- Joined
- Jul 10, 2008
- Messages
- 35,575
- Points
- 113
Jurong Bird Park going Mandai soon.
-
IP addresses are NOT logged in this forum so there's no point asking. Please note that this forum is full of homophobes, racists, lunatics, schizophrenics & absolute nut jobs with a smattering of geniuses, Chinese chauvinists, Moderate Muslims and last but not least a couple of "know-it-alls" constantly sprouting their dubious wisdom. If you believe that content generated by unsavory characters might cause you offense PLEASE LEAVE NOW! Sammyboy Admin and Staff are not responsible for your hurt feelings should you choose to read any of the content here. The OTHER forum is HERE so please stop asking.
Chitchat SMRT CEO replacement underway
- Thread starter scroobal
- Start date
Jurong Bird Park going Mandai soon.
- Joined
- Jan 22, 2014
- Messages
- 8,901
- Points
- 113
Agree. This is more like forced and nothing done on merit or being sincere about it.
At the end, if nothing happens in the next few months and no more mishaps, the whole thing will be shelved.
At the end, if nothing happens in the next few months and no more mishaps, the whole thing will be shelved.
I think the plan was for Lee Fook Sun to run it for a while. But the cabinet must have said no.
Yes, nothing will change if it one scholar to another.
Yes, nothing will change if it one scholar to another.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Jan 22, 2014
- Messages
- 8,901
- Points
- 113
- Joined
- Dec 30, 2010
- Messages
- 12,730
- Points
- 113
- Joined
- Dec 30, 2010
- Messages
- 12,730
- Points
- 113
The tudung lady is the principal of a Primary School...and she was put in to replace when Halimah was made speaker. Inclusiveness at its best.
Ong Ye Kung was the other clown on the board, even as he was a director with NTUC...and what has he done?
The unions are now asking for more data/information regarding the misguided employees...hurray to tri-partism!
Ong Ye Kung was the other clown on the board, even as he was a director with NTUC...and what has he done?
The unions are now asking for more data/information regarding the misguided employees...hurray to tri-partism!
- Joined
- Aug 12, 2008
- Messages
- 37,364
- Points
- 113
They are there to fill in the numbers, to look good to those who does not know how to discern, they are there to collect fees & not ask questions. Just like the job signed for not done, the board members does the same thing, so why persecute the lesser mortals?, when the top is rotten???
- Joined
- Jul 14, 2008
- Messages
- 17,975
- Points
- 113
I hate to say this but SMRT has to seriously look at its staff. Majority what race ? How many FTs in breeding their laid back culture & cutting corners ?
- Joined
- Jan 22, 2014
- Messages
- 8,901
- Points
- 113
/
At least half the Board of Directors should make way for foreign experts to bring about a real transformation in SMRT. No need for Desmond to go for the time being :
/
- Joined
- May 6, 2012
- Messages
- 5,142
- Points
- 113
hello fren, please grow up lah, stop throwing smoke...for fuck sake!!...talk about race... the top mgt, what race arr?
it's those at top that are sleeping on their jobs, simple as that.... and we all know who the fuck they are...
It’s a big organisation and the staff cannot be any different from other large organisations in Singapore. There is also no indication that they recruiting out of norm like Citibank and it’s Indian mafia.
For reasons best known to the Board, Temasek and the Govt, they allowed the SAF to takeover with Air Force and naval engineering background. They did recruit one chap from MTR but he left.
Their problem over the years are engineering and lack of rigour in engineering maintenance and inspection.
What is also interesting is that despite all the mishaps and rolling disasters, they been reporting healthy profits which does not gel. So other than the embarrassing spotlight every now and then, there is no consequences.
Staff no matter what their origin will fail when there is no leadership, control and oversight.
Lastly why is a cabinet minister full time on this explaining and running PR? The operator does not show any sign of accountability.
For reasons best known to the Board, Temasek and the Govt, they allowed the SAF to takeover with Air Force and naval engineering background. They did recruit one chap from MTR but he left.
Their problem over the years are engineering and lack of rigour in engineering maintenance and inspection.
What is also interesting is that despite all the mishaps and rolling disasters, they been reporting healthy profits which does not gel. So other than the embarrassing spotlight every now and then, there is no consequences.
Staff no matter what their origin will fail when there is no leadership, control and oversight.
Lastly why is a cabinet minister full time on this explaining and running PR? The operator does not show any sign of accountability.
There are people better qualified than this lady without the Malay community. If they want to be politically correct, inclusive and make the numbers at least do it right.
There is Malay lady with NTU engineering background and an AC in SPF. She is well regarded in leadership. Why not her?
Clearly we have idiots making these decisions.
There is Malay lady with NTU engineering background and an AC in SPF. She is well regarded in leadership. Why not her?
Clearly we have idiots making these decisions.
