Seen workers on the cargo decks of lorries?

[hibiscus24]

Hi all, Please take a little time to respond if you have thoughts about this issue. Thanks! - Hib.

--

Seen workers on the cargo decks of lorries?

PROJECT HUMANE TRANSPORT is a citizens' initiative to appeal for workers to be transported on buses instead of on the cargo decks of lorries and trucks. There are daily discomforts, stress from high-risk travel and serious, deadly consequences from this hazardous practice. In the worst accident in Singapore so far this year, four migrant workers were killed in an accident while being ferried in this manner in May.

We would like to hear from you. Please tell us what you think of this practice and what values a shift to using buses would represent. Unless you would like to remain anonymous, please include your name, age, where you're from (if you're not Singaporean) and occupation. If you're a tourist, please mention that.

Thank you!
ProjectHumaneTransport@gmail.com

--

[so what]

Talking about discomfort & stressful travel...have you taken the MRT lately?
Compared to this, sitting in the back of a truck is like sitting in a limo.

4 migrant workers dead, yep, thats too bad. But compare this to the number of Malaysian migrant motorcyclists that get killed every year.

At least the trucks are part of slow moving traffic. Move all those migrant workers in fast moving busses with brain dead Singaporean drivers, and you are guaranteed to increase the number of fatal accidents.

[hibiscus24]

Update from Project Humane Transport
--------------------------------------------------------

Dear Friends,

Have you heard? (We did, we sat in on Parliament yesterday)

The Government has decided on tweaking safety regulations instead of
transporting workers on passenger vehicles – workers are going to
continue being transported on the cargo decks of goods vehicles.

http://www.todayonline.com/Singapore/EDC090819-0000036/Greater-safety-in-phases
http://www.todayonline.com/Singapore/EDC090819-0000044/New-measures

Senior Parliamentary Secretary for Transport Teo Ser Luck said in
Parliament that "safety is paramount". We couldn’t agree more!

Goods vehicles are meant for, well, GOODS.

Dr Joseph Thambiah, head of NUH's orthopaedic trauma division says
“the absence of restraints or seat belts means that those sittings on
the cargo deck could still injure themselves if they were flung
against each other, or thrown to the back of the lorry" (ST, 19 August
2009).

The cargo deck of a lorry is not meant for passengers and remains
unsafe, even with the new regulations (for canopies and higher
railings). Moreover, there is a timeline of  3 years to comply.

Has cost overwritten safety once more?

Tell decision-makers how you feel about the new recommendations. Write
to the letters pages of newspapers – in all languages. (And do send a
copy to us at projecthumanetransport@gmail.com) If your letter is
published, please let us know.

Blog about it, speak out on the Reach portal
http://app.reach.gov.sg/reach/default.aspx (someone has started a
thread) – keep talking!

Post relevant links here so we can follow your efforts.

Why write when the decision has been made? Because decision-makers
need to understand how concerned Singaporeans feel.

We'll be in touch. SOON!

Thank you very much,
Project Humane Transport
-------------------------------------

Admins: Just a word of appreciation for letting this be up. It's a tough task and it's heartening that someone is doing something for those who don't have enough clout to do it themselves. Thanks!

[Vulcanl]

Hibiscus24,

Congrats on your success (I read the ST editorial this past weekend as well).

When I first read your post here I thought nothing of it, and mused to myself that there must be other more worthwhile causes to pursue.

I have to admit that after thinking about it the cause is indeed a valid one.  Human beings should not be treated as cargo, and if even China goes to the trouble of insisting on buses for workers then companies in Singapore should do this at a bare minimum as well.

This is a great example of grassroots activism resulting in positive change here in Singapore. 

Thank You for your efforts!

[hibiscus24]

Hi Vulcan, thanks!

It may seem not important in the face of "bigger" problems, but it is still an issue, it matters every day to a section of people, and they need representation. Admittedly I am not able to do much; having been an Expatsingaporean for a while, I figured I have the legitimacy ( :-) ) to post the survey question here; and as a volunteer withMigrant Voices  there is a little bit I do when I can. I used to feel guilty about that, but I've come to realise that even if it is a little, why hold back - why not give whatever you can, be it little or much!

It's tough times for everyone though (I came through retrenchment and I am just about making it via freelancing for now), and if one stops to think, the guys at the bottom have it worst of all.

And then, to not even get a decent van ride back to their container home.

[Lil Miss Realistic]

I think it wouldn't cost much at all to hire a bus to transport workers.
You can fit more in, its much safer for the workers and not only that, the lorries can be used for what its meant for - cargo.

So, yeah, why not.
If its not put into practice it would be just another example of financial factors being more important than humane ones - but it really isn't new in this world, isn't it.

[hibiscus24]

Oops BM: Sorry about posting the link (to the Migrant Voices website). It's Googlable anyway.

LMR: It doesn't cost money but it costs a little bit of thought and organisation - it's no loss to the company, for sure - but as long as there is no pressure on the contractors, they won't bother.

Aside, I heard someone say (indignantly!): "The workers should refuse to accept such conditions! They should demand proper transport!" And their alternative is to... walk home. This person was obviously someone who doesn't think very much.

[TheWrathOfGrapes]

LMR - it is all about financial consideration.

Most contractors and sub-contractors own some lorries - they are the necessary tools of trade. They are used to carry cargo, equipment, materials and humans (unfortunately). Before and after the daily work, the lorries are idle and so they are used to ferry the workers. Hiring buses and vans would be additional cost, whereas the lorries are already sunk cost.  Most likely, they will have to pay more than other civilians who hire the buses/vans as the construction workers are not exactly as clean as office workers or school children, and there will be a lot of cleaning up to do if those vehicles are to be used for other purposes. And these vehicles for hire have to ply many times a day to claw back the expenses, but workers need to be ferried only twice a day.

So, unless laws are passed and enforced, lorries will continued to be used. If laws are enforced, the additional costs will be passed to the contractors who may then docked it from their workers. It may mean the worker getting less take-home pay for that little extra comfort and safety. If given a choice, I doubt many workers will go for the buses. 40 sweaty, muddy and smelly workers squeezed into a bus, versus 10 sitting in airy breezy open-air lorries - take your pick.

[Lester25]

Sorry but that argument doesn't wash. Employers should be obliged (by law) to provide a safe working environment for employees, and that includes the transport used to carry them around. If seat belts are mandated in school buses, they should be for all transport. I am sure you wouldn't argue that employers shouldn't be forced to provide helmets and safety harnesses and other safety equipment to their employees on the basis that this will add to their costs? Any increase in employer's costs would be passed on to their customers or as reduced profits,  and not via cutting employees wages and if the change is mandated by law it will result in an increase in costs for all employers, with no impact on their relative competitiveness.

[TheWrathOfGrapes]

Lester, I don't think there is any divergence in views here. My point is:

So, unless laws are passed and enforced, lorries will continued to be used. If laws are enforced, the additional costs will be passed to the contractors who may then docked it from their workers.

You mentioned seat belts for school buses - they were mandated recently. That problem has been known for many years, until some school kids got injured/killed. So yes, until many more construction workers are killed, or the pressure/negative publicity from the public gets noticed, the status will remain quo. And yes, the school children now have to pay more for their bus rides.