Stallholders in row with Workers Party town council

[SgParent]

It occurred to me that
1 the original intention is a quarterly spring cleaning
2 somebody from mysterious organisation wanted this cleaning to include high area.
3 TC objected as annual cleaning is scheduled in Oct

agree

4 this unknown party insisted and final compromise, with the coordination of nea is for hawker to pay for scaffolding while TC provide labour foc for cleaning of high areas. That is why despite knowing that closure is for 5 days, the official classification is still Quarterly Cleaning.
5 this mysterious rep when back telling hawkers that TC wants them to pay.
6 hawkers refuse and the mysterious rep left the matter as it is resulting in closure with no scaffolding.

if so then it explains a few things.. like why ahpetc got involved with its labour.

but with hindsight it should not have been so kind/generous/considerate/compromising. then it would not be tangled in this mess

individual hawkers should have thrown rotten eggs at lackey ngkk shop for the past 2mths for causing the mess and made them lost 4days of income unnecessarily

 

[Seee3]

but with hindsight it should not have been so kind/generous/considerate/compromising. then it would not be tangled in this mess

My guess is that all the misunderstanding arises from the definition of "annual". I think the TC define annual as within the calendar year and scheduled the next cleaning in Oct 2013 which is still within the calendar year. It was not clearly defined and some mysterious chap must have argued that annual would mean within 12 months from the last cleaning date which probably was in Jun 2012. So Oct will exceed this new definition of annual. That is probably why nea subsequently insisted that the cleaning must be done by Jun.

If TC is to acede to change the annual cleaning to Mar then the cycle is shortened by 3 months. In the long run such practice will lead to increase in the frequency of Major cleaning which will be translated to cost for the TC At sc cc charge of less than $150 per month per stall, TC will find it tough to bear such additional cost.

Therefore the compromise was made but unfortunately things didn't worked out as planned and nobody is willing to admit mistake.

 

[Bigfuck]

How can non-hawkers who know nothing about hawkering discuss about cleaning? Furthermore, PAP dogs some more.

 

[kukubird58]

Your selection of 'facts' is bewildering. NEA said the scaffolding arranged by the hawkers were for the covering of stalls. This is totally illogical - Hawkers hire contractor to cover stalls, so why would they want to hire scaffolding for that job? The contractor covering the stalls will use its own way to cover the stalls. And why would anyone be stupid to use scaffolding for the covering of stall when a ladder would suffice?

Let's face the facts - NEA told the hawkers that there the spring cleaning would be an annual cleaning. NEA had asked the hawkers to arrange for the scaffolding. NEA convey the latter to WP TC. WP TC was prepared to do the annual cleaning until it discovered that there was no scaffolding. So, they proceeded to do the initial spring cleaning. NEA screwed up and facing the wrath of hawkers, decided to write a tale and pin the blame on the WP TC.

That's the simple story that you choose not to see.

hahaha...double confirmed an empty vessel...
1. despite so many postings on this subject, u don't know that scaffolds are needed to cover the stalls; ladders will not suffice...
2. u are better off being a fiction writer telling stories......LTK said in parleement that it was a misunderstanding not the version that you dreamed of.....

with idiotic opps supporters like u, papee will laugh their way to the polls....
asuuming your version of the story is right.....it only double confirms that LTK is a serial liar and had lied again in parleement.....lol.

 

[winnipegjets]

hahaha...double confirmed an empty vessel...
1. despite so many postings on this subject, u don't know that scaffolds are needed to cover the stalls; ladders will not suffice...

Only a dumber like you buy into the tale that scaffolding is need to cover the stalls ...look at the picture



See how low the stall is? A guy using a ladder can do it.
Secondly, why should the hawker even bother how the contractor go about to cover the stall? The hawker just wants his stall covered; he is not going to dictate to the contractor how the job is to be carried out.
So, the VB's tale of scaffolding for stall covering is debunked.

2. u are better off being a fiction writer telling stories......LTK said in parleement that it was a misunderstanding not the version that you dreamed of.....

