SBS Transit's Actions Contradicts Government Policy
-
Originally posted by baby hunter:
now we're talking public bus service, NOT SIA lah...
fuel surcharge is apply to all airline, not only SIA.
Nvm... full stopNationalise, any losses the most we pay 50% income tax to subsidise this subsidise that
-
Originally posted by eagle:
We are not talking about fuel, but rather, efficiency.
efficiency?packed buses? do you know commuters are 100% gulity of creating a false impression of packed buses which ends up buses delayed all because ppl refusing to move in.. I dunno how many times I've to shout for ppl to move in when I see ppl refusing to move in
everything blame operator, when you can't even blame commuters for not cooperating
-
Originally posted by sbst275:
efficiency?packed buses? do you know commuters are 100% gulity of creating a false impression of packed buses which ends up buses delayed all because ppl refusing to move in.. I dunno how many times I've to shout for ppl to move in when I see ppl refusing to move in
everything blame operator, when you can't even blame commuters for not cooperating
So you don't see it as a failure in logistics planning when the bus is packed so full that remaining passengers cannot get up?
So you see being efficient as packing the bus to the fullest like a can of sardines when moving off so that the cost vs revenue ratio is lower, at the expense of consumer comfort?
Mind you, this is public transport; public service.
-
Originally posted by sbst275:
you sure when there's no goal to be achieved?Those places I've been like Melbourne, when bus svs are state controlled, the scheduled freq can be like 60 mins
Poor management, not a result of profits.Profits will only improve performance only if it's a perfectly competitive industry.
For the transport companies where it's more like a monopoly (where Temasek controls all),
there is no incentive for them to improve performance, because they have market power, all that is
needed is for them to raise prices, commuters have no other alternatives.
Don't forget you are also comparing a city (Melbourne) with a big geographical dispersion as compared to Singapore.
I look at the list of bus companies in Melbourne, there are public and private ones.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Melbourne_bus_routes
-
sbst275,
Ask yourself this question.
If you own and control all the transport companies in Singapore.
What's the best way to make more profits?
Increase the price of fares or increase efficiency?
If you increase efficiency by running more buses in those routes,
you will run up more expense for the company.
If you increase fares, you will get more profits, you can pack
up buses like sardines, you will make more money.
-
Another thing
Advertisment revenue account for almost 60% of SBS's profit
-
Originally posted by sbst275:
Another thing
Advertisment revenue account for almost 60% of SBS's profit
How is advertising related to efficiency of bus services?
-
Originally posted by sbst275:
Another thing
Advertisment revenue account for almost 60% of SBS's profit
More importantly.
Do you understand that the employment of China bus driverswill increase the income gap between the rich and the poor further?
Let's say Singapore is an economy of 100 citizens.
Say the economy is fully employed, all 100 citizens have jobs,
then one day 5 citizens decided to resign from their clerical positions
and 5 citizens decided to resign from their jobs as "bus captains".
The 5 bus drivers want to take up clerical positions, the 5 clerical
officers want to remain in clerical line (just not in their previous company),
nobody wants to go into bus driving they feel that the pay is too low.
The bus company decides to outsource to China because manpower is cheaper,
ends up employing 5 bus drivers from China.
Then the 5 clerical positions that was vacant will be competed by 10 citizens.
Each of the 10 try to price themselves lower than the other so they can
gain employment.
Ultimately, the lower income earners end up with lower pay.
Therefore increasing the income gap (Gini Coefficient) further.
-
Originally posted by eagle:
Just two questions:
If you can earn 1k to 1.2k by being a sales person at a departmental store from 10am to 9pm, would you prefer to earn 1.6k by driving constantly on the road in a big and bulky vehicle?Or if your daily net income is around $50 to be a taxi driver, also driving on the road the whole day like the bus driver, would you want to be a bus driver?
sometimes decisions like these are not so simple lor. if i am a 50 yr old pot belly uncle that speaks only broken english, even if i want to work as a sale assistant in taka or isetan, no one will hire me! hehe. again, how come we can so easily empathise with why CEO's and companies need to make millions to survive. but so hard to empathise with the hardships of ordinary uncles and aunties... -
Originally posted by holygoh:
sometimes decisions like these are not so simple lor. if i am a 50 yr old pot belly uncle that speaks only broken english, even if i want to work as a sale assistant in taka or isetan, no one will hire me! hehe. again, how come we can so easily empathise with why CEO's and companies need to make millions to survive. but so hard to empathise with the hardships of ordinary uncles and aunties...if they have will to think...they will never be a biz man liao...
