There was this report of MOE awarding cleaning contract to a high bidder and was uncovered by the AG, resulting in spending more millions and was blasted by AG for the wastage
However I salute the MOE officer who make the brave, correct and wise decision who award the contract to higher bidder , this guy or girl actually know his stuff unlike ..the AG officer simply do not understand the real situation on the ground .. those who has worked in the cleaning line will know, yes you can squeeze the cleaning contractor but they in term will squeeze the poor cleaner , this has happen to one of the project i have managed , the contractor practically make a loss every month in order to build up their track record with the government body . their poor old age cleaner are in term paid $600 for their 8 hours of hard work everyday 7 days a week. you may say if these old cleaner are underpaid they should resign , but i can tell you they will not and many old and weak pple can bullied in this world. my heart bleed and go to them. i feel really sorry for them
Hope in futuere gov scholar who sit in his air con arm chair in his office do not make such apathetic analysis and conclusion and please find out what is happeing on the ground. anyone who can make such simplistic cost benefit analysis without much forethought, you are not worth what you are paid
correct,
in tenders, always choose the B-graders' price offers than the A-graders and C- and D-graders.
common sense, u want good n superior quality goods and services yet in a competitive pricings...
the best is to work hard now, earn many money, invest in the right properties,..next time no need to be cleaners and also our parents also no need to be cleaners, can enjoy a better golden old life. That will get rid of all the exploitation.
maybe gone undertable money
I agree with the TS.
Bear in mind that the whole point of tender exercises is to look out for the quotation that offers the best value. And remember that 'best value' is not always the same as 'lowest price'.
For all you know those lower bidders may be cutting corners and providing low wages to its workers. They might be forcing the poor cleaning aunties to work longer hours for lower pay, for instance.
I don't have a problem with MOE not choosing the low-end bidders, so long as they can show that the firm whom they awarded the contract to is providing good value for money.
Originally posted by fudgester:I agree with the TS.
Bear in mind that the whole point of tender exercises is to look out for the quotation that offers the best value. And remember that 'best value' is not always the same as 'lowest price'.
For all you know those lower bidders may be cutting corners and providing low wages to its workers. They might be forcing the poor cleaning aunties to work longer hours for lower pay, for instance.
I don't have a problem with MOE not choosing the low-end bidders, so long as they can show that the firm whom they awarded the contract to is providing good value for money.
agreed...
its a higher quotation, but not the highest...
pple, u want cheapest and the best quality too...?
then go find 'made in china' or those developing countries' goods and services lor...
Originally posted by fudgester:I agree with the TS.
Bear in mind that the whole point of tender exercises is to look out for the quotation that offers the best value. And remember that 'best value' is not always the same as 'lowest price'.
For all you know those lower bidders may be cutting corners and providing low wages to its workers. They might be forcing the poor cleaning aunties to work longer hours for lower pay, for instance.
I don't have a problem with MOE not choosing the low-end bidders, so long as they can show that the firm whom they awarded the contract to is providing good value for money.
Originally posted by Singmarine:
We should look for value rather than just mere price. A 10% increase in price with 50% increase in service is worth it.
value, budget air also valueair, but look at their service?? value can drop anytime ya.
Originally posted by Singmarine:
We should look for value rather than just mere price. A 10% increase in price with 50% increase in service is worth it.
Agreed.
I don't mind paying a small premium for a much greater increase in quality.