On December 3, Nicole Seah and Kenneth Foo posted on Facebook regarding their visits to 216 Hawker Centre.
They cast aspersions on the funding for the renovation.
So here’s my question, since both of them met face-to-face, why didn’t Nicole Seah ask Mr Tan about the renovation funding?
What was her intention in creating that Facebook post with no mention or photo of a conversation with Mr Tan, who was on the ground during their visit?
The renovated hawker centre is the culmination of the efforts of the East Coast Town Council together with the dedication of hawkers from 216 Hawkers Association and representatives from Bedok Town Centre Merchants’ Association. They spent hours and hours discussing the plans, months before the work even started.
It is unbecoming of Nicole Seah and Kenneth Foo to make claims on Facebook when Nicole had the chance to ask Kiat How about the renovation.
What bothers me is this.
The second part of her post stated that she had met a resident during her walkabout, and she shared the resident’s story as a true anecdote that she could not verify.
Let's take a closer look at her story.
Nicole mentioned she spoke with a blue-collar worker nearby who almost cried as she shared the story with her.
According to Nicole, the worker said she was verbally abused by a supervisor, who also used a mop to express his anger and abused low-wage employees who could not afford to resign.
As Nicole explained, she offered the worker to write an appeal to the Ministry of Manpower (“MOM”) for further assistance, but the worker declined her offer as she worried about the potential consequences as she also finds it difficult to land gainful employment.
Let’s assume this anecdote is accurate and give Nicole the benefit of the doubt. I would like to ask the following question;
Was Nicole’s advice to the Worker correct?
Has Nicole Seah considered that not all employment matters require immediate attention from the MOM?
Is Nicole aware that she can appeal to the Tripartite Alliance for Fair and Progressive Employment Practices (“TAFEP”) instead?
It is unlikely that the worker will encounter any workplace discrimination after reporting her former abusive employer with the assistance of the Tripartite Alliance for Fair and Progressive Employment Practices. This is because TAFEP is very professional and know how to handle workplace concerns while protecting the worker.
As a PR professional as well as a politician, Nicole shows a lack of professionalism by making such a post.
If her intent is to create awareness of workplace harassment, in this case, she should first give her full effort to assist the worker in the appeal, once she had brought light to the case and stopped any potential future abuse in the alleged workplace. After that, she can then publicise the case as a case study to share. This is the right way to go about it.
It is not worth publicizing a post if nothing can be done and no facts can be verified.
