song song gao jurong...    tonite no need on aircon

MSF has set up a new unit to flag potential abuse in young children earlier, so that child protection officers would be able to act sooner.   This comes in light of the 2020 abuse & death of 4-year-old Megan Khung.   ➡️ https://bit.ly/4iIKLdR   Follow us @mothershipsg   Here's the full detailed account of the new SAFER unit and the Megan Khung case:       Background: The Tragedy of Megan Khung   - Victim: Megan Khung, 4 years old, Singaporean - Death: Feb 2020 — after 13 months of abuse by her mother Foo Li Ping & mother's boyfriend Wong Shi Xiang  - Abuse included: repeated caning, forced to eat rubbish, made to sleep in a planter box; her body was burned in a barrel  - Sentencing (Apr 3, 2025): Mother jailed 19 years, boyfriend jailed 30 years  - Key Lapses Identified (Oct 2025 Review): - Lack of clear communication & information sharing across agencies - 2 police officers breached SOP; 1 resigned  - A CPS officer failed to log the preschool's initial call - No single agency connected all warning signs → case fell through cracks        The New Unit: SAFER   What It Stands For   SAFER = Sensemaking Alerts For Engagement & Response    Basics   - Launched: June 2026 (officially announced Sep 22, 2026) - Scope: Children under 7 years with potential child protection concerns  - Part of: MSF's child protection ecosystem reforms following the Review Panel's May 2025 recommendations  - Staffed by: Professionals with child protection experience    How It Works   - Pulls data from multiple agencies: police reports, arrest records (drug/sexual offences), preschool attendance, household information, NAVH helpline calls, CNB data - Identifies destabilising events: e.g. main breadwinner incarcerated, sudden withdrawal from school, repeated injuries  - Upon alert: Officers conduct risk-screening & information gathering within 3 working days  - Next steps: - Escalate for triage if concerns confirmed - Strengthen existing safety plans - Deploy Domestic Violence Emergency Response Team immediately if safety is at risk        ⚠️ If SAFER Had Existed: Megan's Case Would Have Been Flagged 3 Times   MSF confirmed these opportunities would have been caught:    When What Happened Time Before Death  Mar–Apr 2019 Preschool noticed bruises → called NAVH helpline ~11 months  Sep 2019 Megan stopped attending preschool & was withdrawn ~5 months  Jan 2020 Grandmother filed police report ~1 month    Result: Earlier intervention could have identified danger up to 5 months before her death        Early Results (First 2 Months: June–July 2026)   - Total flagged cases: 70  - 1 → referred for early support - 1 → escalated for statutory intervention - 68 → safety plans reviewed & existing support strengthened        Broader Reforms Implemented / Ongoing   Measure Status  Designated Child Protection Case Management Agencies Launched May 1, 2026[__LINK_ICON]  Triage Assessment Panel (dispute resolution) Launched May 1, 2026[__LINK_ICON]  Protection Practitioners Care Fund Implemented[__LINK_ICON]  SAFER Unit Launched June 2026[__LINK_ICON]  Remaining recommendations To be fully implemented by 2027[__LINK_ICON]        Public Role   - National Anti-Violence & Sexual Harassment Helpline: 1800-777-0000 — report suspected abuse  - Quote from Senior Minister of State Goh Pei Ming:   "Every case of child abuse is one case too many. The sooner concerns are identified and acted on, the better the chances of keeping our children safe and supporting our families."         

50多岁员工裁员占比最高　职总将加强转职支援 #fypsg🇸🇬 #perspectivessg #新闻抢鲜报 #新闻话题 #新闻看点 | TikTok      

sibei sian footwear 100% wet. no escape route lol the traffic light waiting area whole place flooded zzz

🤰A S'porean woman was forced to resign due to her pregnancy & subsequent maternity leave as her boss said she "did not fit into his vision" for the team.   A tribunal awarded her S$19,800 compensation for wrongful dismissal.   ➡️ https://bit.ly/4xHDM8O   Follow us @mothershipsg   Here's the full detailed account of the case:       Case Overview   - Complainant: Identified only as "C" - Award: S$19,800 (max ECT limit = 6 months' salary) - 3 months' wages (S$9,900) + 3 months' pay for harm & aggravating factors  - Basis: Constructive dismissal / forced resignation due to pregnancy - Date of Judgment: Released Sep 22, 2026 - Tribunal Magistrate: Lee Li Choon       Timeline of Events   📅 Apr 21, 2021   - C joined the company as an Executive, monthly salary S$3,300   📅 Mar 2023   - New director EC took over her unit   📅 Apr 2023   - C told EC she was pregnant, due Oct 2023; mentioned considering sabbatical to care for newborn — but never filed any formal leave application   📅 Jul 19, 2023   - Performance appraisal: - Immediate supervisor JY rated her "excellent" - EC agreed performance was good / strong work ethic - No salary increment given despite positive review    📅 Sep 12, 2023   - C submitted maternity leave form — dates blank as birth not yet occurred   📅 Sep 13, 2023   - 36 weeks pregnant → hospitalised for pregnancy complications & high blood pressure; on hospitalisation leave    📅 Sep 18, 2023   - JY messaged: EC "wasn't keen on having you back"; JY testified EC intended to tell her to go after maternity leave   📅 Oct 2–3, 2023   - EC repeatedly messaged: "quick chat" re: plans after leave. C tried to decline; eventually agreed   📅 Oct 4, 2023 — Critical Phone Call   - C recorded the call. EC told her: - ❌ She did not fit into his vision for the team - ❌ Employment would be terminated immediately after maternity leave - ❌ Must undergo re-interview & reassessment to return - C had already decided NOT to take sabbatical — EC was aware of this - HR also asked her to come to office for meeting; she declined citing medical leave & health concerns   📅 Oct 11, 2023   - C gave birth; maternity leave began → scheduled to end Jan 25, 2024   📅 Dec 21, 2023   - Feeling forced out, C resigned with 1 month's notice       Tribunal Decision & Key Findings   ⚖️ Why Wrongful Dismissal Was Established   - Under Employment Act 1968, resignation counts as dismissal if compelled by employer's conduct - No formal sabbatical application was ever submitted → company had no valid basis for the unsolicited call - Communication effectively told her: not worthy of continued employment because she was having a baby - Resignation was not voluntary — forced by EC's messages & call   🗣️ Magistrate's Remarks   - Notification was "degrading and deeply insensitive"  - Caused severe anxiety over finances & job security during a highly vulnerable period - Exposes adverse culture facing working women with children   ⚖️ Company's Defence — Rejected   - Claimed they only wanted to clarify plans re: sabbatical - Tribunal: pretextual — C had already confirmed she would return       Legal & Compensation Breakdown   Component Amount  3 months' lost wages (S$3,300 × 3) S$9,900  3 months' compensation for harm & manner of dismissal S$9,900  TOTAL S$19,800  Note: This is the maximum award under ECT's jurisdiction         💡 Key Takeaway: Even without being formally fired, pressuring a pregnant employee to leave = wrongful dismissal. Singapore law protects employees from being pushed out due to pregnancy or maternity leave .