Infographic released by SMRT explaining the fatal accident along the East-West Line on 22 March (Source : SMRT).

Singapore Mass Rapid Transit (SMRT) Trains was fined S$400,000 on Tuesday (28 February) for safety lapses leading to an incident where two of its trainees were hit by an oncoming train last year.
The two trainees are Nasrulhudin Najumudin, 26, and Muhammad Asyraf Ahmad Buhari, 24, who had earlier joined SMRT in January 2016. They were undergoing on-the-job training when they were hit by an oncoming train. Permission to access the tracks was authorised.
There were 15 employees in the team who went on track to investigate a possible fault involving a signalling device on the tracks. Mr Lim Say Heng, 47, who was the first in line, managed to escape on time when the train approached. However, Nasrulhudin and Asyraf, who were on the second and third in line failed to react on time.
Although stating that the staff followed its standard procedure at the beginning, SMRT later admitted after the accident that maintenance staff had not followed safety procedures.
SMRT was charged under Section 12 of the Workplace Safety and Health Act.
The Act states that it is the duty of every employer to take measures necessary to ensure the safety and health of employees at work so far as is reasonably practicable.
The charge sheet wrote that the company had failed to ensure that its employees complied with approved operating procedures when accessing the track, as well as the procedures practised by staff that day to access the tracks passed safety audits, were documented and disseminated.
Deputy Public Prosecutor Anandan Bala stated during the Court today that these were “systemic and prolonged” breaches, noting that this is not a one-off incident.
He stressed that the breach was committed by workmen on the ground and station managers with approval from Operations Control Centre.
The prosecution said that even though SMRT had taken remedial measures post-incident, these measures are not difficult to implement and should have been in place years ago.
Representing the rail operator, Senior Counsel Andre Maniam, argued that the actions taken on the ground were not approved or authorised by SMRT senior management.
District Judge Chay Yuen Fatt said that it was highly disconcerting that the failures were systemic and had occurred on many levels in delivering the sentences.
He stressed that the procedures on the ground had evolved over time in a “haphazard fashion” despite safety protocols in place.
He said that employees were left to adopt whatever practice they deemed convenient,saying, “Official safety protocols on paper were either unknown to employees or completely disregarded.”
Two others have also been charged.
Teo Wee Kiat, 40, one of SMRT’s directors, was also charged under Section 48 (1) of the same Act. The Act states that should an offence be committed by a corporate body, an officer of this body shall be guilty of the offence and be liable to be punished. Teo faces a fine of up to $200,000 and/or a jail term of up to two years
While, Mr Lim was charged with causing death by a negligent act under the Penal Code. He is the officer-in-charge of the work party which was inspecting the tracks on the day of the fatal accident.
According to the charge sheet, he failed to ensure that the necessary safety measures were in place to make sure trains do not enter the train track while they were there. He faces a jail term of up to two years, a fine, or both, if found guilty.
Lim was dismissed last September due to the accident, according to Channel News Asia. On September, the public transport operator also dismissed two of its staff including the train driver, Rahmat Mohd, 49.
The National Transport Workers’ Union Executive Secretary Melvin Yong said the union would support Mr Lim and his family and ensure that he was fairly represented.

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

AGO: MOM purchases 432k computer system and left it unused

In its audit report for Financial Year 2015/2016 published on 26 July,…

Remuneration packages given to top managements at GIC and Temasek not interfered by the Government – Lawrence Wong

On Wednesday (8 May), Second Finance Minister Lawrence Wong said in Parliament…

社论:议员该向拍短片的热心民众致谢

上周,一名林姓民众上载短片,揭露一名中年清洁工R先生,居住在锦茂区19A座组屋后垃圾处理站。正因为他拍摄的短片引起民众关注和议论,也使该区负责议员迪舒沙和建屋发展局注意到问题,立即为R先生安排临时住所,摆脱近两年住在不卫生环境的生活。 荷兰-武吉知马集选区议员迪舒沙,后来在个人脸书贴文,解释R先生在一年前已接洽建屋局申请租用组屋。近数周来,自己和服务团队也见了R先生不下数次。除了帮R先生申请社区财务援助,也敦促该区市镇会需继续聘请R先生,确保后者有稳定收入。 不过,迪舒沙却认为,林姓民众拍摄的影片反映“不全面”的事实,其选区团队在背后默默耕耘社区工作,但是“往往上载一段视频很简单就能引起负面情绪,却不能反映事实全貌。”他不忘指出,R先生也透露,自己不清楚有关短片的拍摄目的。 在帖文中,迪舒沙并没有感谢因为关心老伯身体状况而录影的林姓民众,也没有感谢广传短片的社交媒体平台。贴文内容主要作出回应,强调本身和服务团队并没有忽略对其选区弱势群体的关注。 人手一机  人人可记录社区发生大小事 在迪舒沙抱怨上载一段短片很容易引起负面情绪,但他似乎也没考量到,如今人手一机,任何社区民众看到一些引起注意的事物,可能情不自禁“鸡婆“一点去关心一下。自然而然,就会掏出手机录影。如今,摄影和记录,已经不是记者的专项,任何老百姓只要有手机,都成为社区故事乃至历史见证的一部分。 录短片的民众,或许也和你我一样,只不过他在放工回家时,可能多注意下这名在垃圾站进出的老伯,趋前和老伯”八卦“一下,一问之下才知不得了,老伯在垃圾站住了两年!于是林姓民众脑中想到的,可能是帮老伯拍个短片,再上载到脸书,看看能不能引起热心人士乃至有关当局的注意,来帮帮这老伯。 但是,相比下民众又不是专业记者,他们只是当下路过,动了恻隐之心,路见不平拔刀相助,就拿起手机记录下他们认为值得关注的事。他们也不懂得如何向记者一样,知道可以联系哪些相关政府部门去求证事实。短片很快上载出街,但是其他民众怎么诠释这短片,是林姓民众没办法控制的。 事件广传  当局立即回应 也许,林姓民众帮老伯拍短片,也是出于善意,希望有更多人关心,也许有能力的人可以为他伸出援手。建屋局和议员也很快作出回应,马上告知公众已经为R先生做了什么,至少到最后,民众对于当局如何处理R先生的案例,是知情的。…