This tragedy highlights the importance of wearing seatbelts for all vehicle passengers and drivers.

As a person who drives a prime mover (container towing truck) for a living, the need to wear a safety belt is an everyday reality. Having been in this contract job for a year and five months, however, I had many problems with my seatbelts at work, and so do many of my colleagues.

Anyone who has had an encounter with a seatbelt will know that they can be very uncomfortable, essentially restraining the driver by holding him tight against the seat.

As we are driving large vehicles with a heavy load in a very constrained environment, we are not able to drive from a 'back-against-the-seat' position. We have to often move forward and sideways to check for other vehicles, and also to manoeuvre our tow heads.

The restraining action of the seatbelt becomes dangerous in some situations because, very often, when we are in the midst of a manoeuvre, an oversensitive seatbelt locks, and we get trapped trying to turn the vehicle and the big steering wheel. Recently a colleague who died in a tragic accident where he was flung out of his windscreen was found to have choked his seatbelt as well.

In view of all the obvious pros and cons, many drivers still secretly choke the retracting mechanisms of their seatbelts with newspaper or rubber bands, and it all boils down to working as hard as we can in the most comfortable environment we can afford ourselves.

We work 12-hour shifts in the port, with only 15-minute breaks for lunch. If we are late, we are penalised with fines, as with most other 'safety infringements'. Earning limited amounts, drivers work very hard to earn a barely decent living. Every fine and demerit point in the guise of safety does nothing to address why drivers flout the rules repeatedly.

If drivers repeatedly return late from their lunch breaks, perhaps it is not because they want to incur a fine, but because the break is just too short. Imagine having to choose between going to the toilet and having lunch. This is a scenario most people will never have to face in their life, but something that contract drivers at my workplace face everyday.

Recently, I was stopped from using a small plastic device commonly called a seatbelt stopper. What it does is to stop the seatbelt from retracting fully and choking me (I am rather short). With the seatbelt stopper, I was able to concentrate fully on my work without being distracted by an uncomfortable (and potentially dangerous) seatbelt. I was stopped from using it because the safety officers claimed that the device hindered the seatbelt function and was unauthorised.

I have noticed, however, that some seatbelts come with an adjuster that works in the same way as the seatbelt stopper. In that case, since it performs the same function and the approved vehicle safety belts have it, why can't it be a legitimate addition to making the other seatbelts (which do not have the built-in mechanism) more comfortable so that all the drivers will keep their seatbelts on and not do something as dangerous as choking their seatbelt mechanisms with newspaper?

Perhaps the relevant authorities can help address this issue.

Khng Siew Lee (Mdm)