take my in law for example, he's been working for translink (SBS) as a driver for 27 yrs. now driving bus 197 from Jurong east to Bedok ( abt 4 hrs through & flow ). need to wake up 3:45am & leave the hse by 4:30am in order to catch the company transport if he's in morning shift.
due to his age is catching up, physically no longer as good as those young driver. it is quite tough for him to drove for long hr & longer distance. Hence, he did approvch the management, ask for transfer to those shorter distance or those feeder bus. He even dont mind to have a pay cut. but was rejected by the management. ( no reason given ).
so...put him to no chioce, he's thinking of retire next yrs ( he kn himself cant coop with it anymore..). &....he's only 60 next year......if the coy allow his transfer, properly he will work for another 5 yrs. till the official retire age.
so...do u guy think, will the bus company ever think of these? they only kn complaining cant get driver, they never think y.
sometimes is nt only the pay, is the system, is the flexibility, is the welfare that dr ppl aways.....
-
Originally posted by holygoh:
sometimes decisions like these are not so simple lor. if i am a 50 yr old pot belly uncle that speaks only broken english, even if i want to work as a sale assistant in taka or isetan, no one will hire me! hehe. again, how come we can so easily empathise with why CEO's and companies need to make millions to survive. but so hard to empathise with the hardships of ordinary uncles and aunties...that's why I also put the taxi driver job there mah, a job that is very similar to that of a bus driver.
-
Originally posted by eagle:
that's why I also put the taxi driver job there mah, a job that is very similar to that of a bus driver.
I think bus driver is worse then taxi driver as a taxi driver is his own boss. Bus driver has to rush themselves to keep up with the bus schedule. -
Originally posted by baby hunter:
if they have will to think...they will never be a biz man liao...
take my in law for example, he's been working for translink (SBS) as a driver for 27 yrs. now driving bus 197 from Jurong east to Bedok ( abt 4 hrs through & flow ). need to wake up 3:45am & leave the hse by 4:30am in order to catch the company transport if he's in morning shift.
due to his age is catching up, physically no longer as good as those young driver. it is quite tough for him to drove for long hr & longer distance. Hence, he did approvch the management, ask for transfer to those shorter distance or those feeder bus. He even dont mind to have a pay cut. but was rejected by the management. ( no reason given ).
so...put him to no chioce, he's thinking of retire next yrs ( he kn himself cant coop with it anymore..). &....he's only 60 next year......if the coy allow his transfer, properly he will work for another 5 yrs. till the official retire age.
so...do u guy think, will the bus company ever think of these? they only kn complaining cant get driver, they never think y.
sometimes is nt only the pay, is the system, is the flexibility, is the welfare that dr ppl aways.....
In other developed countries there would be Unions to fight for the rights of these workers,else working conditions will never change for the better. Singaporeans don't want to work,
fine, I will get even cheaper labour from China or India.
In Singapore you get a Union run by government sitting idly by collecting money,
if workers decide to take things into their hands and initiate a strike, they will
be put behind bars.
-
Originally posted by 333225520:
I think bus driver is worse then taxi driver as a taxi driver is his own boss. Bus driver has to rush themselves to keep up with the bus schedule.yup, yet they earn almost the same amount and have some similarities, eg driving. Thus in that case, who will want to be a bus driver?
-
Mak Cik and Ah Cik and tourist must now know rudimentary Mandarin, otherwise how to ask for info.
-
Perhaps SBS Transit, the gov, and the rest of the companies can just cut the crap about Singaporean, blah, blah, blah and just admit that they are looking for cheap labour.
-
... the FAP & SBS have no sense of shame... insisting multimillion dollar salaries but always resorting to cheap easy solutions... while the people are left with difficult existence...
... FAP can start counting their days in power from here on...
Hiring bus drivers from China not the answer
Thu, Mar 13, 2008
The Straits Times
I REFER to Tuesday's report, 'China bus drivers hired as few Singaporeans keen on job'. Bus operators should consider the social implications of hiring bus drivers from China for low pay.
