Blog

  • Postman Wins ‘Turban Battle’ Over Disney

    Postman Wins ‘Turban Battle’ Over Disney

    MIAMI • A Sikh postman at Disney World in Florida has won a legal fight against the global entertainment giant after he said he had been made to work away from customers so they would not see his beard and turban.

    Lawyers for Mr Gurdit Singh said he had been segregated from staff and customers at the Florida theme park because he violated a “look policy”, the BBC reported.

    Disney now says Mr Singh can deliver post on all routes, in full view of customers. It says it does not discriminate based on religion.

    Mr Singh, who has worked at the theme park since 2008 but always out of sight of visitors, said he was “incredibly thankful” Disney had decided to change course.

    “My hope is that this policy change opens up the door for more Sikhs and other religious minorities to practise their faith freely here at Disney.

    “My turban and beard serve as a constant reminder of my commitment to my faith… these articles remind everybody that we’re all equal. That is not just a Sikh value, that is an American value.”

    In May, lawyers from the American Civil Liberties Union and The Sikh Coalition, an advocacy group for the religion, wrote to Disney expressing their concerns over Mr Singh’s treatment.

    They said he had been assigned to only one delivery route which kept him away from customers, while other staff were rotated through different assignments where they were visible to guests, the BBC said.

    They argued this was “specifically, because of his racial/ethnic and religious appearance”, and was a violation of his civil rights.

    Disney has now put him on all the routes and said it is “committed to diversity and prohibits discrimination based upon religion”.

    Mr Singh remains in his job, delivering post at the park, and says he is happy to work for the company.

    Ms Gurjot Kaur, a lawyer acting for The Sikh Coalition, said her client first applied for a job at Disney in 2005, and was told he would have to work in the back, cleaning the carpark or in the kitchen. “The interviewer indicated that he could not work in front of guests because of his turban and beard,” she said.

    Mr Singh did not take up the position, but applied again in 2008, initially to work as a doorman.

    Despite extensive experience in hospitality, Ms Kaur said her client was denied the job “because his ‘costume’ did not match the ‘costume’ necessary”, and Mr Singh took the word “costume” to mean his turban and beard.

     

    Source: www.straitstimes.com

  • Aide Iskandar: Internal Clashes Contributed To SEA Games Failure

    Aide Iskandar: Internal Clashes Contributed To SEA Games Failure

    It was a resignation which raised more questions than it answered about Singapore’s dismal SEA Games campaign, one which ended in a disappointing group-stage exit and without an expected medal.

    But after staying silent for a month following his shock resignation as coach of the ill-fated national Under-23 football team, former national skipper Aide Iskandar has decided to speak out on a national project that, he said, conceded too many “own goals” within the Football Association of Singapore (FAS).

    “At times it felt like we were battling each other instead of the opposition,” said the 40-year-old of the challenges he faced at the FAS, in his first comments since stepping down immediately after his side’s final group match against Indonesia on June 11.

    In an exclusive interview with The Straits Times, Aide made it clear that he was more than prepared to take the SEA Games fallout solely on his shoulders. But after weeks of soul searching, in which he replayed the events of the past two years in his mind, the former defender has decided to speak out for the sake of the sport.

    He said: “The resignation was my way of taking responsibility for what happened. I was the coach and the buck stops with me. I wanted to protect the team, especially the players, who are still young.

    “But I asked myself, ‘In the end, how is Singapore football benefiting from this episode?’ What happened at the SEA Games would be an even bigger disappointment if we didn’t learn from it and avoid making the same mistakes .

    “Yes, I could have done things better as a coach. But ultimately, my job was also made unnecessarily challenging.”

    “Challenging” was the word he used to describe his tenure as coach when he resigned. It was also the term sports administrators picked up on, as they sought to meet the former coach in the last few weeks to find out just what went wrong.

    For Aide, the “challenges” all arose from the FAS – especially the national teams’ department under head coach Bernd Stange – not being clear about what its key objective for the year was.

    On the one hand, the FAS had announced that the SEA Games would take top priority this year. Yet, at times, it was as if it was merely paying lip service to the idea.

    Initial plans to keep the SEA Games team together for the year went awry when key players Sahil Suhaimi and Faris Ramli were allowed to join the LionsXII in the Malaysia Super League instead of staying as part of Aide’s Courts Young Lions team, who play in the S-League.

    Then came a series of puzzling moves from within the national teams’ department.

    For one thing, fitness coaches were switched late last year, even though the U-23 team were progressing well under Aleksandar Bozenko.

    Bozenko had worked with the team and Aide when they won a SEA Games bronze in 2013 and narrowly missed out on making the next round at last year’s Incheon Asian Games. In South Korea, the team held their own against stronger sides, losing narrowly to Tajikistan and drawing against Oman before beating Palestine, the first win by a Singapore team at the Asian Games since 1990.

