I am quite puzzled that Singaporeans genuinely think that infidelity is a crime or conduct for which the employer or the state has to address and bring the parties involved to be answerable for their conduct. I am also wondering if this is conditioned by the media over something that took place as result of Yawgate.
Before going on to Yawgate, let me sort of give the position in such matters that organisations in the main take over such matters. Firstly it is not their business and a private matter and HR and the management will make their position clear on this. They only intervene if there are allegations where abuse of office including favouritism is involved etc. Where dismal or disciplinary sanctions are involved, it is because things like the corporate card is used for the tryst or abuse of position has occurred or lies provided during an inquiry to address allegations arising from the affair and not the affair itself.
A former Director and Head of CPIB was appointed by PSC and the old man despite he was known to be involved in an office romance with a subordinate, both parties married. He proceeded to divorce his wife and this is where it gets interesting. The ex-wife who happened to be in CPIB was seconded to another Govt department and out of CPIB by the Civil Service to facilitate the appointment to the new post. And mind you the appointment to CPIB is not an easy hurdle to clear, possibly the highest standard expected in the civil service.
In the case of Yaw, he was not expelled for adultery. There was allegations from one of his conquest that she felt compelled to provide additional service to maintain her employment. Yaw failed to turn up to answer questions and did a runner. In fact, WP sort of treated it as a private matter in the first instance and only acted after the fresh allegations came about.
The PAP had through out its history including in recent times had cabinet ministers and MPs screwing around, having kids out of wedlock and if no serious abuse has taken place, the parties are told to sort out their own matters and not to make it a public spectacle. The Civil Service gets hundreds of complaints each year usually from aggrieved spouses and the vast majority is left to the parties to sort it out themselves. Sometimes the superiors step in to counsel if the office work is affected.
The point is that one should not be led by the state controlled media by the nose. Nobody proceeds to have an expensive by-elections because surprise surprise!! a man and woman had wild sex in the privacy of a room.
The state controlled media will never ask the PM if infidelity or adultery is a dismissible conduct. And you know why?
Before going on to Yawgate, let me sort of give the position in such matters that organisations in the main take over such matters. Firstly it is not their business and a private matter and HR and the management will make their position clear on this. They only intervene if there are allegations where abuse of office including favouritism is involved etc. Where dismal or disciplinary sanctions are involved, it is because things like the corporate card is used for the tryst or abuse of position has occurred or lies provided during an inquiry to address allegations arising from the affair and not the affair itself.
A former Director and Head of CPIB was appointed by PSC and the old man despite he was known to be involved in an office romance with a subordinate, both parties married. He proceeded to divorce his wife and this is where it gets interesting. The ex-wife who happened to be in CPIB was seconded to another Govt department and out of CPIB by the Civil Service to facilitate the appointment to the new post. And mind you the appointment to CPIB is not an easy hurdle to clear, possibly the highest standard expected in the civil service.
In the case of Yaw, he was not expelled for adultery. There was allegations from one of his conquest that she felt compelled to provide additional service to maintain her employment. Yaw failed to turn up to answer questions and did a runner. In fact, WP sort of treated it as a private matter in the first instance and only acted after the fresh allegations came about.
The PAP had through out its history including in recent times had cabinet ministers and MPs screwing around, having kids out of wedlock and if no serious abuse has taken place, the parties are told to sort out their own matters and not to make it a public spectacle. The Civil Service gets hundreds of complaints each year usually from aggrieved spouses and the vast majority is left to the parties to sort it out themselves. Sometimes the superiors step in to counsel if the office work is affected.
The point is that one should not be led by the state controlled media by the nose. Nobody proceeds to have an expensive by-elections because surprise surprise!! a man and woman had wild sex in the privacy of a room.
The state controlled media will never ask the PM if infidelity or adultery is a dismissible conduct. And you know why?
