After it was reported in mainstream media that Fei Siong Food Management has said that the $600 stall inspection fee is optional, TOC went down to Ci Yuan Hawker Centre to talk to the hawkers today (10 Sep).

National Environment Agency (NEA) currently outsources the management of Ci Yuan Hawker Centre at Hougang to a middleman, Fei Siong Food Management – supposedly a “social enterprise” operator.

Speaking to MSM, Fei Siong’s group general manager Joe Sng clarified that the $600 inspection fee and $50 coin exchange fee are “optional”. He said, “We believe it’s some miscommunication from our team to hawkers.”

He explained that the $600 fee was introduced in July to address concerns by the management on food portions sold by hawkers. After complaints from residents about shrinking food portions, the management introduced the $600 quality control service to address this issue, he added.

TOC talked to some of the hawkers who, understandably, did not want their names to be quoted.

A Chinese-cooked food stall owner shared that she has to pay the $600 inspection fee. Surprisingly, she added that the management has already been charging an inspection fee since last year. It was $700 last year and this year, it was reduced to $600 for some reasons. She also shared that the $50 coin exchange fee is not optional and has to be paid whether the service is being used or not. Pointing at the malfunctioned money collection machine, she said, “if this was still working, we would have to pay for this as well.”

Another cooked-food stall told TOC that she was not aware that the inspection is optional. When told that the management had told mainstream news media that inspection fee is optional, she said, “If the contract writes that we have to pay, nothing much we can contest about.” This stall owner has assumed that the inspection fee is meant for hygiene inspection.

A nasi-lemak stall worker also said that it was never told to them that the inspection fee is optional, and that it was just listed in the contract as one of the fees which have to be paid in order to rent the stall.

A roasted-meat stall owner added that there was no choice for him as far as the inspection fee goes. This is because it was already stated in the contract given to him by the management. In other words, it’s either one signs the contract including the inspection fee as a whole or not signs at all.

But the roasted-meat hawker did say that regardless of the inspection fee, it is still somewhat cheaper than renting a stall in some privately-run coffeeshops. Then again, when one compares the hawker stalls at Ci Yuan with those run by NEA directly, it is definitely still cheaper for hawkers to operate at the NEA-managed hawker centres on the average.

Makansutra founder KF Seetoh wrote on this blog, “These hawkers in the new hawker centres (run by social enterprises) pay in total (with a laundry list of extra services and charges), an average of $4000, more than what it cost the highest bidder in Maxwell Hawker Centre – arguably the most popular hawker centre in Singapore – where it hovers between two to three thousand dollars a month in total.”

Interestingly, a Muslim food stall owner shared that he does not need to pay the $600 inspection fee. He told TOC that his stall was not charged as it is under a different scheme since he only came in Feb this year. According to him, he pays around $3-4k, with the utilities being a varying factor of the monthly expenses.

And for the stalls that pay the $600 inspection fee, they told TOC that they also pay around $3-4k after the inclusion of the inspection fee. This begs the question of whether the $600 is to offset the cheaper rentals charged by Fei Siong under a different scheme.

Then, it also appears that the inspection fees imposed by Fei Siong are not uniform. A drink stall staff shared that their stall had to pay $1000 a month while the rest of the stalls pay $600 a month for inspection. When asked why the difference, she only shook her head and said, “It is just stated in the contract, nothing much to say.”

Perhaps it takes more efforts for Fei Siong to inspect drinks than food?

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

Singapore leaders took to social media to express their condolences towards Mr Othman Bin Wok

Singapore leaders posted their condolences and tributes to one of the signatories…

港民发起“光复上水”,游行结束后爆发警民冲突

香港反送中持续了一个月,持续发动多次示威活动,直至港特首林郑月娥日前宣布修订《逃犯条例》“寿终正寝”。但抗争运动仍未停止。近日(13日),香港再次于新界北的上水、金钟与沙田,以“反水货客”主题的“光复上水”运动发起示威活动,游行活动和平进行,但却在游行活动结束后即爆发警民冲突。 据各大港媒报道,主办方称,游行期间有三万人参加游行,而 警方则表示按原计划路线参与的人数最高峰有4000人。 “光复上水”游行的主办方表明此次行动是“和理非”,呼吁所有自发活动需等大会宣布游行结束后才进行;而游行结束后现场气氛转趋紧张,大量示威者占据马路与警员对峙,期间更爆发激烈冲突。报道称,示威者在冲突爆发期间投掷雨伞等杂物,警方则挥动警棍与胡椒喷雾。 据《香港01》及《端传媒》报道,最初示威者对一名不明身份的挑衅者不作拘捕,但双方仍相对克制,其后有没有配戴委任证的警员截查年轻人,市民多次要求警察出示委任证不果,引起示威者不满 ,其后众人包围机动部门警察。 5:30左右,防暴警察抵达现场,而愈来愈多示威者聚集于新运路,新运路与智昌路变成「战场」,警员作驱赶。 双方分别以雨伞及警棍进攻,有示威者报称被硬物击中头部受伤流血,地上则留有大量血迹,伤者需暂时坐于地上,接受救护人员协助止血,警方不断施放胡椒喷雾驱赶示威者。 期间示威者开始占用新运路、智昌路交界以铁马、杂物设路障。 警员则在北区大会堂及九巴石湖墟车厂戒备。 警方在新运路及智昌路交界作出推进后,多名示威者及记者受伤,有人需要送院。 7:00后,示威者转战至龙琛路,该路以药房为主,不少店铺已全日停业,仅少数店家正在营业,示威者开始在药房的大闸门上喷上“反送中”与“光复上水”的字眼,…

Two female bus passengers taken to hospital after accident involving five vehicles along Compassvale Drive

Two female bus passengers were taken to the hospital after a road…