Skip to main content
About Us

Second Reading Speech at Workplace Fairness Legislation Bill

Minister for Manpower, Dr Tan See Leng, Parliament House

Employment practices

 

Mr Speaker, I beg to move, “That the Bill be now read a Second time.”

  1. We currently address workplace discrimination complaints under the Tripartite Guidelines on Fair Employment Practices (or TGFEP) through the Tripartite Alliance for Fair and Progressive Employment Practices (or TAFEP). This framework has worked well for us thus far. Most employers have fair employment practices, and our surveys show a declining trend of workplace discrimination over the years.

  2. However, we are also contending with an ageing population and economic headwinds. Amidst these demographic and economic realities, a complementary foreign workforce remains important to Singapore’s continued economic success as well as ensuring good jobs and good wages for locals. But we are also clear that these benefits will only accrue to Singaporeans if thre is a level playing field that prevents discriminatory practices. This allows all employees to grasp the opportunities in our vibrant economy. So even as we have made progress, we mut not take our generally harmonious and fair workplace conditions for granted. Instead, we should take proactive steps to ensure that employees and jobseekers in Singapore continue to be assured of fair treatment in the workplace.

  3. This Workplace Fairness Bill has therefore been designed to improve protections against workplace discrimination, while preserving our fair and harmonious workplace norms. It is the result of close cooperation amongst tripartite partners – the Government, National Trades Union Congress (NTUC), and Singapore National Employers Federation (SNEF) – to develop a balanced approach. We have taken in the labour movement’s feedback, such as through the Professionals, Managers and Executives or PME Taskforce and Every Worker Matters Conversations. At the same time, we have taken note of SNEF’s views on the need to provide operational flexibility for employers, so they can apply fair employment practices while meeting genuine business needs. The Tripartite Committee on Workplace Fairness also consulted widely. We have held more than 70 in-person engagements, with more than 2,000 individuals from all walks of life – including unions, workers, employers, HR and legal professionals, and civil society and community organisations.
  4. We have also studied other countries with anti-discrimination laws. A couple of observations. First, different countries have different national contexts, and so the laws are not quite comparable across countries. For example, the characteristics that are legally protected and how disputes are legally resolved differ from country to country. Second, introducing such laws is complex, and well-meaning legal protections for workers can have unintended consequences that end up hurting workers. For instance, if employers become more reluctant to hire certain groups or the laws result in protracted litigation between employers and employees.

  5. We have taken the time to consult and study these experiences carefully, instead of rushing to introduce and implement the Bill, because we want to keep our hard-earned harmony in our workplaces and society. The comprehensive process we have gone through and the effort we have made to understand different stakeholder groups give us confidence that the Bill strikes the right balance for now. At the end of the day, employers must fundamentally be able to hire employees based on the skills and attributes that support their business needs. What we want to achieve is to ensure that jobseekers and employees are evaluated fairly based on those skills and attributes. 

  6. Even as we take this next step in our workplace fairness journey, please also let me emphasise upfront that the WFL is not a panacea. Rather, it is an additional layer of protection, that allows us to take certain actions against the more frequently encountered forms of workplace discrimination where there is societal consensus today. It is a measured approach that seeks to preserve our current workplace norms, and guard against divisions in our workplaces and society.

    The Workplace Fairness Bill
  7. I will now cover how the Bill will:
    • First, strengthen protections for jobseekers and employees against discrimination, while retaining flexibility for employers.
    • Second, provide grievance handling processes to promote better communication and amicable resolution of issues.
    • Third, complement our education-first approach with calibrated levers to deal with the small number of bad employers who persist in egregious discrimination.

     

    (I) Key Worker Protections and Employer Flexibilities

    Types of Protections

     

  8. Mr Speaker, let me first share the overarching principles that underpin the protections in this Bill. Singapore is a meritocracy, and employers here must hire and assess workers based on their ability to do the job well. Every worker should also have the opportunity to develop their potential, without employment decisions being distorted by discriminatory biases. Let me explain how the Bill gives effect to this.

