Security guard controlling indoor entrance gate from Shutterstock.com

Starting from 1st January, private security officers who slack off, sleep on the job or sign in to work drunk can face harsher punishment as the police strengthen penalties for errant behaviours to augment the industry’s professionalism and fortify Singapore’s defences.

Officers who show errant attitude can be “punished by a fine not exceeding $2, 000 or imprisonment for a term not exceeding three months, or both. These offences may also be compounded by a fine, in lieu of prosecution.”

Prior to this, there was no penalty for security officers who act unprofessionally, and those who don’t perform well would be given verbal warnings and get suspended or fired.

The spokesman from the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) in response to media query on the new regulations, said that “MHA will strengthen the penalties for selected breaches that pose a risk to public safety and security, to further underscore the importance of upholding professional standards in the security industry and deter errant behaviour.”

“Breaches that will be made an offence include sleeping or consuming alcohol while on duty, being absent from their post without a valid reason, or failing to respond promptly to any request for assistance by any person suffering injuries or damage or loss of property, among other.”

Just last month, the Home Affairs and Law Minister K. Shanmugam said that private security officers play a vital role as they are often the first line of defence. He further said that with proper training, they will be able “to respond to any incident, offer help and manage the public after a terrorist attack.”

The MHA also explained that first-time offenders will be “given warnings or composition fines. Besides prosecution, licence suspension and revocation are also penalties that would be considered, especially in extreme cases or recalcitrant offenders.”

The police has discussed with security associations and the Union of Security Employees about these changes and they have all given their approval.

Association of Certified Security Agencies (ACSA) president Robert Wiener shared with Straits Times that “currently security officers who flouted the rules and were fired could simply move on to another firm, and there was no incentive for them to uphold professional standards.” He added, “There was no real approach we could take as employers when they sleep on the job, come to work drunk or act unprofessionally. I think this is a fantastic move in terms of bringing discipline back to the industry.”

Despite support from employers, union and security association, this move didn’t go too well with the public. Many of them are saying that this new enforcement is being imposed on the old and retirees as they are the ones who work as security officers.

Facebook user, Rajan Rajamanickam said that the majority of security officers are “70 years old working 12 hours shift and they earn a miserable income compared to MPs earning $16, 000 a month and they sleep in the parliament.”

Another FB user named Lim Teck Kee also feels that penalising security officers is not entirely fair. He questioned on how this group’s pay should be increased if they are strictly punished. He said, “If security officers are punished harshly, then their pay should rise in line with this law. Let’s be fair to this group of people who help to take care of the premises. How about minister who are public figure who get high pay, for those who commit adultery or crime should be jailed for life. How about that?” while another FB user, Mike Chew wrote that he feels that it’s cruel to expect senior citizens to stay awake on a 12 hours shift.

One FB user, Malcolm Phua, who had the opportunity to get to know more about security guards’ working rosters and the overtime they do, said that “it’s definitely not a walk in the park. As they are not paid much, they have to work ridiculously long hours to bring home the bacon. I think more details should be studied and work out a solution instead of penalizing them by paying a fine. Their plight must be heard.”

With many netizens questioning the need for such a penalty, given that security officers work long grueling hours and are expected to not doze off during their shift, it has also come to light the dangerous workaholic culture in Singapore.

According to an article published by Channel NewsAsia, Singaporeans remain among the hardest working in the world – at least as seen by the number of hours clocked – although the statistic from the Ministry of Manpower (MOM) is showing that the number of working hours has been on a steady decline since 2010.

“Based on latest available global statistics, Singapore residents in 2015 worked the second longest week in developed cities around the world, clocking in 45.6 hours, trailing only behind Hong Kong at 50.1 hours. When it comes to country-by-country comparisons, a 2016 report by ManpowerGroup – a multinational human resource consultancy listed on the New York stock exchange – also found that millennials (aged between 20 and 34) in Singapore worked the joint-second longest hours (48) in the world, behind India (52) and on par with China and Mexico.”

Clocking in such long hours also means that employees don’t get to spend time with their family. Generally, there are two working hours – usual hours worked and actual hours worked. Usual hours worked refers to the typical working hours which include unpaid overtime and hours spent checking work emails or carrying out other regular tasks at home. On the other hand, actual hours worked includes all forms of overtime, regardless of whether they are regular in nature or whatever they paid for.

