Sunday, November 2, 2014

False accusation by former security officer on The Real Singapore

Hello editor,

I am sending this to you because of an accusation on the trash site “The Real Singapore”.

This site reported that a security officer had been ill treated by the company, forced to work under the hot sun and haze. He further claims to be fired because of “resting during his break”.

He accuses his company, and that of Marina Bay Sands Management, amongst others that of unfair termination.

The fact is, this Jeffrey Pay had been treated very well, given promotions and even study opportunities. His behaviour turned from bad to worse after being promoted.

How do I know this? I was his colleague and I cannot stand to see people bite the very hand that feeds them, not especially because of personal vendetta.

This “Real Singapore” is equally pathetic for not fact checking and falsely accusing good employers. Everyone here is just using this false story for their own purposes.

I’ll probably get into trouble for leaking this document, but it is a risk I’d wish to take. There has been far too much misinformation on the internet.

Evidential photos are attached below and identities of Operations Managers (OM), client names, dollar values given to him are all censored for privacy.

Thank you for publishing this.


(Attached is a copy of the text in the photographed documents in full)



REPORT ON PAY HOCK GUAN (S7xxxx92A)

The following is a report on Security Executive Jeffrey Pay Hock Guan since the time he was recruited as a security personnel till the time that he has left our employment.

2. Jeffrey Pay was recruited as [position] on 28 February 2013 and has been working at [date] March 2013.

3. In April 2013, Jeffrey Pay applied for our [Company] Bursary and was given a sum of [dollar value] for his two children.

4. On 1 June 2013, Jeffrey Pay was confirmed as a [position] and he received a salary increment due to his confirmation.

5. On 1 July 2013, Jeffrey Pay was promoted to Security Executive (SE) and received another salary increment. He then continued to serve the company as a supporting role for the Operations Manager in charge, either as a security supervisor or as a security officer at site whenever required. However, upon his promotion to SE, his work attitude and performance changed terribly and he became arrogant towards his colleagues. During his stint as SE, there were numerous feedbacks received from clients and officers about his work performance, as well as his bad behaviour of insulting and bad mouthing colleagues. One of our clients from [client] wrote in on 2 occasions (22 July 2013 and 30 July 2013) to request for his removal as he was causing morale issues amongst the fellow security officers working there.

6. From the period between July 2013 till October 2013, Jeffrey Pay was shuffled among several assignments, including [clients] as all the clients did not welcome him at their sites owing to his bad attitude.

7. In October 2013, when Jeffrey Pay was assigned to work at The Sail at Marina Bay, the company received numeruous complaints from [name]. [name] spoke to Jeffrey Pay about these accusations and to attempted to guide Jeffrey Pay in carrying out his duties in a more professional manner. By 28 October 2013, all the staff working at the Sail at Marina Bay Condo had individually written complaint letters about the way Jeffrey Pay was behaving at site. Jeffrey Pay was accused of threatening the officers daily and causing arguments amongst staff, poor leadership, shouting at and abusing the officers and also asking officers to spy on each other. On 8 November 2013, Jeffrey Pay wrote a letter to deny these accusations. OM Mr. [name] again tried to counsel Jeffrey Pay about carrying out his work more professionally. At the same time, Mr. Thomas raised a request for disciplinary action against Mr Pay for his actions. Wanting to give him another chance, Mr. Thomas deployed him at the Central Provident Fund (CPF) assignment.

8. In December 2013, Jeffrey Pay applied for our [company] Bursary and was again given a sum of [dollar figure] for his two children.

9.   Thereafter, Jeffrey Pay was transferred to OM [name] and assisted him at the CPF sites. He was cooperative with his colleagues at the beginning stage. However, as time passed, Jeffrey Pay began receiving complaints from the members of the public, tenants and supervisors from CPF Board. Jeffrey Pay was often caught playing games on his Samsung phone/tablet (Please see Picture 1 below). He was given verbal warnings and counselling several times by his site Operations Executive (OE), site Operations Manager (OM), and our HQ Operations Managers (OM). However, he denied that he was using his handphone for leisure and instead insisted that he was checking emails from the officers (please see Picture 2 below) when in fact, he was not given the authority of running any men. He was advised that should officers have any grievances or sought any advice, they can speak to the OE or OMs.

10. Subsequently, in view that Mr Pay was not able to carry out our instructions of cutting down on his usage of mobile phone while on duty and also the complaints that he had received from the tenants, he was to be removed from CPF assignments in June 2014.

11. In May 2014, Jeffrey Pay applied for our [company name] Bursary and was again given a sum of [dollar figure] for his two children.

12. [Name] informed Jeffrey Pay on 10 June 2014 that he would be posted to another assignment. On the same morning, Jeffrey Pay walked out of CPF Bishan branch after being told to report to CPF Robinson by site OM [name] and did not turn up for work. This is a serious offence as he is disobeying a direct order from his OM and abandoning post. OM [name] then put up a disciplinary form requesting for his demotion to Security Supervisor from Security Executive for this serious offence. On 11 June 2014, Jeffrey Pay called up to report sick and went on his rest day on the following day but no medical certificates were given to OM Jimmy. On 13 June 2014, Jeffrey Pay returned to work and was informed about his demotion to Security Supervisor for his behaviour. Jeffrey Pay continued to work until 18 June 2014, went for his off day on the following day, and since then, he had refused to report for duty despite numerous calls by site OM, site OE and OM Jimmy to recall him back to work at other assignments.

13 As OM Jimmy is aware of Jeffrey Pay’s financial situation (Jeffrey Pay has been the recipient of our [company name] Bursary Award for his two children and has since received the bursary three times since his employment for a total of [dollar value]) and family situation, despite him having AWOL for more than 4 days, OM Jimmy sought permission to give Jeffrey Pay more time to return to work. OM [name] and site OM and OE continued to try to contact Jeffrey Pay to come back to work but he still refused to answer them or come back. Finally on 14 July 2014, OM Jimmy made the decision to terminate Mr Pay’s service due to his breach of contract of having been AWOL for more than 4 days. A letter was sent to his registered address by registered mail to inform him of his termination and the sum of money has to repay the Company for his failure to service notice.

14 It is clear from the chronological report above that the Company has been very fair and restrained in handling the disciplinary lapses of Jefrrey Pay. Aligned with our Company’s motto of Tender Loving Care, we have provided him with bursaries for his children over three semesters as well as given him a bonus at the end of 2013. Despite his frequent problems with clients and colleagues, we did not terminate him but instead counselled him to improve himself.

15. The Company will be taking legal action against Jeffrey Pay through the MOM Labour Courts. As for Jeffrey Pay’s false allegations in his postings on TRS, the Company is in the process of consulting our lawyers on civil proceedings.


Prepared by [company] Pte Ltd.
22 Jul 2014





Picture 1: Jeffrey Pay using handphone while on duty

Picture 2: Screenshot of a vulgar message from Mr Pay saying he is advising
officers with his hand phone






1 comment:

  1. You may have seen the Hollywood depictions of what being a security guard is like—and while Paul Blart: Mall Cop and A Night at the Museum are hilariously entertaining films, these interpretations are also quite inaccurate. So, what is the actual role of a security guard? local security guard companies

    ReplyDelete