Jump to content

Flyover collapses at Upper Changi, PIE

Showster

By Showster,
in Lite & EZ

 Share

Recommended Posts

Icedbs

Icedbs

Turbocharged
(edited)

The disturbing trend here is that our authorities are outsourcing their 'last defence' role

 

I would think that even if the checker's role is outsource, someone from the authorities has to approved the checker's results ?

Edited by Icedbs
↡ Advertisement
Link to post
Share on other sites
Soya

Soya

Supersonic

I would think that even if the checker's role is outsource, someone from the authorities has to approved the checker's results ?

I tink they juz go by 'declaration' by the checker and rubber stamp the approval

 

How else does that explain despite having a checker, the thing collapse n checker admit he actually didn't check...?

 

That's why i say the system damn screwed up. U dun really know what's properly checked and what juz been rubber stamped...

Link to post
Share on other sites
Beehive3783

Beehive3783

Turbocharged

Same as all those lift inspection certs and PE certs and lifting certs.

 

Do the PEs really check? Who knows?

 

If they value their reputation and career, they probably will. But those older, more complacent ones would just put their stamp on the paper and collect the money.

 

I tink they juz go by 'declaration' by the checker and rubber stamp the approval

How else does that explain despite having a checker, the thing collapse n checker admit he actually didn't check...?

That's why i say the system damn screwed up. U dun really know what's properly checked and what juz been rubber stamped...

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Atonchia

Atonchia

Supersonic

unfortunately the whole world especially singapore is rapidly adopting the "outsourcing" approach..

 

just like HR, employees are outsourced too..

 

 

unfortunately the whole world especially singapore is rapidly adopting the "outsourcing" approach..

 

just like HR, employees are outsourced too..

To me outsourcing has it's own advantage too, usually the company has expertise in the field of work.

 

Is like aggregation of resources, shared across different customers.

 

Most important is choosing the right source and regular audit to ensure the service/expertise provided is up to par.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Knoobie

Knoobie

Supercharged

To me outsourcing has it's own advantage too, usually the company has expertise in the field of work.

 

Is like aggregation of resources, shared across different customers.

 

Most important is choosing the right source and regular audit to ensure the service/expertise provided is up to par.

 

unfortunately outsourcing here is mainly to cut costs or to transfer the responsibility instead..

  • Praise 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
Lala81

Lala81

Hypersonic

To me outsourcing has it's own advantage too, usually the company has expertise in the field of work.

 

Is like aggregation of resources, shared across different customers.

 

Most important is choosing the right source and regular audit to ensure the service/expertise provided is up to par.

 

Frequently it's also a dead end job if u are the regulator. Attracting talent could also be difficult from a  HR perspective. 

Not surprising, why "outsource when u can" is becoming the norm.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Jusnel

Jusnel

6th Gear

I tink they juz go by 'declaration' by the checker and rubber stamp the approval

 

How else does that explain despite having a checker, the thing collapse n checker admit he actually didn't check...?

 

That's why i say the system damn screwed up. U dun really know what's properly checked and what juz been rubber stamped...

 

just like car workshops promising 36 check points in oil servicing package.

 

How the hell we know the mechanic will actually check 36?  he just simply sign on the form. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Victor68

Victor68

Turbocharged

To me outsourcing has it's own advantage too, usually the company has expertise in the field of work.

 

Is like aggregation of resources, shared across different customers.

 

Most important is choosing the right source and regular audit to ensure the service/expertise provided is up to par.

Regulatory works should be done by an independent body with no profit mindset. If you can award checks to individuals at a cost, then you can influence how you wish the checks to be conducted.

  • Praise 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
Soya

Soya

Supersonic

Frequently it's also a dead end job if u are the regulator. Attracting talent could also be difficult from a HR perspective.

Not surprising, why "outsource when u can" is becoming the norm.

The authorities can still outsource but it has to come under their control and employment. Developers/contractors pay a fixed fee to the authorities who will then appoint a checker from their own panel of accredited checkers to do a proper check

 

The current system of outsourcing the appointment of the checker to the party that's it is supposed to be checking against is simply ridiculous

  • Praise 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
Lala81

Lala81

Hypersonic

The authorities can still outsource but it has to come under their control and employment. Developers/contractors pay a fixed fee to the authorities who will then appoint a checker from their own panel of accredited checkers to do a proper check

 

The current system of outsourcing the appointment of the checker to the party that's it is supposed to be checking against is simply ridiculous

 

Agreed.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Ben5266

Ben5266

Supercharged

Regulatory works should be done by an independent body with no profit mindset. If you can award checks to individuals at a cost, then you can influence how you wish the checks result to be concluded conducted.

 

 

Updated for you.  [laugh]

  • Praise 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
inlinesix

inlinesix

Hypersonic

The authorities can still outsource but it has to come under their control and employment. Developers/contractors pay a fixed fee to the authorities who will then appoint a checker from their own panel of accredited checkers to do a proper check

 

The current system of outsourcing the appointment of the checker to the party that's it is supposed to be checking against is simply ridiculous

 

Even though it is ridiculous, we still LLST

Link to post
Share on other sites
Atrecord

Atrecord

Supersonic
Accredited checker jailed over PIE viaduct collapse which left 1 dead, 10 injured
 
 
 

SINGAPORE: A 61-year-old engineer who failed to make sure that the supporting structures of an uncompleted viaduct were sound was jailed for six months on Thursday (Jul 4).

Singaporean Leong Sow Hon's actions contributed to the collapse of a part of the 1.8km-long Pan Island Expressway (PIE) viaduct, which was under construction along Upper Changi Road East on Jul 14, 2017.  

 

 

A worker, Chinese national Chen Yinchuan, died in the collapse, and 10 others were injured.

Leong, The managing director of construction specialist firm Calibre Consulting (Singapore), was appointed as an accredited checker by the Land Transport Authority. 

He failed to evaluate, analyse and review the structural design in the relevant plans and failed to perform original calculations for all the permanent corbels, the prosecution said.

Permanent corbels are key structural elements of the viaduct as they are essential for its support and overall structural stability, explained Deputy Public Prosecutor Yang Ziliang.

 

The design was so inadequate that parts of the viaduct were too weak to support their intended weight even during the construction stage, the court heard.

Leong admitted on Jun 24 that he did not check the designs or perform calculations for the corbels.

Because of the incident, the estimated completion date of the viaduct has been pushed back by at least two years from the first quarter of 2020 to the first half of 2022.

Leong is the first person involved in the case to be sentenced. The rest, including the qualified person who designed the building works and the builder Or Kim Peow Contractors, are set to claim trial.

The prosecution asked for at least nine months' jail for Leong, saying there was "complete inadequacy" in checking the corbels. 

He added that "the collapse of the viaduct would have been inevitable", and that many people would have been harmed either during the construction stage or after the viaduct was open to traffic.

Leong's defence lawyer Lim Lian Kee asked for a fine of S$25,000.

 

 

Tio jail 6 mth liao...

  • Praise 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
Celicar

Celicar

Turbocharged

Leong's defence lawyer Lim Lian Kee asked for a fine of S$25,000.

 

How on EARTH did this lawyer justify his ask?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Atrecord

Atrecord

Supersonic

How on EARTH did this lawyer justify his ask?

 

if $2,500 will be too frivolous, and $250,000 maybe feel the pinch. So settle for $25,000 lor. [laugh]

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...