    But Aide was instructed to take on German Juergen Raab as his new fitness coach, a move he never signed off on and one which he strongly objected to. Raab, who joined the FAS last October, had previously worked with Stange in Germany.

    Aide was told that Raab had to be assigned to the SEA Games team because funding had been sought from Sport Singapore for him to work specifically with the team.

    Said Aide: “Even when I pointed out how the team did not seem to be responding to Raab and his methods, which resulted in declining fitness levels, I was still asked to keep him on.”

    It was not until April that Aide managed to push the FAS into bringing in former international Kadir Yahaya to help oversee the players’ fitness. Yet, with only two months to go to the Games, there was only so much that could be done.

    It resulted in the team banking on a long-ball game during the SEA Games, a move for which Aide came under heavy criticism.

    Explaining the decision, he said: “The coaches (Kadir and S. Subramani) and I decided that we did not have the fitness levels to play a possession-based game. It would have left us prone to the counter-attack and we would not be able to recover in time.”

    Coaching changes also hampered the team’s preparations just before the tournament. U-23 goalkeeper coach John Burridge asked to be reassigned to the senior team just weeks before the SEA Games. It forced Aide to scramble for a replacement, but more importantly, the change affected his players’ confidence.

    Said Aide: “First-choice goalkeeper Syazwan Buhari actually came up to me and asked, ‘What did I do wrong that John wanted to leave?’”

    Added Syazwan: “John’s departure affected my confidence because it was quite abrupt. When he left, the way we trained changed and it was too late and sudden to adapt to the new training style.”

    Syazwan had a decent Games but made two mistakes in their second match that resulted in both Myanmar goals in the 1-2 loss on June 4.

    Team confidence also took another blow just days before the Games when attacker Iqbal Hussain was dropped from the squad for disciplinary reasons, only to be promoted to the senior squad by Stange for the Lions’ World Cup qualifiers.

    The move infuriated the Young Lions, who felt the German was undermining Aide and creating unnecessary drama at a crucial time. The reserve players on the SEA Games team were also unsettled, wondering if perhaps it would have been better for them to have been excluded from Aide’s team so they could also feature in the senior side.

    Said Aide: “This was the most puzzling move. I told coach Bernd and the management and we decided that it would not have been wise to call up Iqbal given the circumstances. Yet he was called up.”

    The three-time Asean Football Confederation Cup winning defender, capped 121 times by the nation, acknowledged that eyebrows will be raised over his decision to speak up about the torrid campaign.

    Sources acknowledged that there was also a falling out between Stange and Aide, the German’s former assistant. It got to a point where the FAS’ senior management had to step in to prevent the German from upsetting the SEA Games team’s preparation. At times, Aide was more involved in meetings to resolve disputes than coaching.

    When asked about the alleged breakdown in the relationship, Aide declined comment but said he had submitted a report to the FAS about the SEA Games failure.

    “Don’t get me wrong, I am grateful for the opportunity and the resources the team got in terms of training trips to Japan and Turkey,” said Aide of the reported $3.5 million which had been invested in the team to help them at least reach the SEA Games final.

    “But I feel it does not serve Singapore football best if I don’t raise all that went wrong at the SEA Games. This is why I hope lessons can be learnt from the SEA Games disappointment. Many of the problems my team faced could have been avoided.”

     

    Source: www.straitstimes.com

  • Ngiam Tong Dow: Civil Servants Must Understand Ground Before Making Policies

    Ngiam Tong Dow: Civil Servants Must Understand Ground Before Making Policies

    Young civil servants should first walk the ground and understand the problems before they formulate policies, said former top mandarin Ngiam Tong Dow at the DBS Asian Insights Conference today (July 10).

    Mr Ngiam, who had served 40 years as Permanent Secretary in various ministries, was one of the panellists discussing the topic, How Can Singapore Future-proof its Relevance for the Next 50 Years.

    Responding to a question from the audience on whether high salaries in the civil service are diverting talent and growth away from the private sector, he said that civil servants are worthy of their salaries but the way they are trained is important.

    “When a young scholar comes back, he should not be sent to the Ministry of Finance’s Treasury division and become the regulator. He should really be sent to the Economic Development Board (EDB), or the Housing and Development Board, and serve an internship of a year to learn the problems of the ground,” said Mr Ngiam, who is an adjunct professor at the Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy.

    “Unless the civil servant knows the problems on the ground, he would become just a regulator. And regulators, there are too many (of them) in Singapore,” he added, prompting applause from the audience of about 900 Government, business and thought leaders.

    Weighing in on the question, Banyan Tree Holdings executive chairman Ho Kwon Ping said that while tweaks to the public sector’s pay structure may have to be considered along the way, it is better to “err on the side of overpaying”.

