recently there was a newspaper report that stated that bus companies are having a lot of difficulties hiring local drivers: the prime reason is singaporeans are too choosy and dislike the long hours that might stretch to a 10 – 12 hour shift.

therefore, the report hints that that leaves the state run government linked company no alternative but to look to foreign drivers.

as i sat there and pondered the story in a cab on the way to another drinking session (seems like i am drinking quite a bit in singapore also, after i have came back from algeria), i begin to doubt the authenticity of the report. i mean, if you take a taxi often, when have you come across a non- singaporean driver?

look, cab drivers has incredibly long shifts, they are treated as “owners” but tended to as slaves. it is more like a co-op farmer who relies on the state. their income fluctuates like crazy but rarely goes above 3.5k. while, bus captains (stupid GLC-esque euphemism), in that report, are said to gross above 3k and have long but fixed hours, benefits, insurance and the likes…

now correct me if i am wrong, if that is so, shouldnt people prefer to be a bus driver instead of a cab driver? apart of the imagined “flexibility” i see little that is of great sway to driving a cab.

so, taking in all these ‘analysis’, why is the report framed in such a way? me thinks that it is a novel way of maintaining SMRT/Trans island’s profit margin. simple and masterful really. if you cannot stand the pressure of increasing the fare just to meet your (CEO) personal sales growth and why not reduce the local drivers with cheaper ones in china?

before you get me wrong, i am not anti globalisation, in fact, i think it is the only way to grow. however, to say replace the GLC’s real motive with some crap reasoning really shows that the media is being controlled and also that our GLCs have no other objective than to keep profits.

oh.. it disgusts me.