<TABLE border=0 cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width="100%"><TBODY><TR>Revamp system at CPF office to avoid waste of time
</TR><!-- headline one : end --><!-- show image if available --></TBODY></TABLE>
<!-- START OF : div id="storytext"--><!-- more than 4 paragraphs -->I VISITED the Central Provident Fund (CPF) office in Jurong East to nominate a beneficiary for my CPF account. It took me 50 minutes to reach the front of the queue at the inquiry and information counter and there were at least 30 other customers behind me.
Every customer peppered the officer with all manner of questions which the officer answered patiently as temperatures rose among those waiting in line. One customer could easily consume some 15 minutes of an officer's time.
I observed that of the six counters manned by an officer each, only two were serving CPF members.
There were several rows of empty chairs provided for waiting customers but only one customer was waiting for his turn.
While the officer at the information counter was busy attending to a long line of impatient customers, the four other officers were relaxing as they were waiting for the next customer so they could call his queue number.
The information counter should be closed and a machine dispensing queue numbers to customers should be installed instead, as in polyclinics, banks and telco shops.
In this way there should be seven counters instead of six, each with an officer to process the host of CPF transactions.
We do not need a bureaucracy that moves at a snail's pace but competent officers and an efficient system, as unnecessary waiting is an economic loss for the public.
Heng Cho Choon
<!-- end of for each --><!-- Current Ratings : start --><!-- Current Ratings : end --><!-- vbbintegration : start -->
</TR><!-- headline one : end --><!-- show image if available --></TBODY></TABLE>
<!-- START OF : div id="storytext"--><!-- more than 4 paragraphs -->I VISITED the Central Provident Fund (CPF) office in Jurong East to nominate a beneficiary for my CPF account. It took me 50 minutes to reach the front of the queue at the inquiry and information counter and there were at least 30 other customers behind me.
Every customer peppered the officer with all manner of questions which the officer answered patiently as temperatures rose among those waiting in line. One customer could easily consume some 15 minutes of an officer's time.
I observed that of the six counters manned by an officer each, only two were serving CPF members.
There were several rows of empty chairs provided for waiting customers but only one customer was waiting for his turn.
While the officer at the information counter was busy attending to a long line of impatient customers, the four other officers were relaxing as they were waiting for the next customer so they could call his queue number.
The information counter should be closed and a machine dispensing queue numbers to customers should be installed instead, as in polyclinics, banks and telco shops.
In this way there should be seven counters instead of six, each with an officer to process the host of CPF transactions.
We do not need a bureaucracy that moves at a snail's pace but competent officers and an efficient system, as unnecessary waiting is an economic loss for the public.
Heng Cho Choon
<!-- end of for each --><!-- Current Ratings : start --><!-- Current Ratings : end --><!-- vbbintegration : start -->