Bus commuters here belong to different races and speak different languages and dialects. Many are senior citizens who can manage only Hokkien, Teochew, Cantonese or Malay.And many foreigners here, including tourists and employees, speak only English.
But bus drivers from China speak only Mandarin.
How can they help commuters who ask simple, but important, questions like whether they are on the right bus, where to alight and what is the correct fare? Not everyone goes about with an ez-link card.
If bus operators want Singaporeans to take up the bus captain's job, they should offer more attractive working conditions, rather than resort to the cheap solution.A 10- to 15-minute break is not sufficient rest time for drivers in between trips.
Having one rest day in a week is also not enough to recuperate, let alone enjoy a balanced life. Even that rest day is not fixed.
Bus captains provide a very important service to the people and deserve better treatment. As we pay our civil servants well, I don't see why bus captains do not deserve similar consideration.
Focus on service and not primarily on cost. It is not as if bus companies are operating at a loss.
Jackie Lau Wai Wan (Ms)
-
Originally posted by HyperFocal:
... the FAP & SBS have no sense of shame... insisting multimillion dollar salaries but always resorting to cheap easy solutions... while the people are left with difficult existence...
... FAP can start counting their days in power from here on...
Hiring bus drivers from China not the answer
Thu, Mar 13, 2008
The Straits Times
I REFER to Tuesday's report, 'China bus drivers hired as few Singaporeans keen on job'. Bus operators should consider the social implications of hiring bus drivers from China for low pay.
Bus commuters here belong to different races and speak different languages and dialects. Many are senior citizens who can manage only Hokkien, Teochew, Cantonese or Malay.And many foreigners here, including tourists and employees, speak only English.
But bus drivers from China speak only Mandarin.
How can they help commuters who ask simple, but important, questions like whether they are on the right bus, where to alight and what is the correct fare? Not everyone goes about with an ez-link card.
If bus operators want Singaporeans to take up the bus captain's job, they should offer more attractive working conditions, rather than resort to the cheap solution.A 10- to 15-minute break is not sufficient rest time for drivers in between trips.
Having one rest day in a week is also not enough to recuperate, let alone enjoy a balanced life. Even that rest day is not fixed.
Bus captains provide a very important service to the people and deserve better treatment. As we pay our civil servants well, I don't see why bus captains do not deserve similar consideration.
Focus on service and not primarily on cost. It is not as if bus companies are operating at a loss.
Jackie Lau Wai Wan (Ms)
What's FAP?
Farking Action Party?
-
Originally posted by maurizio13:
What's FAP?
Farking Action Party?
.. Foreigners Action Party -
The organization that I worked for provides private bus service. Fifty dollars a month. Everyone has a seat. Air-con is cool. Arrival time at pick-up point punctual. Journey is a comfortable 40-minute ride.
-
Nationalising... Simply make profit, profit goes to govt? lose money increase tax rate to keep up the bus service? at the same time, ads revenue make up at least 50% of their revenue.
Inefficient? most of the times just ppl refuse to move in, making the bus to be delayed and lengthening travelling time... at the same time, the behind bus catches up. Everything blame blame blame, even yourself dun move in causing delays never thought of it. Dun wanna believe? I ever saw buses stucked at 1 bus stop for 5 mins, creating the buses behind unable to move.. Why? cos after the exit there's lots of standing spaces yet no one wants to move in until so long later... waste everyone's time (I can dare to say 6 man hours of time)
as for welfare... if there's cases like Loyang Ave accident, buses are delayed, passengers saying not 'efficient'... end up driver gotta forgo break to please everyone?
increase wages? fares then got to go up, when diesel prices have alrdy gone up more than 100%. Dun come and say abt wages, if you want ppl to provide you a service, they've to remain afloat before anything can happens... If you can accept fuel surcharge for SIA, why not here? Dun tell me public tpt, but who's going to bear the cost? taxpayers w/ additional taxes?
At the same time, if you are not willing to work on shift, dun come and criticise abt getting foreign drivers who are more willing than locals to work shift.