So, now you think agree with LTK that it is a big misunderstanding?
LTK said it MAY be a misunderstanding.
I believe NEA screwed up and tried to pin the blame on the WP TC.

asuuming your version of the story is right.....it only double confirms that LTK is a serial liar and had lied again in parleement.....lol.

The facts are there to bear out who is the liar. The VB dossier has been shown to be doctored and contain lies. I am glad it is on Hansard as someday, VB will be dealt with for lying to Parliament.

 

[SgParent]

1. despite so many postings on this subject, u don't know that scaffolds are needed to cover the stalls; ladders will not suffice....

disagree.

for the structure that supports the canvass cover, why girl girl/nea-now/you see the need to create/call it a name which nobody else does/understand? dun tell me if the white scums decided to call themselves Gods then you will also happily do that?

nonetheless this is irrelevant because nea-chin/lackey ngkk/ahpetc did not dispute the mar cleaning was a spring cleaning and not an annual cleaning which include >2.5m areas.

 

[rushifa666]

If any of you have the time, go and ask your hawker in any pap ward when they put that stupid canvas if they have to pay extra. Because mine confirmed it. And they have paid extra for every cleaning every year. The genius TC did not even have the foresight to give stalls a cover over their heads. Same genius also built the roof so fricking high in some places that its three storeys above ground.

 

[liangshan]

It occurred to me that
1 the original intention is a quarterly spring cleaning
2 somebody from mysterious organisation wanted this cleaning to include high area
3 TC objected as annual cleaning is scheduled in Oct
4 this unknown party insisted and final compromise, with the coordination of nea is for hawker to pay for scaffolding while TC provide labour foc for cleaning of high areas. That is why despite knowing that closure is for 5 days, the official classification is still Quarterly Cleaning.
5 this mysterious rep when back telling hawkers that TC wants them to pay.
6 hawkers refuse and the mysterious rep left the matter as it is resulting in closure with no scaffolding.

Inform you 5 days cleaning and you still assume it's quarterly cleaning?

Go and read the emails provided by AHPETC. Pradreep from AHPETC was the one who brought up about scaffolding . Not some mysterious organisation as you claimed. There was no signs of objection in the emails stating that WP or the TC wanted it to be in October. Whole thing is WP screw up. Not the imaginary story as u claimed.

 

[SgParent]

Inform you 5 days cleaning and you still assume it's quarterly cleaning?

Go and read the emails provided by AHPETC. Pradreep from AHPETC was the one who brought up about scaffolding . Not some mysterious organisation as you claimed. There was no signs of objection in the emails stating that WP or the TC wanted it to be in October. Whole thing is WP screw up. Not the imaginary story as u claimed.

informed you spring cleaning you still assume it's annual cleaning?

go and read the emails provided by girl girl. nea-chin/lackey ngkk/ahpetc brought up about spring cleaning in mar. not some mysterious annual cleaning as you claimed. there was no sign of objection in the emails stating that nea-chin or lackey ngkk wanted it to be a annual cleaning. whole thing is girl girl's screw up. not the imaginary story as you've claimed

 

[winnipegjets]

Inform you 5 days cleaning and you still assume it's quarterly cleaning?

Go and read the emails provided by AHPETC. Pradreep from AHPETC was the one who brought up about scaffolding . Not some mysterious organisation as you claimed. There was no signs of objection in the emails stating that WP or the TC wanted it to be in October. Whole thing is WP screw up. Not the imaginary story as u claimed.

The WP TC had put out its schedule. NEA does not have the legal authority to change the schedule put out by the TC.

 

[tanwahp]

Inform you 5 days cleaning and you still assume it's quarterly cleaning?

Go and read the emails provided by AHPETC. Pradreep from AHPETC was the one who brought up about scaffolding . Not some mysterious organisation as you claimed. There was no signs of objection in the emails stating that WP or the TC wanted it to be in October. Whole thing is WP screw up. Not the imaginary story as u claimed.

The first thing any TC staff with experience will do is to check that there was no mistake when NEA wants to close the hawker centre down for 5 days for spring cleaning.

