'Not Practical' because it doesn't Concern Gov...
-
I bet if MPs uses the MRT daily, it will become something very easy to do - almost second nature...
==============================
Not practical to take down particulars
July 15, 2007
SMRT said its frontline staff are trained to assist passengers in need, and the safety of passengers is their priority.
An SMRT spokesman said staff helped Madam Lee to her feet and took her to the staff room to rest.
The spokesman added: 'The man who accidentally knocked into her stayed around for a while, and left when the lady was able to stand up and walk without any visible injury at that time.'
The spokesman said such incidents are not unusual because many people use the stations.
'When these happen, the staff's first concern is to render assistance to the affected passenger.
'It is not practical for them to take down the particulars of everyone who is involved in incidents that do not appear to be an act of crime, violence, offence or aggression, and where there did not appear to have any obvious or visible injury at the point in time.' -
Basic courtesy..thats all thats asked for.
-
Agree.Originally posted by DC+:Basic courtesy..thats all thats asked for.
Btw, SMRT is partly to blame. Too little staff to 'handle' to many people. -
Originally posted by ShutterBug:
If someone died because of such passengers who accidentally knock against someone who is physically weak in a rush, what will SMRT do? This is the type of question SMRT must attempt to answer is it is or claims to be world-class.
I bet if MPs uses the MRT daily, it will become something very easy to do - almost second nature...
==============================
[b]Not practical to take down particulars
July 15, 2007
SMRT said its frontline staff are trained to assist passengers in need, and the safety of passengers is their priority.
An SMRT spokesman said staff helped Madam Lee to her feet and took her to the staff room to rest.
The spokesman added: 'The man who accidentally knocked into her stayed around for a while, and left when the lady was able to stand up and walk without any visible injury at that time.'
The spokesman said such incidents are not unusual because many people use the stations.
'When these happen, the staff's first concern is to render assistance to the affected passenger.
'It is not practical for them to take down the particulars of everyone who is involved in incidents that do not appear to be an act of crime, violence, offence or aggression, and where there did not appear to have any obvious or visible injury at the point in time.'
[/b]
Apparently, the front-line staff of SMRT is only scantily trained just to look at the condition of the affected person and say he or she is recovering or ok.
He should be sufficiently and professionally trained to take into account whether there is serious encounter like fainting, blackout, heart attack or whatever and be ready to summons the person knocking into any one by completing a simple slip-fill-out of "IC/name/address/contact" to help everyone concerned so that traveling on mass transport like MRT can be more orderly and responsible by all. -
when even the police doesn't arrest the perpetrators of assaults ....
what other kind of response ... can we expect ? .... -
Police is using the "seizable" or "non-seizable" categorisation of offences in order to deny responsibilities for any crimes against persons of more private or civil nature but telling such persons to commence his own private civil suits.Originally posted by Fatum:when even the police doesn't arrest the perpetrators of assaults ....
what other kind of response ... can we expect ? ....
Yet citizens need the police to use its special power to intervene where such private trespass against persons are more serious in nature like openly blatant assault.
If we allow the police to adopt this standard of policing then almost every case of assault no matter how unprovoked will become private suits just because the police may want to take a short cut to avoid their duties and responsibilities.
It is using the same legalistic wrangling tactics to pass relevant amendments to the Immigration Act or regulations by using the terrorisms or illegal immigration as an excuse so that the citizens like the landladies and landlords will be responsible or jailed for illegal harbouring of illegal. The police who allows Took Leng How to escape immigration control is not even reprimanded.
It is passing their traditional duties of policing to Management Corporation of private estates by canceling licences of security agencies for breach of standards whereas their own policemen do not even bother to patrol the surrounding more diligently. -
To Editors, The Straits Times, Today
(Guess Yong Pung How or Dr. Tony Tan will never allow such letters to be published because they are too afraid of PM Lee's instruction to the press not to engage in crusading journalism)
Dear Editor,
There seems to be increasingly frequent incidents where private citizens were blatantly assaulted by another but the police merely concluded the whole episode by saying that such incidents were of private nature and it is up to the victims to seek his own recourse like commencing his own private summons against the perpetrators.
Is the police aware in such an encounter, there may be more than meet the eyes with perpetrators likely to take advantage of such a hands-off approach to increase their aggressions everywhere?
From reported cases it is clear that the police has been able to rely on “seizable” or “non-seizable”; categorisation of offences in order to deny responsibilities for more in-depth investigation and prevention of crimes of any kind against persons of more private or civil nature by telling the victim to commence his own private civil suits.
Yet citizens need the police to use its special power to intervene where such private trespass against persons are more serious in nature like openly blatant assault. Without such intervention, there will be a tendency for citizens to take laws into their own hands to settle private feuds. So will the police understand such a intricate balance of relationship and factors in seeking to deny responsibilities for commissions of offences against the person.
