Some members of the Security Association Singapore (SAS) have responded negatively to a SGAG video commissioned by the Union of Security Employees (USE).

This was after the video, a satirical skit put up on Apr. 25 by SGAG, showed two security officers being briefed on tasks on their first day at work.

View this post on Instagram

 

A post shared by SGAG (@sgagsg)

The video is a paid partnership between USE and SGAG.

SAS had asked that the video be removed but it is still available online at 6pm on May 2.

What video showed

The skit showed two officers being lectured about how "lucky" they are now as they get to work fewer hours due to the progressive wage model and still get a higher salary.

The two officers are shown repeatedly interrupting the person-in-charge by making asinine remarks about their jobs, including using plastic bags for toilet breaks and using a gun to catch terrorists.

Objection to video

SAS objected to the video in a May 2 Facebook post, with a statement attributed to its executive director Jourdan Sabapathy.

The objections are three-pronged, but the chief complaint was that the video was done in poor taste.

1. Portrayed security officers poorly

SAS wrote that it was against security officers being portrayed as "buffoons".

It also called out the risk of trivialising or normalising of the problem of abuse in the security industry given how the person-in-charge was seen "shouting at and abusing the security officers".

The post read: "SAS and the tripartite partners have worked hard to improve the image of security officers. This video does not help."

2. Portrayed security industry employers poorly

SAS added that it took issue with the terms used in the video, such as “employers tekan officers” and security officers must do overtime of "over 100 hours".

"Tekan" is a colloquial phrase for "abuse".

These phrases promote an adversarial approach against employers in the security industry, as they insinuate that they unfairly treat or force security officers to work long hours.

The association said such a portrayal is not in line with "the spirit of tripartism", which refers to the collaborative efforts of employers, unions and the government.

SAS explained that security officers are able to work such long hours only because the Ministry of Manpower (MOM) had "issued overtime exemptions to security agencies".

"These exemptions allowed agencies to employ officers for overtime that could exceed 100 hours," it added.

Employers were, in turn, hiring in accordance with the parameters provided by MOM, and did not constitute "tekan".

The association also called out the phrase “permanent unpaid leave” used in the video, as security officers should be able to negotiate for flexible working arrangements.

SAS said a vast majority of security agencies abide by the law and prosecution of security agencies for such practices remains low.

3. "Tomfoolery" of characters wrong way to convey message

But SAS acknowledged that the video draws attention to poor employment practices and that it supports USE's condemnation of such practices.

"It is, however, SAS’ view that the SGAG video is not the correct way to raise or address such serious issues. In fact, whatever message was intended to be conveyed appears lost amid the tomfoolery of the characters," it added.

Union response to complaint

USE responded about an hour later on Thursday evening to reject the SAS complaint.

The USE response was signed off by president Ardi Amir, general secretary Raymond Chin and executive secretary Steve Tan.

SAS' complaints about the video were a "red herring", they countered, which meant that complaint diverted people's attention from the main point.

USE revealed this was the second video they have commissioned with SGAG, which was given the creative freedom to produce the video, given how USE applies "a light touch with content creators".

"We thus find the complaint about this second video odd, given that the SAS or its exco did not find fault with the first," the union wrote.

The statement also said USE is aware that some agencies have chosen "not to follow the spirit of the PWM" and that the media should check in with the SAS member companies regarding compliance.

According to USE, the non-compliant companies, which are in the minority, are contracting their officers to work the maximum permissible hours under the progressive wage model, and for officers who want to work less, to apply for unpaid leave.

Those unpaid leave hours are then deducted from these officers’ wages, meaning that the officers receive less than the progressive wage model rates.

This is tantamount to undercutting the workers.

USE also shot down the characterisation of overtime exemptions by SAS.

USE said overtime exemptions are meant to be an option for companies to deal with exigencies or urgent situations by allowing companies to work beyond the overtime hours stated in the Employment Act.

The security sector previously used such exemptions as the default for all security agencies given the manpower shortages, and working 95 hours of overtime and beyond was common, which SAS had acknowledged.

"To claim that because MOM approved the overtime exemptions and hence, that agencies were 'merely hiring in accordance to the parameters provided by MOM' is disingenuous," the union said.

USE highlighted that such exemptions were removed from January 2021, given the prevalence of the problem at the time.

SAS rebuts USE rebuttal

In response to USE's rebuttal, SAS issued another statement as a rejoinder less than an hour later on Thursday night.

SAS said USE did not deal with the "substance of what we have raised and instead attempts to distract by going into other matters that are wholly unrelated to the SGAG video".

In the second statement, SAS responded to some of USE's points.

"As regards the first video in the series, our members did not raise any issues with it and we do not see any issue with it. It is not demeaning to officers, does not show abuse and does not vilify employers," SAS wrote.

It added: "But the SGAG video has hurt officers and it has hurt employers. What is USE's response to this?"

Update, May 9, 2024

Both SAS and USE have issued a joint statement on May 9.

 Top photos via SGAG