The article also noted that “the usual hours worked declined from the recent peak of 46.6 hours a week in 2010 to 43.2 hours in 2017, according to statistic from the MOM. Actual hours worked also dropped, from a high of 45.6 hours in 2010 to 43.0 in 2017.”

However, the “MOM report was greeted with disbelief by some netizens, with several pointing out that they are working longer hours and how technology has resulted in them having to frequently attend to work outside of office hours via emails or whatsapp messages.”

FB user Raymond Chua sadly agrees with the article as even when he goes home “he has to bring laptop and work. Stressed and totally no mood for getting married or having any children.”

Another user also agrees and says that there is lack of work life balance in Singapore. He hardly has the time to socialise with people as he comes home late and feels exhausted.

FB user, Jouren LZ suggested that “working hours should be made 8 hours, including lunch hour. Culture should be less demanding to achieve work life balance. We all should be less demanding towards life.”

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

社论:本地报业巨头高层领导收入冠全球?

本地媒体工作者,收入全球最高? 《海峡时报》今日报导,两名该报社编辑涉嫌违反行为准则,被纪律处分。文章提到,“一人将被降级,调派至另一岗位;另一人则接到书面警告、扣工资和被调职。” 金融服务专页协会前主席梁实轩,就质疑本地媒体巨霸的领导高层,是否领着巨额高薪。 他说,友人询问他,这名涉及出轨不当行为的编辑,领着多少薪资? 梁实轩则引用报业控股2017年的企业管理报告,在改报告中,指出基于商业敏感和机密,故此没有披露首五位领导高层(非董事和CEO)的实得收入。 报告中称: “在人力资源竞争激烈的环境下,要确保拥有付经验团队来保障公司运作的稳定。 有鉴于薪资涉及商业敏感和机密,故此,不披露公司五大关键管理人(不是董事或总裁)的薪酬,较符合公司的最佳利益。这五大管理人的在2017财政年,薪酬范围被设定在25万新元以下。” 在同年,这五大管理人所获的年度总薪酬,共544万3千元。 对此,梁实轩就质疑,我国新闻自由在全球排名才151名,但是媒体机构高层,却享受着巨额高薪? 另一方面,从报告中看,前CEO陈庆鏻(去年9月1日卸任),在2017财政年,基薪加上可变动花红、实物受益和和分红,薪资总得300万元。 至于续任者伍逸松,是第五任三军总长,中将军衔。在07年退伍后担任东方海皇集团主席兼总裁,于去年才接任报业控股执行总裁。…

Softer, progressive approach towards urban redevelopment needed: Senior Minister Puthucheary

The Singapore government needs to shift its approach towards urban redevelopment and…

UN expert urges countries around the world to fulfill human rights obligations by combating air pollution

Ahead of World Environment Day on 5 June, an independent UN expert…

疑GPS故障走错地点 女私召车司机大雨中轰乘客下车

手机程序中的导航系统出现纰漏,乘客也告知送错地点了,但是女私召车司机却不顾外面下着倾盆大雨,强迫乘客下车。 署名本杰明的网民指出,上述事件发生于周二(10月22日)上午。 他于当天上午要从位于杨厝港路嘉城林的住家,前往工作地点,即位于巴耶利峇路155号的Lotus 诊所。 “当时约早上7时30分,我已经迟到了……天空下着大雨,所以我就在家预约了私召车Gojek服务。” 曾多次反映皆被无视 他对网络新闻网站《Stomp》指出,在路上,他发现有关女私召车司机没有照正确路线行驶,虽然尝试告诉女司机,但是她仍坚持跟着导航走。 本杰明表示他多次反映,但女司机最终竟要求他在比莱1号路下车,而该处距离其目的地仍有1.3公里。 “虽然我不断尝试说服她,说她到达了错误地点,但是她却威胁我说,若我不下车,她就报警。” 本杰明指出,他当时无奈地在大雨中下车,随后还要另外花费八元,预订Grab私召车服务,从比莱路前往诊所。 他表示,当他回顾此事,意识到或许是Gojek应用程序中的GPS出现了故障所致。“这是可以理解的,类似事件时有发生。” 惟,令他震惊和难以接受的是,许多私召车司机都缺乏基本常识,而且工作时过于依赖GPS。…