How Singaporeans were DUPED by MSF's Covid-19 Support Grant

[megank1993]

After the 500 dollars payout the government assured the public that more supports would be made available. One of this was the "Covid-19 Support Grant".

Link to Covid-19 Support Grant: https://www.msf.gov.sg/assistance/Pages/covid19relief.aspx#CSG

The details are as above. It is important to understand how this Support Grant was sold to the public: support for ALL of whom lost their job after Jan 23.

While "due to Covid-19" is mentioned, it is neither elaborated, or further explained in detail on the website or elsewhere

From the website above:

"Full-time or part-time employees affected by the economic impact of the COVID-19 situation (loss of job/income or start of involuntary no-pay leave should have occurred after 23 Jan 2020)"

Instead, the brackets seem to imply - that the dates "after 23 Jan" - would be the key central deciding stipulation for this grant.

Ok fair enough.

However once people did start applying or in my case went down personally to the SSO Office itself, the story and tone changed drastically!

Now the MSF officers told me the job loss - "must be due to COVID-19". When queried further on how to prove this, the officers quietened their tone, saying "they would ask the employer for explicit proof stating "due to COVID-19". The employer has the final say, after which the claim would be rejected.

This greatly upset me. Firstly how does one fairly and truthfully prove this "due to Covid-19".

Employers can give any number of reasons even if the case was clear-cut and MSF is obliged to listen to the employer (boss) not the employee? What if things soured the business itself due to Covid-19 and the employer thought it good enough reason to dismiss employees who they already had issues with. Thus the employer gets the final say and is able to further retaliate on the employee?

Of course, it is easy to conjure up hundreds of different scenarios and why having the employer, the final say in explicitly mentionning "due to Covid-19" is greatly troubling.

How will the employee ever get to be heard in a fair and just manner? Are the courts at hand to provide assistance to give a fair trial to hear both sides in a just way? Who decides? And how?

Surely MSF must have foreseen this? They deal with social issues, squabbles of all kinds on a regular basis, no?

Now let's look at the MSF website and its wording, its emphasis on the stipulations mentioned. Does it ever go to emphasize how "due to Covid-19" is important to prove on their website? They surely do mention several other irrelevant stipulations but fail to elaborate on how the applicant needs to prove the impossible - "due to Covid-19".

Why does the MSF hotline, seems so muddled with no access to speak to an MSF officer at all? Surely MSF can hire or delegate temp staff to answer to public queries? Was this intentional to not be able to speak to an officer and only automation? Their email is equally useless as well.


The truth is that :

MSF have no intention of helping vulnerable unemployed Singaporeans with this nonsense Covid-19 Support grant. If they really wanted to help they would be clearer on how to prove "due to covid-19" as well provided the necessary staff support.

They did neither.

It was simply a public gesture to keep the public calm and give an impression - "don't worry, we are here to help"

Singapore doesn't care about its own citizens. It has always been an every man for himself society. Don't for a second be fooled into thinking the government is going to help out anyone, let alone the unemployed.

Meritocracy remember?

I am a Minister because i studied hard, got a scholarship and went to Oxbridge. Oh, you didn't?

Too bad! Now get out of my elite uncaring face!

 

[A Singaporean]

PAP will find ways and means to fuck Sinkies.

 

[Narong Wongwan]

If they are are serious Helping sinkies with the money they should just send a cheque or bank into your account. Instead as usual they want you to beg like beggars and show evidence and jump over all the hoops just to get a lousy few hundred bucks. Usual Fucked up pap Style

 

[laksaboy]

There is no need to treat citizens that well in a de facto one party regime. Little or no political cost.

This is a universal, repeatable, observable truth.

 

[sweetiepie]

KNN my uncle think they will give some out pretty easily after that the rest wait nong nong KNN

 

[Valium]

Those millions went to their own pockets. This is the greatest opportunity to plunder from the reserves with the perfect excuse.

 

[LaoTze]

Those millions went to their own pockets. This is the greatest opportunity to plunder from the reserves with the perfect excuse.

 

[Valium]

The 3 can use for their cancer treatment.

 

[megank1993]

I was looking back on the Headlines on 1st May, back before Sinkies knew they were getting played:

Here's 158 in action: https://www.straitstimes.com/singap...-grant-application-start-date-pushed-back-msf

The 158 Headlines: "More employees eligible for Covid-19 support grant; application start date pushed back: MSF"

Note: The emphasis is on "more employees". Notice how this is being sold to the public as I mentioned in my original post.

From 158 again: "The Ministry of Social and Family Development (MSF) said on Thursday (April 30) that the Covid-19 Support Grant would be expanded to include more Singaporean and permanent resident workers here."

Note: Again the emphasis on "expanded" and "more". Did they really help more people as of 1 month later. More than what? The 500 dollar? I doubt so. Complete and utter deceit!

158 again: "These changes in employment or salary should have occurred after Jan 23, when the first Covid-19 case was detected in Singapore, said the MSF in a statement."


Note: Again, 158 is clearly implying that the key stipulation and deciding criteria would be "after Jan 23".

Nowehere, does 158 even come close to mentioning -- the contentious issue --- of trying to prove "due to covid-19".

Did 158 also know?

Sinkies, do you feel you have been duped by this false and misleading rheotric?

 

[MacPhersonEstate]

After the 500 dollars payout the government assured the public that more supports would be made available. One of this was the "Covid-19 Support Grant".

Now the MSF officers told me the job loss - "must be due to COVID-19". When queried further on how to prove this, the officers quietened their tone, saying "they would ask the employer for explicit proof stating "due to COVID-19". The employer has the final say, after which the claim would be rejected.

This greatly upset me. Firstly how does one fairly and truthfully prove this "due to Covid-19".

Employers can give any number of reasons even if the case was clear-cut and MSF is obliged to listen to the employer (boss) not the employee? What if things soured the business itself due to Covid-19 and the employer thought it good enough reason to dismiss employees who they already had issues with. Thus the employer gets the final say and is able to further retaliate on the employee?

Of course, it is easy to conjure up hundreds of different scenarios and why having the employer, the final say in explicitly mentionning "due to Covid-19" is greatly troubling.

The truth is that :

MSF have no intention of helping vulnerable unemployed Singaporeans with this nonsense Covid-19 Support grant.

Bro, I empathize with you. Just remember who you should be voting for...