I dunno.. do this kpkb, do tat as solution kpkb... wat you want? I think carry on like tis, you live a miserable life... everything also unhappy
-
There's still locals willing... yes 60
But there's older drivers retiring, demand from passengers for more buses and bus route... is it enough?
There are bus svs like Sv 170 tat ends up using abt 40 buses alone or Sv 143 using 30 buses
-
Originally posted by sbst275:
Nationalising... Simply make profit, profit goes to govt? lose money increase tax rate to keep up the bus service? at the same time, ads revenue make up at least 50% of their revenue.
Inefficient? most of the times just ppl refuse to move in, making the bus to be delayed and lengthening travelling time... at the same time, the behind bus catches up. Everything blame blame blame, even yourself dun move in causing delays never thought of it. Dun wanna believe? I ever saw buses stucked at 1 bus stop for 5 mins, creating the buses behind unable to move.. Why? cos after the exit there's lots of standing spaces yet no one wants to move in until so long later... waste everyone's time (I can dare to say 6 man hours of time)
as for welfare... if there's cases like Loyang Ave accident, buses are delayed, passengers saying not 'efficient'... end up driver gotta forgo break to please everyone?
increase wages? fares then got to go up, when diesel prices have alrdy gone up more than 100%. Dun come and say abt wages, if you want ppl to provide you a service, they've to remain afloat before anything can happens... If you can accept fuel surcharge for SIA, why not here? Dun tell me public tpt, but who's going to bear the cost? taxpayers w/ additional taxes?
At the same time, if you are not willing to work on shift, dun come and criticise abt getting foreign drivers who are more willing than locals to work shift.
I dunno.. do this kpkb, do tat as solution kpkb... wat you want? I think carry on like tis, you live a miserable life... everything also unhappy
Of the whole post, I can only agree with this one:
At the same time, if you are not willing to work on shift, dun come and criticise abt getting foreign drivers who are more willing than locals to work shift. => But sure got pple disagree.For the rest of the post, your concerns have already been answered earlier.
-
Next thing aft nationalising
if govt is forced to raise bus fares, ppl go for opposition... mirror image of Malaysia's election
anyway... ppl like the iron lady Margaret Thatcher were the ones to get rid of nationalised industries and making it to privatised like the buses in London.... ironically, ppl here wants to do the opposite... hoping to tie the govt to as many burden as many as possible
-
Originally posted by sbst275:
Nationalising... Simply make profit, profit goes to govt? lose money increase tax rate to keep up the bus service? at the same time, ads revenue make up at least 50% of their revenue.
Inefficient? most of the times just ppl refuse to move in, making the bus to be delayed and lengthening travelling time... at the same time, the behind bus catches up. Everything blame blame blame, even yourself dun move in causing delays never thought of it. Dun wanna believe? I ever saw buses stucked at 1 bus stop for 5 mins, creating the buses behind unable to move.. Why? cos after the exit there's lots of standing spaces yet no one wants to move in until so long later... waste everyone's time (I can dare to say 6 man hours of time)
as for welfare... if there's cases like Loyang Ave accident, buses are delayed, passengers saying not 'efficient'... end up driver gotta forgo break to please everyone?
increase wages? fares then got to go up, when diesel prices have alrdy gone up more than 100%. Dun come and say abt wages, if you want ppl to provide you a service, they've to remain afloat before anything can happens... If you can accept fuel surcharge for SIA, why not here? Dun tell me public tpt, but who's going to bear the cost? taxpayers w/ additional taxes?
At the same time, if you are not willing to work on shift, dun come and criticise abt getting foreign drivers who are more willing than locals to work shift.
I dunno.. do this kpkb, do tat as solution kpkb... wat you want? I think carry on like tis, you live a miserable life... everything also unhappy
You can look at it this way, if bus services (public) loses money, the money used to offset the loses goes into the cost of providing the service.
If it is privatised, the profits is the excess of the cost of providing the service.
If you consider packing up the buses like sardines as efficient, at the expense of commuters risking servere injury during traffic accidents.
They could have also increase frequency of buses so that commuters won't be squeezed like sardines, instead of taking a profit maximising approach.
If buses were nationalised, there won't be this rent for premises and corporate taxes, both of these items account for nearly $40 million which goes
indirectly into the government's coffers.
Cost recovery (public) or profit motive (private)?