     

  9. The Bill prohibits employers from making an adverse employment decision on the ground of a protected characteristic. Under clause 17 read with clauses 5, 6, and 7, employers are prohibited from choosing not to hire someone, giving them a poor performance appraisal, denying a promotion or training opportunity, or dismissing them because the jobseeker or employee has a protected characteristic.

     

  10. The Bill will also prohibit company policies or job advertisements that discriminate on the ground of a protected characteristic under clauses 18 and 19.

    Protected Characteristics

     

  11. After extensive consultations, we have decided on a more nuanced and calibrated approach by first starting with five categories of protected characteristics under clause 8. These are areas where there is broad societal consensus and we have national policy imperatives to prevent discrimination against in the workplace. Together, they account for more than 95% of discrimination complaints received by TAFEP and MOM. This provides some assurance that we have the experience and capabilities to handle such cases under the WFL, without disrupting business operations or workplace harmony.

     

  12. The first category is Age. The Bill protects against age discrimination because all workers – young and old – deserve to be assessed based on how well they do their job rather than their age. For instance, employers should not assume that an older person has less strength than a young person to carry out manual tasks. At the same time, we also recognise that senior workers are disproportionately impacted by age discrimination. Given our ageing population, we must empower our senior workers to contribute to our workforce if they wish to, for as long as they remain productive and continue learning and refreshing their skills. This is why an exception under clause 21 provides employers with flexibility if they intend to tap on these seniors’ experience and expertise and retain them in the workforce. At the same time, we also know that the law can only go so far in preventing discriminatory practices and we will continue our efforts to dispel negative stereotypes and create more age-inclusive workplaces.

     

  13. The second category is Nationality. Many Singaporeans understand the economic case for why we need foreigners – they grow the economic pie by anchoring companies and investments that create better prospects for Singaporean workers and businesses. Other countries also know this – they have been competing hard to attract more global talent so that they can anchor global and regional functions, cutting-edge technology, and skills in emerging industries. Without foreigners to complement our local workforce, we will lose out on better jobs, higher wages, and stronger business opportunities. So it is essential that we remain open and welcome global talent and businesses that make our team stronger.

     

  14. At the same time, we recognise the lived experiences and concerns of Singaporeans about whether foreigners are taking over their jobs. From time to time, we hear of biased employment preferences for specific nationalities. We have been taking strong measures to counter such discriminatory practices and ensure our locals are treated fairly.

     

  15. This Bill is our next step to further strengthen protections for Singaporeans and ensure a fair playing field. It will enable us to take stronger action against nationality discrimination. We have also gone a step further in clause 22 to provide an exception that will allow employers to make employment decisions based on whether the person is part of the local workforce. This means employers will be given the flexibility to strengthen their local workforce core, to build stronger local networks and greater resilience to disruptions like the recent pandemic, and hence achieve stronger business outcomes.

     

  16. Separately, clause 26 codifies into law the existing Fair Consideration Framework job advertisement requirements and the duty to fairly consider candidates. By doing so, we will have a greater range of enforcement levers calibrated to the severity of the breaches, and further deter discriminatory employers.

     

  17. The third category is Sex, Marital Status, Pregnancy, and Caregiving Responsibilities. Based on earlier feedback, including from the Conversations on Singapore Women’s Development, these areas are important to ensure fair, merit-based treatment for men and women alike, and to support our national marriage and parenthood objectives. This is why the Bill protects against discrimination on the basis of sex, which under clause 10 refers to the sex that is legally assigned to the individual – either at birth or post re-assignment. While we have made progress, women continue to be underrepresented in areas such as STEM fields and leadership roles. Women in STEM jobs were 29% in 2013 and this improved to 34% in 2023. Women’s participation on the boards of the top 100 SGX-listed companies is currently 25%. We recognise that this is due to an interplay of many social and economic factors. The Government will keep working to empower women to fulfil their aspirations, and we hope this Bill can contribute towards our efforts for a more balanced representation of men and women across sectors and occupations.

     

  18. The protection for caregivers is in line with the Government’s efforts to build a family-friendly environment in support of both fathers and mothers, in their marriage and parenthood journey – especially to signal the important role fathers play as an equal partner to care for their children. It will also support the greater care needs of our ageing population.

