SINGAPORE – An interim report for a proposed Bill to enshrine into law workplace anti-discrimination guidelines is now open for public feedback.

Covering the protection of workers against nationality and age biases, as well as new penalties on errant employers, the interim report on the Workplace Fairness Legislation – as it is called – was launched on Monday.

Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong announced the decision to legislate anti-discriminatory practices in August 2021.

He said then that it was a response to calls to protect Singaporeans from being passed over for jobs and opportunities, simply because their foreign managers were favouring old networks and links from their own countries. This was seen as prevalent in the IT and financial sectors.

Between 2018 and 2021, one in two discrimination complaints was related to nationality favouritism, according to the Manpower Ministry.

Although the proportion of job seekers reporting prejudiced treatment fell from 43 per cent to 25 per cent in the same period, Manpower Minister Tan See Leng said on Monday: “Nonetheless, we want to continue to work to tackle workplace discrimination.

“We want to do more to ensure that we have a strong and robust system in place to uphold workplace fairness. And it’s important for us to send the strongest signal that we have zero tolerance for any form of workplace discrimination.”

Speaking at a press conference, he emphasised that the legislation, if passed, will not replace the current and broader Tripartite Guidelines on Fair Employment Practices.

“If you have legislative Bills that are too broad, and open to interpretation by employers, by workers, by unions and other stakeholders, I think you’re going to end up creating a lot of disputes,” he said.

The report for the Bill, expected to be enacted into law in 2024, holds 20 recommendations. The key points of the report are:

• Protect workers against common biases: nationality; age; sex, marital status, pregnancy status and caregiving responsibilities; religion, race and language; as well as disabilities and mental health;
• Broaden the potential for workers to seek redress beyond dismissals, to include hiring and promotions;
• Introduce new penalties to reflect varying degrees of breaches; and
• Protect workers from employer retaliations.

The National Trades Union Congress (NTUC) is expected to keep its role in helping workers who face unfair treatment. The draft Bill also suggests that employees with union-assisted claims get up to $30,000 in restitution, compared with $20,000 for non-unionised ones.

NTUC secretary-general Ng Chee Meng said foreign chambers have expressed support for anti- discrimination measures at the workplace.

“When the Singaporean PMETs feel that they have a level playing field, we can then enlarge the space for a foreign augmented workforce,” he said. PMETs refer to professionals, managers, executives and technicians.

The recommendations include keeping the Tripartite Alliance for Fair and Progressive Employment Practices (Tafep) as workers’ first port of call for complaints outside their companies.

However, mediation will become compulsory for all claims. That will be handled by the Tripartite Alliance for Dispute Management.

This alliance will refer cases where mediation failed to the Employment Claims Tribunals for a second conciliation attempt. Failing that, too, contending parties will then get a legal hearing.

The proposed process upholds Singapore’s value of amicability between labour and business, discourages workplace litigation, yet allows for breaches to be sent concurrently to the Manpower Ministry for investigation and legal action.

Dr Robert Yap, president of the Singapore National Employers Federation, said the draft Bill tries to balance workplace prejudices with businesses’ need for flexibility.

It addresses employers’ worries, such as potential onerous requirements, new costs, and a spike in frivolous claims from disgruntled workers. Micro businesses such as heartlands merchants were anxious about being able to meet requirements such as grievance handling processes, he added.

Commenting on the report, Mr Clarence Ding, a partner and employment law specialist at Simmons & Simmons, said it would be neater to subsume the tripartite guidelines within the framework of the proposed law.

“If we want an anti-discrimination law that is truly anti-discriminatory, we should step away from rhetoric that continues to suggest a positive discrimination towards Singaporeans, and at the expense of other talented individuals,” he said, adding that this could be seen as a protectionist measure to entrench Singaporeans in jobs.

Both Mr Ding and Mr Ian Lim, who heads the employment practice at TSMP Law Corp, support the bid to protect workers from retaliation.

They also support exemptions in the hiring of candidates with disabilities and those aged 55 and above, or in instances of legitimate business needs, such as a spa preferring to hire female therapists for its women customers.

Proposed for the legislation, too, is discretion for religious organisations to consider faith in employment decisions.

Allowing workers to seek redress pre- and during employment, and not just at the dismissal stage, is a significant step, said Mr Lim.

Both lawyers cited how without an existing whistle-blower protection law, allowing workers to bring claims against retaliatory actions from employers, such as being passed over for promotions, pay rises, transfers or training opportunities, will make an impact.

But more clarity on the penalty is needed, said Mr Lim. “It is unclear exactly what the protection from retaliation will entail, and what form it will take.”

Both lawyers questioned the waiver for firms with fewer than 25 employees from the legislation for five years. With the waiver, 75 per cent of workers in Singapore will still be covered under legislation.

The same threshold for firms with 10 or more employees to post job ads on the MyCareersFuture portal before they can apply for Employment Passes and S Passes could be applied here, meaning that the five-year exemption from the legislation would apply only to firms with fewer than 10 employees – so that more workers can be protected sooner, suggested Mr Lim.

Mr Aslam Sardar, chief executive of the Institute for Human Resource Professionals, urged businesses to start preparing their processes and policies on handling grievances.

“The challenges involve proper documentation, communication, and training of appointed grievance handlers,” he said. “Generally, processes for grievance handling should not deviate too much, though there could be differences depending on the type of organisation and whether they have union representation.”

A merit-focused hiring system opens access to a greater talent pool in the tight labour market, said Ms Chan Yit Foon, Marina Bay Sands’ senior vice-president of human resources.

The integrated resort hires over 10,000 workers of close to 50 nationalities. “Employers with a large workforce like us should be the catalyst for change by creating a level playing field for job seekers,” she said.

Ultimately, it takes all levels of employees to tackle discrimination at the workplace, said Mr Lim.

“Managers need to be trained not to discriminate, and staff need to be trained to recognise discrimination, and to not be afraid to speak up when it occurs,” he added.

Feedback can be made at go.gov.sg/tcwfinterimfeedback

Correction note: A previous version of this story had NTUC secretary-general Ng Chee Meng saying that foreign trade chambers have expressed support for the proposed Bill. This is incorrect. Mr Ng said that foreign chambers have expressed support for anti- discrimination measures at the workplace. This article has also been updated to clarify that public feedback is being sought for an interim report for a proposed Bill.

Correction note: A previous version of the Types of discrimination pie chart in this story lists the percentage of sex, family status discrimination as 13 per cent. MOM has clarified that it is 17 per cent.