The next e-mail seemed to indicate that there was some telephone conversation as the scaffolding was mentioned impromptu. It could be confirmed that 1. it was spring cleaning with overriding ceiling cleaning with hawkers wanting to pay for ceiling cleaning or 2. it was merely spring cleaning but TC is not in a position to determine the days NEA wanted the centre closed.

 

[tanwahp]

The WP TC had put out its schedule. NEA does not have the legal authority to change the schedule put out by the TC.

Should be the other way round. NEA seems to decide the dates and TC complies.

 

[Goh Meng Seng]

I cannot believe you are so lame to such an extend... LTK has already surrendered, putting his head into the sand like an ostrich, doesn't dare to investigate to get the truth but yet, you are just giving lame twisted logic to justify WP's incompetency and blunders?

LTK doesn't dare to investigate because the truth may just be very ugly for him and WP to take...so, just move on lah! Ssssshhhh! Say no more, let Singaporeans decide!

Goh Meng Seng

Should be the other way round. NEA seems to decide the dates and TC complies.

 

[SgParent]

......... Say no more, let Singaporeans decide! Goh Meng Seng

that's so embarrassingly lame and embarrassingly stupid, coming from you.

if you really believe that then what have you got to say after being rejected by singaporeans repeatedly? even tkl, endorsed by you also kena jialat jialat by "singaporeans decide"

 

[tanwahp]

I cannot believe you are so lame to such an extend... LTK has already surrendered, putting his head into the sand like an ostrich, doesn't dare to investigate to get the truth but yet, you are just giving lame twisted logic to justify WP's incompetency and blunders?

LTK doesn't dare to investigate because the truth may just be very ugly for him and WP to take...so, just move on lah! Ssssshhhh! Say no more, let Singaporeans decide!

Goh Meng Seng

Since you quoted this statement of mine, I gather you have issue with the validity of the statement. Maybe you can explain why NEA wrote this:

"Hi Mr Predeep The next spring cleaning date for 538 Bedok North St 3 will be from 4/3/13 (Mon) to 8/3/13 (Fri) as proposed by Hawkers Association rep.. Pl let us know if you have any comments. Thank you. Regards Chin PeiYun . Executive (Facilities & Management) . Hawker Centres Division . National Environment Agency ."

Like I say, follow through your arguments instead of disappear for days and wait for the coast to clear then come back with same motherhood statements. The same when you claimed ATL sent a quotation addressed to "Chairman", then disappeared.

 

[Thick Face Black Heart]

I cannot believe you are so lame to such an extend... LTK has already surrendered, putting his head into the sand like an ostrich, doesn't dare to investigate to get the truth but yet, you are just giving lame twisted logic to justify WP's incompetency and blunders?

LTK doesn't dare to investigate because the truth may just be very ugly for him and WP to take...so, just move on lah! Ssssshhhh! Say no more, let Singaporeans decide!

Goh Meng Seng

The dossier blatantly put the word "annual" inside when in fact, there was no "annual" in the initial correspondence between the parties. What does that tell you? They're trying to make a mountain out of a molehill, from Day One. What is there to rebut then? Nothing. All hot air and dirty politicking. Come 2016 we will see who is the winner.

 

[Goh Meng Seng]

It is an indisputable fact that AHTC has written to ask for erection and dismantling of the scaffolding. If there is no basic understanding between the three sides that this 5 day cleaning exercise also include the high rise cleaning, why would AHTC ask about scaffolding?

And it is also clear that there isn't a single confusion about AHTC is supposed to do the high rise cleaning, unlike what is claimed in parliament about "confusion". It is just a plain refuse to clean for whatever reasons, most likely the failure of WP's contractor ATL in getting extra payment from hawkers. Pretty straight forward here. i.e. while initially AHTC knew of its responsibility of cleaning the ceilings but its contractors refused to clean after failure of double charging the hawkers. QED.


Goh Meng Seng

 

[Seee3]

Inform you 5 days cleaning and you still assume it's quarterly cleaning?