     

  19. The fourth category is Race, Religion, and Language ability. While racial and religious harmony is part of our longstanding societal values, we still hear that some members of the minority races face racial discrimination at the workplace. This Bill protects against such discriminatory biases. For instance, employers cannot assume that a person of another race does not know Malay or Mandarin. This will send a strong statement that racial and religious discrimination are not acceptable in Singapore.

     

  20. Relatedly, clause 23 affords religious groups with some flexibility to make employment decisions for roles that are religious in nature such as imams and priests, and roles related to the running of religious institutions, while preserving common space for secular jobs. This is appropriate in view of Singapore’s multi-religious society, and the longstanding role that religious groups play in our social fabric.

     

  21. The fifth category is Disability and Mental Health Conditions. The Bill complements the Government’s Enabling Masterplan 2030 by prohibiting discrimination against disabilities. Clause 24 also provides an exception to facilitate greater employment opportunities for this group by allowing employers to favour persons with disabilities in their hiring decisions.

     

  22. We have also received feedback on the importance of employers making accommodations for persons with disabilities to participate in the workforce. To this end, we are working on a Tripartite Advisory for Reasonable Accommodations to raise awareness and provide practical guidance to employers. We hope this will help to bring the concept of reasonable accommodations into the mainstream employment space. This greater public awareness will lay the foundation for future moves as part of our Enabling Masterplan, to further support persons with disabilities.

     

  23. For persons with mental health conditions, this Bill recognises they are more likely to face challenges at the workplace. As raised multiple times in Parliament, mental health issues are a growing challenge, both in Singapore and globally. We must take an evidence-based approach to mental health issues at the workplace, rather than perpetuate stigmas that limit the potential contributions of these fellow members of our society.

     

  24. Let me also explain our approach given questions on why we have not covered discrimination against more or even all characteristics, or indirect discrimination. Like us, other jurisdictions such as Australia and Hong Kong also have a positive list of protected characteristics as it is not practicable to legislate broad principles without causing uncertainty. Just as each jurisdiction has its own bespoke set of protected characteristics, we decided on each protected characteristic for their own policy reasons which I have shared earlier – such as supporting our older workers to contribute to our ageing workforce amidst demographic constraints, and reaffirming racial and religious harmony as part of our key societal values.

     

  25. It is also important to note that discrimination can arise in many ways. It is a complex and nuanced topic which engages various socio-economic issues. For instance, indirect discrimination is when an employer takes an apparently neutral action that disadvantages people with a protected characteristic in practice. It can impose very wide legal obligations that create uncertainty and litigiousness for both employers and employees. We have seen cases overseas where employers who had standardised ability tests were challenged because certain racial groups tended to fare worse than others. Examples like this remind us why it is important that our laws are not overly prescriptive – to avoid undermining labour market flexibility and inhibiting our ability to leverage our long-standing and successful model of labour relations to manage such complex issues.

     

  26. So, we have designed this Bill knowing it cannot be the only tool to tackle all forms of workplace discrimination. Instead, this Bill starts on a more scoped and surer footing to ensure we can preserve the precious workplace and social harmony that we enjoy today, while remaining open to future updates to the list of protected characteristics. The Bill complements the TGFEP, which will enable TAFEP to tackle workplace discrimination based on all other characteristics. Internationally, this approach of having a law to cover certain protected characteristics and a more flexible tool to cover all other characteristics is quite unique. It enables any employee who faces discrimination to seek support, and is only made possible because of good tripartite relations and strong institutions like TAFEP. We will also update the TGFEP in tandem with the WFL’s implementation to ensure alignment. So I would like to reiterate to all employees: if you are facing workplace discrimination, MOM and TAFEP will support you. You will not be turned away simply because it is not a protected characteristic. The TGFEP will continue to cover all other forms of workplace discrimination.