- Joined
- May 6, 2012
- Messages
- 5,142
- Points
- 113
but certainly not so.... when they come to decide on how much they should pay themselves
after we saw how that fatso managed our ships and we this donald duck with our metro system,
we know this country is falling apart..
- Joined
- Aug 12, 2008
- Messages
- 37,364
- Points
- 113
Have already said, they are there to fill in the numbers, to collect fees, not to ask questions. This is the kind of job, I would like to do. Unfortunately my spine is stiff, I can't bend, if not, "members have privileges".
- Joined
- Jan 22, 2014
- Messages
- 8,901
- Points
- 113
/
imagine at Board meetings ceo Desmond a former CDF a LG a Stanford Alumni taking Directions from the 10 Directors. :(
Calls for SMRT CEO Desmond Kuek to quit grow louder
Should he stay or should he go? Odds are, he will go.
By Belmont Lay |
November 6, 2017
The heat is on.
The Straits Times published a a series of in-depth articles (here, here and here) on Nov. 5, 2017, effectively putting the “Should SMRT CEO Desmond Kuek step down?” question on the national agenda and etching it into the public consciousness.
Here are three salient points Singaporeans can acquaint themselves with about this issue:
1. The dilemma of keeping the SMRT CEO or letting him go
Asking if the SMRT CEO should step down was framed as part of a ST listiclequestioning how deep the SMRT rot is and where the buck should stop.
This is unprecedented, to say the least, as calls for the SMRT CEO to quit have thus far been mainly made by the frustrated public on social media as a form of retaliation in response to unsatisfactory train services.
This shift could be taken as a sign that something major in SMRT is happening and ST could have gotten wind of it.
And then there exists the conundrum: Should Kuek be made to stay on to fix the problem or should he be allowed to leave?
The instinct to let him go is satisfying in the short run, but it essentially renders the current situation unsolved for the next CEO to fix.
And if Kuek leaves, this also means letting him go after more than five years at the helm but not having much progress to show for.
Can the public accept that?
2. The military culture in SMRT
An amnesty exercise was carried out for a few days in SMRT and ended on Friday, Nov. 3.
This was to allow staff to own up to lapses before a wide-scale audit was launched to pinpoint problematic areas.
A company amnesty is not unique and neither is it a usual practice, as it has been carried out before in larger companies overseas in the wake of things going wrong.
ST reported that the massive internal audit at SMRT, which has begun, has been named Operation Osprey.
According to the report, “Osprey” is the name of a predatory hawk, which is a sign that the company is determined to hunt down any other potential perpetrators of malpractice.
Therefore, if the military culture at SMRT has not been clear to outsiders until this point in time, these two examples are the most obvious indications.
These are the manifestations of military minds working and imposing its ethics and style on a civilian transport outfit that has to be run more like a sleek corporate unit.
Anyone who has ever been through National Service in Singapore will attest that being made to own up to one’s mistake is one of the crudest practices that NS-obligated Singaporeans have ever witnessed.
Experts quoted in ST have pointed out that owning up does not absolve one of liability or allows one to be legally protected from prosecution if the authorities decide to probe matters further, so it is potentially self-incriminating to do so.
Worse, the greatest downside of SMRT’s failings is producing the irritating side effect of making former military men in corporate management look bad in general.
3. Former and current senior SMRT staff are speaking to the media anonymously
A lot of the information ST reported on in one of the pieces they published stems from speaking to anonymous sources within and outside SMRT, who are familiar with the company’s working culture.
They were quoted anonymously because they are not authorised to speak with the media, but nonetheless, have chosen to speak up regardless.
This shows that there are individuals who are trying to give another side of the story that is different from what the management is saying and attempting to shift the public attention away from the stage-managed perspective.
And more crucially, there is a conspicuous absence of even suggesting that a whistle-blowing culture be established, which could potentially surface any problems a lot faster than an amnesty exercise.
Last but not least, the top echelons in SMRT might have unwittingly pitted themselves against its own staff.
During the Oct. 16 press conference, Kuek said “nine in 10 of our people are incredibly committed, professional and commuter focused”, but “there remain some deep-seated cultural issues within the company that has needed more time than anticipated to root out”.
SMRT has 10,000 employees. The one in 10 staff that are supposedly not pulling their weight in the CEO’s eyes comes up to 1,000 individuals.
If the CEO can point fingers at his employees, he can expect to have a lot of fingers pointing back at him.
This then goes back to point 1: Is the call for Kuek to step down not only growing louder in public but also from within his own organisation?
This could then explain the blatant calling out of the issue in ST in the first place.
Should he stay or should he go? Odds are, he will go.
By Belmont Lay |
The heat is on.