Go and read the emails provided by AHPETC. Pradreep from AHPETC was the one who brought up about scaffolding . Not some mysterious organisation as you claimed. There was no signs of objection in the emails stating that WP or the TC wanted it to be in October. Whole thing is WP screw up. Not the imaginary story as u claimed.

Not sure if this is the email you are referring :
http://www.ahpetc.sg/wp-content/upl...ail-Correspondence-between-NEA-and-AHPETC.pdf
If it is, I can only gather from it that PS was referring to just spring cleaning as indicated in the subject title of his email the fact that he brought the scaffolding issue showed that someone else had asked for it and he was only following up on the matter.

If you refer to this post fro JJ, his reaction to nea's clarification on requirement for only 1 annual high level cleaning is an indication that someone had being asking for more than 1 high level cleaning per year. http://sghardtruth.com/2013/06/02/a...ully-bedok-hougang-hawkers-stallholders-saga/. Therefore, PS cannot be the one who requested for the scaffolding.

A short story for your consumption. A vehicle workshop offered annual m'tce package of 4 servicing per yr. The coverage of each servicing is different, with the last servicing being most extensive - including replacement of brakes and would require 8 hrs. Other servicing requires only 2 h. Ah Kow took up the package. He planned to drive to Malaysia and insisted that the workshop to change his brakes at the 3rd servicing. A compromise was struck with Ah Kow promising to provide the parts while the workshop will provide labour foc. On the servicing day, Ah Kow failed in arranging for the parts to be delivered to the workshop and his car was left in the workshop for 8 hr without the brakes replaced. Ah Kow shouted at the staff that the mere fact that he agreed to leave the car for 8 hr clearly indicated that he wanted servicing coverage to be that of the 4th servicing with the brakes replaced and the workshop is irresponsible. End of story.

 

[tanwahp]

It is an indisputable fact that AHTC has written to ask for erection and dismantling of the scaffolding. If there is no basic understanding between the three sides that this 5 day cleaning exercise also include the high rise cleaning, why would AHTC ask about scaffolding?

And it is also clear that there isn't a single confusion about AHTC is supposed to do the high rise cleaning, unlike what is claimed in parliament about "confusion". It is just a plain refuse to clean for whatever reasons, most likely the failure of WP's contractor ATL in getting extra payment from hawkers. Pretty straight forward here. i.e. while initially AHTC knew of its responsibility of cleaning the ceilings but its contractors refused to clean after failure of double charging the hawkers. QED.


Goh Meng Seng

More motherhood statements here.

AHPETC ask about scaffolding = AHPETC should know that there is high rise cleaning

AHPETC is responsible for ceiling cleaning = AHPETC is expected to clean the ceiling at anyone's beck and call with no regard to timeline.

Yes, QED on your part. We will leave it to readers to determine the logical reality.

 

[leetahbah]

A short story for your consumption. A vehicle workshop offered annual m'tce package of 4 servicing per yr. The coverage of each servicing is different, with the last servicing being most extensive - including replacement of brakes and would require 8 hrs. Other servicing requires only 2 h. Ah Kow took up the package. He planned to drive to Malaysia and insisted that the workshop to change his brakes at the 3rd servicing. A compromise was struck with Ah Kow promising to provide the parts while the workshop will provide labour foc. On the servicing day, Ah Kow failed in arranging for the parts to be delivered to the workshop and his car was left in the workshop for 8 hr without the brakes replaced. Ah Kow shouted at the staff that the mere fact that he agreed to leave the car for 8 hr clearly indicated that he wanted the brakes replaced and the workshop is irresponsible. End of story.

Story don't make sense... 3rd servicing - Ah Kow provide parts, workshop will provide labour foc. What about 4th servicing? Is workshop providing parts again with labour foc for 4th servicing or is it a short 2hr servicing?

A more likely alternative is Ah Kow and the Workshop bring forward the 4th servicing to 3rd and make the 4th servicing a short 2 hr servicing. No customer in his right mind would provide the parts when the package has included it.