    Meeting Business Needs

     

  27. Next, I will talk about how the Bill provides room for genuine business needs. Clause 20 sets out the ways that employers can legitimately consider protected characteristics when making employment decisions. Let me give some examples to explain how they may work in practice:
  1. First, for the reasonable performance of the job. For example, an employer can consider if a jobseeker is fluent in a particular language for the role of an interpreter.

     

  2. Second, for health and safety reasons, to protect employees and the people around them. For instance, a security company can consider whether an officer with a recently diagnosed but untreated case of depression can carry firearms – for the safety of the officer and others.

     

  3. Third, for reasons of privacy. For instance, a spa can choose to hire female therapists to serve their female clientele.

     

  4. Fourth, for legal and regulatory reasons. For example, a bus company may only hire bus driver trainees above 21 years old as this is the regulatory age needed to obtain a Bus Driver’s Vocational License.

28. In designing these flexibilities, we also want to assure employers that they will not run afoul of the law if they need to make employment decisions based on requirements set by the Government, such as those involving public safety or national security.

(II) Channels to resolve disputes amicably

29. Mr Speaker, when grievances arise, open communication is vital to help employers and employees to preserve the relationship and avoid further misunderstandings. Let me now talk about how the Bill will require employers to put in place grievance handling processes, and provide stronger protection from retaliation for employees who step forward.

 

Grievance Handling

 

30. First, grievance handling processes. TAFEP has seen disputes arise from miscommunication that could have been quickly resolved if the parties had discussed openly from the start. Workplace disputes should, where possible, be resolved within the firm itself. This encourages employers and employees to settle differences more amicably while minimising disruptions and building trust.

31. Today, 6 in 10 firms already have formal procedures to manage workplace discrimination. Most firms are fair and equitable workplaces. By making a push for firms to put in place processes to handle grievances professionally and sensitively, we can help these employers ensure that genuine cases do not fall through the cracks. Grievance handling processes will also help to build trust by providing a safe space to have conversations about sensitive or difficult issues.

32. Clause 27 of the Bill requires firms to inquire into the grievance they have received, review it, and inform the employee of the result. Throughout the process, the employer must also protect the employee’s confidentiality to the extent possible.

33. The Bill focuses on ensuring that employers have a grievance handling process in place, and refrains from being overly prescriptive on the detailed requirements. This approach is practical and sensible given the diversity of firms in our economy – a process that works for a technology start-up with 30 employees might not work for a construction company with 300 employees or a bank with 3,000 employees. The grievance handling requirement will serve as a baseline requirement that most of our employees can benefit from. Unions will also continue to play a key role in setting the right norms, educating workers about their rights, and amicably resolving disputes.

34. For firms that do not already have such processes in place, TAFEP has prepared accessible and practical resources and templates. For instance, there is a Grievance Handling Handbook on TAFEP’s website that provides details on internal grievance handling procedures. TAFEP is also working on new e-learning courseware to guide employers on implementing a grievance handling process.

 Protections against retaliation

35. At the same time, we know formal processes alone may not be sufficient. In MOM’s 2023 survey, we saw a decline in the proportion of employees who sought help after experiencing discrimination despite a rise in firms with formal procedures. Employees were worried about impacting their work relationships or careers.

36. Clause 28 of the Bill provides better assurance, by prohibiting employers from retaliating against those that file complaints and claims. The message is clear: we will not hesitate to take action against employers that retaliate against those who raise valid grievances, and employees should feel safe to bring them up.

37. Beyond these formal legal protections, MOM and TAFEP will continue our longer-term educational efforts so that employers and employees see the value of keeping communications and attitudes open.

Workplace harassment

38.  Beyond grievance handling and retaliation, we also received suggestions on including workplace harassment issues in the WFL. In Singapore, we have a multi-pronged approach to address harassment issues, including in the workplace. There are criminal offences under the Protection from Harassment Act and the Penal Code. We also have a Tripartite Advisory on Managing Workplace Harassment. The grievance handling processes required under this Bill can also be used by victims of workplace harassment, to surface their cases to employers for resolution. Beyond this, the tripartite partners have agreed to develop a Tripartite Standard to complement the existing Tripartite Advisory, that will guide and encourage employers to adopt best practices in this area. This bolsters our educational efforts and complements the current legal protections, to create safer workplaces.