If we allow the police to adopt this lower standard of policing then almost every case of assault no matter how unprovoked will become private suits just because the police may then take short cut to avoid their duties and responsibilities.
There seems to be a tendency to rely on legalistic wrangling of laws and regulations to pass relevant duties to citizens. For example, the police has passed amendments to Immigration Act or regulations using the terrorisms or illegal immigration as an excuse to make landladies and landlords liable to be jailed for illegal harbouring of illegal when clearly such are the duties of the police and not the citizens who at best could only exercise caution. The police who allowed criminal like Took Leng How to escape immigration control is not even reprimanded.
Police has also passed many duties now to the Management Corporations of private estates by relying entirely on private security agencies to do policing. It has been resorting to canceling licences of security agencies for breach of standards whereas when their own policemen do not even bother to patrol the surrounding more diligently, there is no penalty or acceptance of responsibilities. -
Originally posted by ShutterBug:
under govt - everything must be in detail and black and white.
I bet if MPs uses the MRT daily, it will become something very easy to do - almost second nature...
==============================
[b]Not practical to take down particulars
July 15, 2007
SMRT said its frontline staff are trained to assist passengers in need, and the safety of passengers is their priority.
An SMRT spokesman said staff helped Madam Lee to her feet and took her to the staff room to rest.
The spokesman added: 'The man who accidentally knocked into her stayed around for a while, and left when the lady was able to stand up and walk without any visible injury at that time.'
The spokesman said such incidents are not unusual because many people use the stations.
'When these happen, the staff's first concern is to render assistance to the affected passenger.
'It is not practical for them to take down the particulars of everyone who is involved in incidents that do not appear to be an act of crime, violence, offence or aggression, and where there did not appear to have any obvious or visible injury at the point in time.'
[/b] -
Why must we put the responsibility on the SMRT staff to help in such cases? Can't we as fellow passengers and citizens also chip in?
Yes, the SMRT staff has the responsibility to help the injured passenger, which I believe they did to the best of their limited abilities. However, the call for them to take down the particulars of the errant passenger is really not practical. Firstly, they cannot possibly take down the particulars of every passenger who knocked into another, an incident which must occur several hundred times a day. Secondly, they have no legal right to do so (to the best of my knowledge), and the passenger can simply refuse to give his particulars, in which case the SMRT would have no legal recourse. -
Here we have a fine example of making a mountain out of a molehill. It's not even deliberate, let alone a case of causing hurt.
Still they should do something about the overcrowding in their trains. At the end of yesterday's Parade Preview the intervals between trains were still 8 minutes long! -
Having too many staff contributes to higher operating costs, hence minimising profits.Originally posted by hloc:Agree.
Btw, SMRT is partly to blame. Too little staff to 'handle' to many people.
-
what does it matter, they can always increase fares.Originally posted by ditzy:Having too many staff contributes to higher operating costs, hence minimising profits. 
-
I guess MRT staff can't be bothered about security in MRT Stations.
-
No litter bins mean no cleaning staff needed.Originally posted by bila_prem:I guess MRT staff can't be bothered about security in MRT Stations. -
so did anybody died ? the lady was alright after a while wat. if you are the person you will give your particulars ?Originally posted by robertteh:If someone died because of such passengers who accidentally knock against someone who is physically weak in a rush, what will SMRT do? This is the type of question SMRT must attempt to answer is it is or claims to be world-class.
Apparently, the front-line staff of SMRT is only scantily trained just to look at the condition of the affected person and say he or she is recovering or ok.
He should be sufficiently and professionally trained to take into account whether there is serious encounter like fainting, blackout, heart attack or whatever and be ready to summons the person knocking into any one by completing a simple slip-fill-out of "IC/name/address/contact" to help everyone concerned so that traveling on mass transport like MRT can be more orderly and responsible by all. -
x2. Especially during weekend evenings, the train frequencies are just ridiculous. Did they expect people to be hiding at home during weekends?Originally posted by Kuali Baba:Here we have a fine example of making a mountain out of a molehill. It's not even deliberate, let alone a case of causing hurt.
Still they should do something about the overcrowding in their trains. At the end of yesterday's Parade Preview the intervals between trains were still 8 minutes long! -
When the train frequencies are too low, people will rush to board. It's human nature. What's more, average Singaporeans already have so little personal time to ourselves.. sometimes it's so packed that there's no guarantee u can board even when the next train arrives!
It's a simple logic - if train capacity and frequencies are adequately met, people will learn that it's no longer necessary to rush. Then less people would get knocked about during mad rushes. What the heck do we pay those "top brains" for, to do taichi work?