Sunday, December 18, 2011
Wednesday: 5 hours of disruption on Circle Line.
Thursday: 6 hours of disruption on North-South Line.
Saturday: 7 hours of disruption on North-South Line.
Sunday: 6 hours of disruption on North-South Line and East-West Line. (Inspections)
At a time when our MRT system falls into a unprecedented 24-year low in terms of reliability, causing some hundreds of thousands of commuters to be inconvenienced, many questions have been raised and they ought to be explained. I'm raising a few other concerns and observations.
1. After LTA and SMRT spent the whole of Sunday morning inspecting the trains and tracks, it threw up serious inconsistencies--many parts of tracks were found damaged and many of the "third rail" misaligned. As many as 13 trains were also found to be damaged and have to be removed from service. How then, were the "routine" nightly checks effective? And the SMRT CEO claimed that the damaged "third rail" , which caused the worst-ever disruption on Thursday evening, was inspected some 5 days before, it isn't very convincing to me that in just 5 days, 20-over parts of the tracks "suddenly" had problems.
2. During the Thursday breakdown, no doubt their "emergency procedures" were put in place (as claimed), they obviously were not able to reach out to the very victims adequately. Announcements were far and few, and many commuters who weren't conversant with English were left puzzled and helpless. This is definitely not a new problem. I read the Chinese newspapers daily, and all these years, there had been countless calls, through the forum pages, for the MRT systems to put more signs and directions in other official languages. All these have fallen on deaf ears. Now, even during emergencies, if they do not attempt to reach out to as many people out there as possible through the broadcast of different languages, they cannot expect people to remain calm and act wisely.
3. Lack of flexibility! On Wednesday when the Circle Line was disrupted, trains that were running on all other lines continued to broadcast information at the interchange stations, asking people to transfer to the Circle Line. Shouldn't these pre-programmed information be silenced and replaced by verbal broadcasts to commuters, so that they will not proceed to the platform and add on to the crowd? Some flexibility ought to be practiced during times of emergencies, no? I think staff should be empowered to exercise what they think should be done during emergencies, so that fears and uncertainties can be allayed.
------------------------------------------
There are many calls for the CEO to step down and be held accountable for the many failures of SMRT. But on the other side of the camp, there are people who feel that we shouldn't always be asking for 'resignations' whenever something happens.
Let me give you my 2 cents' worth.
1. In the private world, people in the top seats are always under scrutiny and are answerable to companies' performances. Bad decisions or poor performances will mean the end of their leadership. After all, these are very much what the shareholders care. If you don't live up to expectations, off you go. SMRT is ambiguously defined along the boundaries of private or public. But since she is not a politician; and the gahmen sees the company as part of "private sector", then double standards should not be practiced. Furthermore, the company is accountable to us, the daily millions of commuters. If the management isn't performing, the boss has to answer for it.
2. The CEO has consistently been under the bad light of poor Public Relations. During the past few years, there had been a spike in grouses and unhappiness. The management's poor answers to all these, has painted a 'nonchalant' image of themselves. The classic answer to the inability of commuters to board their first train, "People can board the trains – it is whether they choose to", had caused the ire of commuters, especially when she is not a commuter herself. Then time and again, there are new train faults and track faults. Each time, they seemed to just apologise, move on, and then the next problem arose. People want the problems to stop, or at least be less frequent, but the way they handled Public Relations did not totally serve to put a closure to the concerns of commuters.
3. Two major security lapses at MRT depots were unexcusable. Complacency could be happening in the large organisation, and this can seriously compromise the safety of the people and the nation. Look, 27 major service lapses in this year alone, with many more minor ones that might have gone unreported. If a bottom-up approach to solve such complacencies is not working, then a decisive top-down solution is needed. A new management with a new CEO might just be what the company needs to carry out major changes in corporate mindset, attitude and instill public confidence.
My stand: Off you go.
---------------------------------------
On the issue of penalties for SMRT, let me say this: DON'T FINE THEM. But let me explain why.
1. Fines had been a mode of penalty all these years. Does it work? Obviously not.
2. Fines will just make the company even MORE complacent. The management may get away with the thinking that "What is the worst thing that can happen to us? Just a fine will do. We will raise fares again the next year anyway." Yes, just look at the annual report--the company is cash-loaded enough to pay for such fines.
3. Fines may just mean something like 'transferring the money from the left pocket into the right pocket', if you establish the links of who exactly is the major stakeholder of the company.
4. SMRT's disruptions inconvenienced commuters. So, the rightful penalty should be something that returns the favour back to them, instead of a Fine that does not, in any direct way, appease the commuters.
In my opinion, the best penalty is to FREEZE FARES. Of course, everyone will hope that fares be lowered in the light of poor service. But you and I know that this will never happen. Similarly, asking the company to provide a day of free service may run into some complications, because our MRT system is being run by 2 different operators.
Freezing Fares, on the other hand, will serve to make them more motivated to improve their service standards. Only when their standards are restored and improved to a level that satisfies criteria and expectations, do they deserve having the Freeze removed. It is not a directly painful penalty, since they are still enjoying profits annually, but if standards do not improve when the Freeze is still in place, those profits will surely be eroded.
I hope the authorities consider the options when dishing out penalties.
人生是黑白的.
7:19 PM <3
>>>