Mediation-centred approach and employment claims

39. Now, what if the employer and employee are unable to settle their differences within the firm itself? While an employee should first bring up the issue to the firm, not every instance of communication and conciliation within the firm will be successful. In such cases, the employee can decide if they wish to make a private employment claim under the Bill. We will introduce a second Bill later to provide this option for claimants.

40. Today’s Bill is the first of two Bills, and will cover the substantive rights and obligations under the WFL. We have chosen to introduce it early so that employers have more time to prepare themselves for the new law. The second Bill will pertain more specifically to how private employment claims can be made for workplace discrimination. It will take us some time to work through the details, which are complex and novel, on how such claims are adjudicated. If both Bills are passed, we intend to implement the WFL sometime in 2026 or 2027.

41. But let me give a preview and share the broad approach towards private claims, which was recommended by the Tripartite Committee.

42. For cases that cannot be resolved through the firms’ grievance handling process, we intend for parties to go through mediation before a workplace discrimination claim proceeds. As with all employment disputes, adjudication is a last resort. This preserves a non-litigious culture, encourages open communication and trust, and achieves better outcomes for everyone.

43. Today, the Employment Claims Tribunals (ECT) already hears employment claims, such as for wrongful dismissals. It adopts a judge-led approach focused on resolving the dispute quickly, privately, and amicably. We are studying how we can empower the ECT to hear workplace discrimination claims with the same principles as far as possible, while deterring frivolous and vexatious claims against employers with appropriate safeguards.

(III) Education and Enforcement Approach

44. Let me now turn to the Government’s education and enforcement efforts. We will educate on what is discrimination, what is not discrimination such as when language proficiency is a business requirement, and what to do where there is discrimination. We will illustrate with examples and provide accessible channels of advice and support. Most employers are responsible and comply with the TGFEP. They will not see a heavy increase in their obligations. The WFL is not about making it more difficult or burdensome for them to operate. Instead, it provides employers with greater certainty on the rules and expectations, so that they know how to act.

45. On the education and capability building front, TAFEP is working closely with partners like SNEF, the Institute for Human Resource Professionals (IHRP), Singapore Human Resources Institute, and the Association of Small and Medium Enterprises. TAFEP has set up a one-stop resource webpage for employers, employees, and HR professionals. There will also be briefings, clinics, and webinars, including those catered to SMEs. Finally, there will be training resources for companies and HR to incorporate into their own in-house corporate training, including tapping on the IHRP-certified HR community to share best practices for SME employers.

46. MOM will continue to support firms on this journey by helping employers that may be in breach of the WFL to understand their obligations and rectify the breach. In line with our educational approach, we will provide time for employers to prepare themselves for the new legislation. This is why we have chosen to introduce this first Bill early.

47. We also recognise that small firms may have limited capabilities and resources and that this can make full compliance from day one difficult. Clause 4 of the Bill exempts firms with fewer than 25 employees, who will be given more time to build up their capabilities before the WFL requirements apply to them. We will review this in five years after the law is implemented. In the meantime, the TGFEP will continue to apply to these small firms.

48. For the small number of errant employers that blatantly flout the rules, the Bill empowers the Government to take enforcement action based on the severity of the breach. Part 7 provides calibrated levers that balance between effective deterrence and rehabilitation. For less severe breaches, these include directions to attend educational workshops and administrative financial penalties imposed by MOM. For more severe breaches, MOM can bring the offenders to Court to recommend heavier civil penalties. To be clear, these are enforcement actions that the Government can take, which are in addition to the private claims that employees can make.