    “It is better to tweak and reform the system from where we are today than to have a system where civil servants are all forced to be corrupt because they are so underpaid,” he said.

    However, he noted the danger that this approach poses to the private sector. “(Companies) either have to keep up with the salaries, which are high, or you have an overbalance, or perhaps a hollowing out of the best and brightest in Singapore all going to the public sector. That may not be good for Singapore in the long run,” he said.

    Mr Ngiam added that well-educated Singaporeans should be spread across various segments of society and not concentrated in the public sector. “If you just keep them within the Government, in the long run, (they) become an elite, become fossilised,” he said.

     

    Source: www.todayonline.com

  • Workers’ Party Youth Wing Forum SG100 Conference

    Workers’ Party Youth Wing Forum SG100 Conference

    As Singapore celebrates her golden jubilee, the Workers’ Party Youth Wing calls on fellow young Singaporeans to share their dreams and aspirations for the next 50 years. More than a dozen young Singaporeans will offer their personal views on Singapore’s future development in three panel discussionsWe hope to create a forum for conversation on alternate paths for Singapore — to paint a shared vision and provide inspiration to shaping Singapore’s future to realise community ownership and citizen participation. We hope to provide the catalyst for deeper discussion on the Singapore we want in 2065 and the roadmap to get there. Together, we can build a nation that we can be proud of calling home for generations to come.

    Venue: The Agora, Midview City, no. 18, Sin Ming Lane
    Date: Saturday, 22nd August
    Time: 1pm to 5pm, registration begins at 12pm, doors will close at 12.55pm
    Enquiries: [email protected]

    This event is open to everyone.

    Pre-registration is required due to limited seating capacity at the venue. Pre-registration begins 20th July. Please check back here.

    Programme

    1pm: Opening Statement by WP Youth Wing President Daniel Goh
    1.10pm: Session 1 – Super Urban Singapore (VISION)
    2pm: Session 2 – Community & Heritage (OWNERSHIP)
    2.50pm: Tea Break Session and Art Competition Voting
    3.20pm: Session 3 – Participating in Our Identity (PARTICIPATION)
    4.20pm: Summation and Q&A
    4.40pm: Closing Remarks

    Information about the panellists and their presentation titles will be made available closer to the date

    Session Abstracts

    Super Urban Singapore

    Several major developments that are being planned for the next few decades will transform Singapore’s cityscape. Paya Lebar Airbase and Keppel Port will be relocated, opening up prime land for redevelopment. The current government projects the population will hit 6.9 million in 2030 and is planning to further build up Singapore to accommodate the influx of migrants. By 2065, the 99-year lease clock would be ticking for many HDB estates, where over 80 per cent of Singapore live. The extensive redevelopment of our old heartland regions beckons, as is already happening in old estates such as Queenstown. Would we see the island dominated by 50-storey HDB flats with sky gardens to match the towering skyscrapers of the downtown district? Would most of us live, work, love and shop underground, turning street-front living into a luxury good? What are the environmental, social, cultural and political implications? What should we do to co-create our vision of a super-urban Singapore?

    Community and Heritage
    We frequently use the term “community” in our public debates to refer to stakeholders in policy and political matters. The government regularly calls upon communities to act on a social problem or for the government to act on, and sometimes both. However, are communities empowered to act or by the government’s action? What forms a community and how can a community be empowered with ownership to realise its social aims and aspirations? SG50 has seen an outpouring of commemoration of Singapore’s heritage, which is seen as intimately connected to communities. The Botanic Gardens was recently inscribed as our first UNESCO world heritage site, a place of significant combined natural-cultural heritage. This island that we call home has more cultural capital than we realise. But are we able to go beyond nostalgia and buildings to value cultural traditions and values as our living heritage and use these cultural assets to foster community ownership as we head to SG100?

    Participating in Our Identity
    National identity is represented in the culture, language, traditions, history and politics of the people. It is the sense of the nation as a whole, a description and a proposition expressing a strong sense of belonging and belief amongst the people. Our Singaporean identity has developed strong roots over the past fifty years and continues to evolve. What are the main features of our identity and what foreseeable evolution of our identity in the next fifty years can we expect and should embrace? What challenges to our identity do we face and are there gaps we need to fill? One key foundation for national identities around the world is political culture—the values, institutions and practices associated with governance to keep the country running and secure. Is our political culture solid and stable enough to support our identity? How are we, as citizens, going to participate in the political process and shape our identity?

     

    SG100 Art Comp

     

    Source: http://wpyouth.sg/sg100

  • Mohd Khair: Pinkdot Agendas Undermine Familial And Social Fabric Of Singapore

    Mohd Khair: Pinkdot Agendas Undermine Familial And Social Fabric Of Singapore

    Talking about intolerance, we Singaporeans have been a very tolerant society.

