Food guru KF Seetoh from Makansutra wrote an open letter to Senior Minister of State Dr Amy Khor on Tuesday (9 Oct) imploring her to preserve Singapore’s public hawker centres. In essence, Mr Seetoh is against the government appointing a 3rd-party, the so-called “social enterprise” operator, to run publicly funded hawker centres.

In his letter, Mr Seetoh also shared more unfair practices adopted by some of the Social Enterprise Hawker Centre (SEHC) operators against hawkers.

In particular, he highlighted some of the high-handed tactics adopted by one SEHC operator after going through the agreement between the operator and a hawker. The operator would penalize the hawker if the hawker quit his stall half-way, making him pay the remaining months of rent and fees until a new tenant, subjected to the approval of the operator, is found.

The one-sided contract also stated that the operator is entitled to “at any time” and “from time to time” increase stall rentals and ancillary charges. There is little the hawker can do once he signs the agreement.

SEHC operator belongs to Koufu owned by Pasir Ris-Punggol GRC grassroots leader Pang Lim

Yesterday (11 Oct), Todayonline reported that the SEHC involved is actually the new Jurong West Hawker Centre, run by Hawker Management Pte Ltd, a subsidiary of Koufu Group. Koufu in fact, just went public recently in Jul this year. Koufu is founded by Mr Pang Lim (PBM), a grassroots leader at Pasir Ris-Punggol GRC. He is the Vice-Chairman of Punggol 21 CC Building Fund Committee as well as Patron of Punggol North CCC and Punggol 21 CCMC.

Todayonline also reported other dubious tactics employed by the Koufu’s subsidiary, forcing the hawkers to subsidize the tray-return monies. It was reported that hawkers at Jurong West Hawker Centre are the ones paying for patrons to return their trays. In other words, unlike other hawker centres where the patrons would pay a small deposit per tray and get their refunds when they return the trays, the patrons at Jurong West Hawker Centre do not pay for the trays. When they return the trays, they will get $0.20 for each tray. Koufu then charges the hawkers accordingly.

The hawkers said sometimes they even had arguments with patrons over trays due to the tray returning system imposed by Koufu. For example, if a customer uses three trays for three dishes that could be placed on one tray, the stallholder has to fork out 60 cents in total, a hawker pointed out.

One hawker also told Todayonline that they had to pay up to $900 a month for tray charges, on top of the monthly rental and the ancillary charges imposed by Koufu. He gave a breakdown of the costs:

Rent – $2,140
Dish washing – $1,100
Cash machine rental – $300
Tray return – $900
Service fee – $250
Total: $4,690

Furthermore, according to Mr Seetoh, Koufu’s subsidairy would also charge hawkers for contract drafts whenever it updates management terms in the agreement.

Hawkers launch petition but NEA says hawkers aware of charges before signing agreement

Feeling the pinch, some hawkers at Jurong West Hawker Centre have petitioned the National Environment Agency (NEA) for the operator to remove the fee of 20 cents for each returned tray.

The NEA said that it has received “feedback” from some stallholders at Jurong West Hawker Centre. Stallholders were “aware of the charges involved before signing the (tenancy) agreement” with Hawker Management, said a spokesperson from NEA.

The agency has asked Hawker Management to work with the stallholders to address any concerns on this matter. It added that effective tray-return systems make the cleaning of tables easier and faster, which is beneficial to both customers and stallholders.

In the contract, indeed, it is stated that stallholders must take part in the “tray return with incentive system implemented by the landlord”, where the tenant “shall pay S$0.20 / tray issued to the tray cleaning contractor at the point of issuance”:

Koufu’s subsidiary, in reply to Todayonline, said the tray return system was a joint effort by stallholders and the management.

“The initiative was implemented to achieve two objectives — to collectively encourage customers to return their used trays and thereby creating a cleaner and more comfortable environment; and to increase productivity within the hawker centre and provide more affordable food options for the community,” it added.

NEA said it is looking into the matter.

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

竞选期间坊间选民积极反映观点 符策涫乐见狮城政治新时代

工人党党魁毕丹星和林瑞莲国会助理符策涫,个别在脸书分享与选民们的互动,例如毕丹星称,工人党才更应该百倍地向选民致谢,也感谢选民们十年来都热情好客。 毕丹星是在昨日贴文提及,一些选民不满,为何此次工人党团队胜选后没有乘罗厘向选民谢票,他也解释基于当前对疫情管控,选举局也不允许各政党的这种谢票方式。 选民告诉他“我们只想感谢工人党”,然而毕丹星分享,在他的想法,工人党才更应该百倍地向选民们致谢。 他也有感而发,2011年第一次当该区议员时,还不知道选民会如何待他,但从那时候开始,选民们都很热情好客。十年以来也认识了近邻的友诺士居民,看着他们成长变化,或是在巴刹遇到他们。 司机摇下车窗为工人党打气 至于符策涫则分享竞选期与选民们的互动,包括有时等交通灯过马路,会有司机鸣笛,让他误以为交通灯已经转绿了,但司机们则摇下车窗高喊“工人党”,给工人党团队打气。 他说在巴士上也常遇到民众询问工人党在一些议题上的议题和看法;走在街上民众也会主动讨论,与他们相关的议题和孩子们的问题,“对于我们如何形塑国家未来,我们有许多交心的讨论,建设一个对国人有益的机制。” 曾在选举上阵东海岸集选区的符策涫认为,这显示新加坡政治的新时代,我们如何应对逆境、接纳新的议题是很重要的,国人也不再接受维持现状,他们更愿意发表意见和采取行动。 他相信8月24日召开国会将是新的里程碑,10位工人党议员和两位非选区议员,形成独立以来最强大的替代阵营,而工人党也会继续参与激烈辩论和审查政府政策。 他也指出,实则工人党已提出许多替代政策包括冗员保险、最低薪金制和减少班级规模以提升学习效率等。 符策涫坦言,要挑战现任执掌公共职务者,形同攀越大山,但工人党收集来自基层的想法,并且愿意和勇敢站出来的志愿者们,一起为更好的政策和未来群策群力。所以“没有不可能的任务”。