Mr Speaker Sir, allow me to say a few words in Mandarin:

我们现有的职场公平与和谐得来不易。因此《职场公平法令》将维(wéi) 护(hù)这些社会 规(guī)范(fàn)。我们参考了其他国家的经验，认识到推出这项法令的复杂性。维(wéi) 护(hù)职场和社会和谐需要取得适当的平(píng) 衡(héng)，才不会造成工作场所形成诉(sù) 讼(sòng)文化。因此，法令并非灵(líng) 丹(dān) 妙(miào) 药(yào)。它所提供的是多一层保障，确保雇主公平地根据工作能力评估和录取雇员。

法令将加强现有的职场保障，确保雇员和求职者不会因为年龄、国(guó) 籍(jí)、性别、婚孕状态、看护责任、种族、宗(zōng) 教(jiào)、语言或体障和精神状况而遭(zāo) 到(dào) 歧(qí) 视(shì)。法令也将在处理纠(jiū) 纷(fēn)方面规定保护措(cuò) 施(shī)，让雇员能够放心举报歧视行为。

对于企业而言，法令将确保雇主能根据业务需求做出雇佣决定。 这包括考虑求职者是否有能力履(lǚ) 行(xíng)工作职责。雇主也可以因为健康和安全理由或是监(jiān) 管(guǎn)要求决定不雇用某些员工。雇用少过 25 人的小企业，在法令生效后的首五年内将暂时免受法令约(yuē) 束(shù)，让他们有更多时间适应新规定。

有句老话：法律不外乎人情 – 意思就是法律规定的原则，必须依照人情常理所定。

我们明白大多数雇主都采取公平的雇佣方式，并理解和谐工作场所的重要性。因此，新法令生效后，我们将采取以教育为主的方式，引导雇主改正行为，而不是马上开罚。只有严重违(wéi) 反(fǎn)规定的雇主将面对罚款或被控上法庭。

Mr Speaker Sir, given the significance of this Bill, please allow me to attempt to say a few words in Malay. To my Malay-speaking friends, please pardon any errors in my delivery:

Undang-undang Keadilan di Tempat Kerja akan bantu kekalkan dan perbaiki norma-norma adil dan harmoni yang telah berfungsi dengan baik. Setelah mengkaji pengalaman di negara lain, kami sedar akan kerumitan dalam membuat undang-undang seperti ini.

Kita mahu kekalkan harmoni yang kita bina di tempat kerja dan dalam masyarakat. Kita juga tidak mahu jadikan tempat kerja, sebagai tempat tindakan undang-undang. Jadi, WFL ini bukan penawar. Sebaliknya, ia adalah pelindung tambahan yang wajar untuk pastikan pekerja dinilai dan diambil kerana kebolehan mereka dan bukan berdasarkan prasangka.

Bagi pekerja dan pencari kerja, Rang Undang-Undang ini beri mesej yang tegas – setiap orang ada peluang untuk mencapai potensi mereka di tempat kerja. Ia akan pastikan ada saluran tindakan yang sesuai dan tidak ada pekerja perlu derita dalam diam – seperti kes di mana mereka hadapi diskriminasi kaum atau agama semasa bekerja.

Undang-undang ini juga pastikan majikan tetap fleksibel untuk buat keputusan berdasarkan keperluan bisnes yang tulen. Dalam masa yang sama, kami akan berikan kumpulan agama fleksibiliti untuk ambil pekerja mengikut agama. Sambil itu, kami kekalkan ruang bersama untuk pekerjaan sekular.

Kami sedar banyak majikan ambil pekerja dengan adil dan ingin bertindak dengan betul. Walau ada undang-undang baru ini, kami akan utamakan pendidikan. Kami hanya akan bertindak terhadap majikan yang terang-terang langgar peraturan.

 

Conclusion

49. To conclude, while this Bill is not a silver bullet for upholding workplace fairness, it will enhance our current model of promoting fair and harmonious workplaces in a way that is tailored to our local context. It will encourage an atmosphere of trust and openness where issues on workplace discrimination can be raised safely and resolved amicably. In doing so, we aim to preserve, reinforce, and improve our existing workplace norms on fair and harmonious workplaces.

50. Beyond the WFL and TGFEP, we need to cultivate the right mindsets and a shared understanding that everyone benefits from a fairer workplace. The tripartite partners are committed to continue our efforts at nurturing these mindsets and norms in the workplaces and beyond. We welcome everyone to join us on this whole-of-society effort to build fairer and more harmonious workplaces together.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move.