened in Orchard station.

“The gears within were all smashed up. Otis, the manufacturer, said they had never seen anything like this before and couldn’t explain what caused it. This does strongly suggest that we staff were right that the City Hall accident was caused by uneven loading causing the key to shear off rather than corrosion since the Orc gearbox was sealed up.” said Jack.

For subways in Hong Kong and Taiwan,  the keep left policy works because the escalator rotates direction to even out the wear and tear and also that the escalators are shorter in length.

Jack’s recommendation to the SMRT, “Abolish it (keep left courtesy campaign) entirely, then carry out thorough inspections to determine scale & extent of damage to the escalators.”

When former President, Ong Teng Cheong proposed the MRT system that consist only the East-West Line and North-South Line, the Then-Finance Minister, and current President, Tony Tan remarked that it was foolish to build the MRT system and objected to the proposal. Therefore in order to have the project going and budget to be approved, the scale of the MRT system was largely reduced, along with the carrying capacity.

Over the years, Singapore’s population has been on a sharp increase, and today, the figure is at a number that is way beyond the population the MRT system was originally designed for.

Jack added that in 2004, the top management of SMRT was very responsible. Only the manager he was under was working under had issues.

In his resignation letter addressed to the then-director of Electro-Mechanical Services and Vice-President of Engineering on 10 September 2004, he wrote,

“I have compiled here a few examples of the problems plaguing EPL, problems that I believe have led to two other long-serving Assistant Engineers, XXX and XXX to resign before me. I have tried hard to change the system from within by raising issues to the EPL management that I think are important and should be looked into urgently, and I have tried to offer concrete suggestions on how to deal with some of these problems, but it appears to me that many of these problems were not, and are not, being dealt with seriously, if at all.

The apparent lack of interest in resolving problems by the EPL management have led to a serious fall in staff morale, with the inevitable drop in staff discipline as well, for verbal and even written letters of warning have been issued widely to many of the men. There also appears to be no consistency to the enforcement of disciplinary standard, for warning letters have been issued to some men for certain incidents, while no disciplinary action has been taken against some other staff for incidents of a similar nature. Orders are often issued verbally, with no follow-up memo, so that it becomes difficult for a staff member to check and clarify on any order he does not quite understand.

Often, when something goes wrong, the men have no way to defend themselves as there is no documentary evidence to back up their assertions.

We have even been ordered to alter reports to suit the EPL management’s view.

As the conditions that the EPL rank and file staff have to work under, it is no surprise that there have been so many resignations as the conditions I have outlined in the preceding few lines make it difficult for us to continue working here.

When asked about the alteration of reports and mismanagement, he said that his manager was, unfortunately, the newly appointed Chief Executive Officer’s blue-eyed boy. So despite his mismanagement on maintenance, she kept promoting him until he reached a position to mess up the entire company.

To show just how strongly he feel on the matter, Jack profess, “if the company decides to press criminal charges against him (the maintenance manager) I’ll identify myself and testify against him.”

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

64-year-old man related to Geylang homicide, arrested and to be charged on Friday

In a statement on Thursday (July 21), the police announced that the…

内容涉复述李玮玲指控总理要求本社撤文 媒体人质问弟妹畅所欲言其他人却不行?

昨日(9月1日),李总理新闻秘书张俪霖,代表总理向本社总编许渊臣发函,指本社英语站在8月15日刊登的一篇评论,复述针对总理的不实指控,要求本社撤下并在三日内道歉。 张俪霖指上述评论涉及重复总理妹妹李玮玲,在此前作出的指控,指其已故父亲李光耀曾受到哥哥李显龙的误导,误以为欧思礼38号故居已经获政府宪报为文化遗产,故此要保留遗嘱中要求拆除故居的指示是徒劳的。 张俪霖驳斥上述指控毫无根据,也解释2017年7月,总理已在国会作出充分解释,反驳其弟妹的指控。总理重申李光耀个人遗嘱要求在他百年后拆除欧思礼38号故居。 然而,在听取内阁一致认为故居不应被拆除的意见后,李光耀最终接受政府有可能出于公共利益而保留该产业,因此愿意灵活处理和考虑拆屋以外的选项。 此外,张俪霖也反驳,李光耀自2011年起就没有在任何一份遗嘱中,将李总理列为遗嘱执行人和受托人。 她续称,上述文章的指控具诽谤行,总理选择不起诉弟妹,不代表容许他人复述和散播这些指控。 信函称总理限定本社英语站在三天内需撤下上述评论,并刊登道歉启事以及承诺不再刊载有关指控,否则总理“别无选择,只能委律师行使法律权益”。 本社英语站已在昨晚撤下上述誌期8月15日的评论文章,惟暂未针对总理公署的要求,作出任何回应。 对于总理公署再对本社抛下重磅弹,也有许多读者、社运分子表达关注,其中范国瀚就在个人脸书揶揄,“总理又在起诉网络批评声音”。 至于资深媒体人兼《海峡时报》前副总编辑默乐(Bertha Henson)则质问,总理选择不起诉弟妹,但是不容许他人复述、散播他们的指控,难道意味着总理的弟妹可以畅所欲言,但是其他人如果重复他们的言论就不可以?“法律是这样运作的么?” 人权律师、前政治拘留者张素兰则好奇询问:如果网络公民请总理弟妹也参与诉讼?恐怕只有总理和他的弟妹才知道真相。…

Australia’s Minister for Foreign Affairs Mrs Julie Bishop is in Singapore for a two-day visit

Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA) has announced that Australia’s Minister for Foreign…

后知后觉!洪维能当九年议员才惊觉樟宜商业园充斥外国人

西海岸集选区人民行动党议员洪维能,周一在国会上称,在走访樟宜商业园后,在那里感受到,明明身在自己国土,“却恍若异客”。   他形容自己在走入樟宜商业园时,发现身边都是穿着“光鲜亮丽“的人们,而且这些人显然是外国人,对着他说外语。   “我第一次感觉到,身在自己的国家,自己却像外国人一样”,他指出。   他也描述,自己曾与某德国公司的子公司高层共进午餐,该名高阶主管为30多岁的法国人。   该名高阶主管就向他透露,如今的法国因为高失业率所以很难找到优渥的工作。这不仅仅是个人观点,而是所有外国人也认同的观点,即新加坡对他们而言是能够得到好工作的地方。   在听完此番言论后,洪维能认为,如果换成是本地人,相信也能够胜任这些外国人的工作。他强调,新加坡核心劳动力应该遍布所有领域,而并非只是在金融行业。  …