I was laughing when I recently read the news that our 2 transport operators were fined $500 and $200 respectively for failing to meet service standards in a regular 6 monthly review. Luckily I wasn't eating or drinking while reading this piece of news.
Why? Because you're fining hundreds of dollars to corporations that earn millions annually.
It boils down to the fundamental reason for issuing the fines. This reminds me of a situation a few months back on eating sweets in MRT station. I think the fine is $500 per incident and it serves as a deterrent to prevent people from eating in MRT stations. This fine is effective because now most of us refrain from eating in MRT stations because of that fine amount.
So my question is that it's okay to fine consumers $500 for eating sweets but only a few hundred dollars for service lapses??
I seriously don't see how can the fines be a deterrence to corporations that earn millions annually. Instead of using a fixed amount, a percentage of operational profit for the last quarter should be used with a base fine, whichever is higher. That would really be a deterrence. You can even channel the income from the fines to programmes that ensure better adherence to the service quality.
Seriously if I'm in the business of issuing fines, I would not even bother to fine the operators with this pitiful amount. It doesn't even warrant the effort taken to monitor their service levels and it doesn't encourage anyone from adhering to the service standard. So what is the fine for?
No comments:
Post a Comment