Update 27 Nov: Police seen again at dormitory after 60 of the 102 strikers did not turn up for work. I do not understand this. How can sending in the police to those who don’t want to work help settle a wage dispute? What is the priority here– to come to an amicable settlement, or to put on a show of force?
RIOT POLICE. Apparently that’s who the authorities called in when 100 SMRT bus drivers refused to report for work.
Come on, what is this? People go on strike and your first response is to surround them with riot police? What crime did they commit? Were they rioting? Did they damage any property? Did they threaten anyone?
All news reports simply point to the drivers refusing to board the buses to bring them from their dormitories to their depots. Yet someone saw it fit to call in MOM, call in the riot police.
For what? To intimidate the drivers?
The message is loud and clear: Don’t anyone ever think of going on strike.
But I think the real message they’ve sent is how scared the PAP is of industrial disputes, how its so-called listed companies which make their own commercial decisions cannot resolve their own commercial problems without running like crybabies to the nanny govt, and how they exploit cheap labour en masse.
Rather than let workers and management settle their own industrial disputes without govt interference, you chose to put on a show of force to intimidate workers.
How can we believe all their tri-partite nonsense when the unions are powerless and the Govt brings its riot police to the table whenever there is any hint of industrial dispute?
Shame on you, PAP!