The Straits Times published a a series of in-depth articles (here, here and here) on Nov. 5, 2017, effectively putting the “Should SMRT CEO Desmond Kuek step down?” question on the national agenda and etching it into the public consciousness.
Here are three salient points Singaporeans can acquaint themselves with about this issue:
1. The dilemma of keeping the SMRT CEO or letting him go
Asking if the SMRT CEO should step down was framed as part of a ST listiclequestioning how deep the SMRT rot is and where the buck should stop.
This is unprecedented, to say the least, as calls for the SMRT CEO to quit have thus far been mainly made by the frustrated public on social media as a form of retaliation in response to unsatisfactory train services.
This shift could be taken as a sign that something major in SMRT is happening and ST could have gotten wind of it.
And then there exists the conundrum: Should Kuek be made to stay on to fix the problem or should he be allowed to leave?
The instinct to let him go is satisfying in the short run, but it essentially renders the current situation unsolved for the next CEO to fix.
And if Kuek leaves, this also means letting him go after more than five years at the helm but not having much progress to show for.
Can the public accept that?
2. The military culture in SMRT
An amnesty exercise was carried out for a few days in SMRT and ended on Friday, Nov. 3.
This was to allow staff to own up to lapses before a wide-scale audit was launched to pinpoint problematic areas.
A company amnesty is not unique and neither is it a usual practice, as it has been carried out before in larger companies overseas in the wake of things going wrong.
ST reported that the massive internal audit at SMRT, which has begun, has been named Operation Osprey.
According to the report, “Osprey” is the name of a predatory hawk, which is a sign that the company is determined to hunt down any other potential perpetrators of malpractice.
Therefore, if the military culture at SMRT has not been clear to outsiders until this point in time, these two examples are the most obvious indications.
These are the manifestations of military minds working and imposing its ethics and style on a civilian transport outfit that has to be run more like a sleek corporate unit.
Anyone who has ever been through National Service in Singapore will attest that being made to own up to one’s mistake is one of the crudest practices that NS-obligated Singaporeans have ever witnessed.
Experts quoted in ST have pointed out that owning up does not absolve one of liability or allows one to be legally protected from prosecution if the authorities decide to probe matters further, so it is potentially self-incriminating to do so.
Worse, the greatest downside of SMRT’s failings is producing the irritating side effect of making former military men in corporate management look bad in general.
3. Former and current senior SMRT staff are speaking to the media anonymously
A lot of the information ST reported on in one of the pieces they published stems from speaking to anonymous sources within and outside SMRT, who are familiar with the company’s working culture.
They were quoted anonymously because they are not authorised to speak with the media, but nonetheless, have chosen to speak up regardless.
This shows that there are individuals who are trying to give another side of the story that is different from what the management is saying and attempting to shift the public attention away from the stage-managed perspective.
And more crucially, there is a conspicuous absence of even suggesting that a whistle-blowing culture be established, which could potentially surface any problems a lot faster than an amnesty exercise.
Last but not least, the top echelons in SMRT might have unwittingly pitted themselves against its own staff.
During the Oct. 16 press conference, Kuek said “nine in 10 of our people are incredibly committed, professional and commuter focused”, but “there remain some deep-seated cultural issues within the company that has needed more time than anticipated to root out”.
SMRT has 10,000 employees. The one in 10 staff that are supposedly not pulling their weight in the CEO’s eyes comes up to 1,000 individuals.
If the CEO can point fingers at his employees, he can expect to have a lot of fingers pointing back at him.
This then goes back to point 1: Is the call for Kuek to step down not only growing louder in public but also from within his own organisation?
This could then explain the blatant calling out of the issue in ST in the first place.
- Joined
- Aug 10, 2008
- Messages
- 11,668
- Points
- 113
You guys are so blind and unforgiving. He volunteered to take over the Job at MRT. His Heart is there for the good of people and Nation as a whole. If we have get others to do, it might even be worse off for Singaporeans. On a whole , sending in a scholar to do the job is a tough choice. He could have done better in other department, if not for the toxic culture in SMRT.
- Joined
- Jan 22, 2014
- Messages
- 8,901
- Points
- 113
/
i feel sad for Desmond. he should go for broke and named all the jiak liao bee in smrt...:(
Transport Minister Khaw Boon Wan saved a part of his speech in parliament today to throw SMRT CEO Desmond Kuek under the bus (not literally lah).
Making reference to Kuek’s speech where he blamed “deep-seated cultural issues” for SMRT’s persistent problems, Mr Khaw said he held Kuek responsible.
“It is the responsibility of management to set the right culture, professionalism, and excellence. It begins from the top and if there is poor work culture, the CEO is responsible – you set the corporate culture.” And with that, Mr Khaw revealed he was informed by SMRT CEO Seah Moon Ming that SMRT will be looking to review the pay package given to SMRT senior management, including Kuek..
Similar threads