    When a Muslim goes to a non-halal eatery and ask for halal food but none could be served by the eatery, we don’t see Muslims in Singapore suing the owner of the eatery for any form of distress caused by the rejection of the request. In fact, there’s no distress whatsoever.

    Likewise, when a non-Muslim goes to a halal eatery and ask for pork or liquor to be served, we don’t see non-Muslims in Singapore suing the Muslim owner of the eatery for any form of distress caused by the rejection of the request. And really there’s no distress at all.

    Why?

    Because we respect each other’s beliefs and value systems.

    Alcohol drinkers don’t go around suing Muslims just because the latter believe and say that drinking alcohol is wrong based on their religious belief.

    Likewise, we don’t find Muslims in Singapore suing others who say that polygamy is wrong. We don’t. We simply don’t find that in Singapore.

    Why?

    Because this is Singapore, and we are Singaporeans who are very tolerant to different beliefs so long as they do not tear down our basic familial and social fabric. But the moment anyone or any activism is going all out to undermine that familial and social fabric, we Singaporeans will stand up and unite together to defend it at all costs. Defending that familial and social fabric that have been the bedrock of Singapore’s development and progress all these years cannot be deemed as intolerance, cannot be defined as bigotry and cannot be accused of propagating hate speech.

    Instead, those labels should be directed at those who undermine that familial and social fabric that we Singaporeans cherish and protect.

    Why?

    Because they are the ones that are intolerant. Any form of disagreement will be immediately labelled as bigotry and accused of propagating hate. And that is happening now even with the 377A still around. It is not hard to imagine the kind of absolute intolerance we can face if 377A is abolished from the Penal Code.

    How come?

    Well, just look at what is happening right now in the US. Refusing to bake a wedding cake for a gay marriage results in a legal suit. Refusing to solemnise gay marriages is now a crime. And yet lgbt activists here claim that legalising same-sex marriages will not affect anyone at all. It is instead absolutely clear from that legalising same-sex marriage will result in the absolute intolerance on the part of the lgbt activists. The slightest disagreement with them will result in lawsuits or even being charged in court for alleged crimes.

    So, to those lgbt activists and sympathisers, don’t go round saying that we are intolerant as a society in Singapore. Singaporeans have been and will continue to be tolerant so long as the familial and social fabric are not threatened. Once threatened, we will defend it. PERIOD.

    And Singaporeans are neither stupid nor illiterate. We know what the lgbt activism has done to other parts of the world once same-sex marriage is legalised.

    Same-sex marriage has become the demon that is out to destroy the institution of marriage and family in those countries. If ever 377A is abolished and same-sex marriage is legalised in Singapore, the same level of intolerance or more will also set foot. SSM will then be used to knock out anyone, any organisation, any religion and any law (including AMLA – Administration of Muslim Law Act) that is against same-sex marriage.

    So, don’t ever say that pinkdot is an innocent movement just for a group of lgbts and their supporters to celebrate diversity and the freedom to love. Pinkdot is a political movement that is intolerant of the familial and social values so dearly upheld by Singaporeans all these while. These are the very familial and social values that have seen us through the ups and downs of Singapore’s development and progress. Pinkdot wants us to abolish Section 377A and legalise same-sex marriage. And should that be allowed to happen, the pinkdot will transform itself into a demon that will be so intolerant to any form of disagreement to same-sex marriages and to its lifestyle choice of freedom to love anyone and anything at all.

    And by the way, Singaporeans have long been tolerant of lgbts living in our midst. They live, work and play together with all of us for as long as we can remember. The Government also acknowledges that they are in almost every sector of the economy, including the public sector and public service. And for the record too, no lgbts have been persecuted in Singapore by the Courts just because of them being lgbts. But the lgbt activism at the level we are seeing right now, especially in the form of pinkdot, is a recent phenomenon fuelled by external parties, and has now become brazen and emboldened with the recent US Supreme Court ruling. We Singaporeans have been a tolerant society all these while. The very existence of pinkdot now in our midst is testimony to that. But that does not negate our right to say that it is wrong and that we are against pinkdot in Singapore.

    And why are we against pinkdot in Singapore?

    Because pinkdot is pushing for the repeal of Section 377A and the legalisation of same-sex marriage. These two pinkdot agendas will undermine the very familial and social fabric that Singapore has been based on in its years of development and progress. And if we can sum up what PM Lee Hsien Loong has said in recent weeks, it would be this: The society in Singapore is deeply religious. The social sphere has developed taking into account the religious and ethnic beliefs of the multireligious and multiracial societies found in Singapore. So don’t push it.

     

    Mohd Khair

    Source: We Are Against Pink Dot

deneme bonusu