LTA launches taxi app to locate taxis and broadcast location for street pick ups

Land Transport Authority (LTA) has just launched its own smartphone app, “Taxi-Taxi@SG”…

冀望减少家庭负担 单亲妈妈五年申请租赁组屋仍无下文

一名单亲妈妈日前在社媒上发文申诉,指自己一直申请租住政府组屋数年都被拒,甚至先后致函了数位部长,包括向李显龙总理求助,但是都没有下文,导致孩子可能必须随着自己过上四处为家的生活,对政府承诺会照顾人民的“口不对心”做法,感到失望。 署名Chanel Koh的单亲妈妈于2月12日在脸书上帖出长篇文中,她细述了年轻时期所面对的困境,一直到婚后生子,面对家暴和破败婚姻后,重新想要拥有“自己的家”的心愿,以及所面对到租赁政府组屋的困境。 她也披露在申请租赁组屋过程中,曾经向多名“高官”求助,但之后音讯全无,或表示他们也无能为力。 她称,儿时亲睹父亲遭杀害、母亲入狱的困境,随后被送到阿姨家中,却遭到对方虐待,最后她离家出走,一直到三年后母亲获释为止。 在她20岁那年开始,即2015年至2016年期间曾经申请组屋租赁,也曾经数次致函基础建设统筹部长兼交通部长许文远,但申请最后都不了了之, 她曾于2015年接获租赁单位回函,指她不符合申请资格,因为薪金已经达到了1800(包含公积金),且仍然有母亲和兄弟,虽然当时他们皆为阶下囚。 但是Chanel指出,1800元的薪金在除去缴纳公积金后,只剩下1440元,应付包括租金在内的一个月开支已经非常困难,“若有家人支持,母亲和兄长都没有入狱,我会申请租赁组屋吗?” 她之后于2015年11月6日致函新加坡总理李显龙,或许引起一些关注了,建屋局当时曾向她索取大量文件,但是到了2016年的农历新年后,就音讯全无了。 家暴离开丈夫 她于2016年3月28日再次致函政府组屋租赁部门,申请租赁一房式单位,同时也通过电子邮件向武吉班让单选区国会议员张俰宾博士求助。然而事情发生了一年多,她仍然没有接获任何帮助,并且还是在外组屋。 Chanel于2016年结婚,和丈夫一起居住,但是在生了两个孩子,却迎来了丈夫的暴力相向及不忠,因此她再次希望能够搬出去住,而且决定将孩子带在身旁。…

前学者:家长式作风、社会工程和威权主义,乃精英化政策之表征

李光耀公共政策研究院前副院长刘浩典教授,指出新加坡的精英主义,通常不是因为“成功新加坡人缺乏同情心”,或社会开支不足,反之,更多是源于“非常精英化”的政府政策和决策过程。 针对学者李秀萍和前政府投资公司经济师杨南强,提及现有对低收入群体支援不足、小贩面对压力的情况,刘浩典于上周五再次撰文,提醒精英化的政府政策,透过三大方面展现: 其一,家长式作风,认为所有人只要遵守新加坡精英们的设想去做,社会就会变得美好。 二,社会工程:自以为政府可以打造出精英们所设想的社会。 三,威权主义:极度怀疑公民社会、独立媒体或任何可能挑战政府权威和专业的非政府行动主义者。 倨傲的精英和复杂社会情势极不搭调 他直言,上述信念不仅非常精英且倨傲,甚至和越发复杂的社会情势极不搭调。 “随着社会问题越发复杂,就没有绝对清晰的解决方案。正确的做法,应该是更加谨慎、时常检视自身是否存在偏见、决策上也不宜过早妄下定论。” 讽刺的是,近年来的局势发展恰恰相反:对于越发复杂的情境,人民行动党政府却越发坚持其核心理念,从当前对最低薪资制的论战中,就可见一斑。 他补充,政府显而易见的精英主义,也体现在把人民当作实现他们宏伟愿景的工具,例如小贩们面对的处境就是最佳例子。 小贩政策偏离小贩实际需求 “政府谈的都不是小贩们真正需要的东西。小贩们只是政府为了实现某些目的的手段:负担得起的小贩美食、“充满活力”的小贩中心,提升小贩生产力、打造只会国家和申遗等等。”…