2nd Reading Speech at Workplace Fairness (Dispute Resolution) Bill
Minister for Manpower, Dr Tan See Leng, Parliament House
1. Earlier this year, we passed the Workplace Fairness Bill. This was a significant milestone in our journey towards fair and merit-based workplaces. The new Workplace Fairness Act (WFA) is a landmark legislation that strengthens protections for jobseekers and employees against workplace discrimination. It complements the existing Tripartite Guidelines on Fair Employment Practices (TGFEP), by:
- First, prohibiting employers from making adverse employment decisions based on protected characteristics. These are: nationality; age; sex, marital status, pregnancy, caregiving responsibilities; race, religion and language ability; and disability and mental health conditions.
- Second, it requires firms to have grievance handling processes to promote better communication and amicable resolution of workplace issues.
- Third, increasing the range of calibrated enforcement levers to strongly deter against unfair employment practices.
2. As I had explained to this House when passing the Workplace Fairness Bill, we want to take a sure-footed and prudent approach, to maintain the hard-earned harmony we have today in our workplaces and society. This is why the WFA focuses on strengthening protections against the most encountered forms of discrimination, covering more than 95% of all the complaints received by the Tripartite Alliance for Fair and Progressive Employment Practices (TAFEP).
3. We had extensive debates in this House over the scope of the law and how it meets the needs of various stakeholders. Ultimately, I am glad that the House was in unanimous agreement that the Workplace Fairness Bill passed in January is the right move to ensure that employees and jobseekers in Singapore continue to be assured of fair treatment in the workplace.
4. As mentioned in this House previously, the WFA will be introduced in two Bills. The first Bill covered the substantive rights and obligations under the WFA that I have just summarised, and the second Bill before us pertains to how individuals can make private claims under the Act. We have taken considerable time to work closely with our tripartite partners, the National Trades Union Congress (NTUC), the Singapore National Employers Federation (SNEF), as well as the Ministry of Law (MinLaw) and the Judiciary, on the multi-faceted processes involved. I would also like to thank the many stakeholders who gave feedback, ranging from human resources (HR) and legal professionals, to non-governmental organisations as well as members of the public. We have considered your views carefully, and the resulting dispute resolution process strikes a judicious balance between the needs of workers and employers.
5. Fundamentally, we aim to provide an amicable, accessible and expeditious dispute resolution process for parties in workplace discrimination claims, while preserving our workplace and social harmony. I will now cover how the Bill will: first, encourage parties to resolve disputes amicably amongst themselves, including through mediation; second, provide more workers with access to an affordable and expeditious forum to adjudicate workplace discrimination claims as a last resort; and third, include safeguards to deter and deal with frivolous claims, so as to ensure a fair and just adjudication process.
6. Finally, I will also cover how we will support stakeholders in understanding and implementing this new law.
7. Let me begin first by taking Members through the dispute resolution process, which we have designed to bring about amicable resolution of workplace discrimination claims. Parties are encouraged to resolve disputes amongst themselves, through the firm's internal grievance handling process. If that is unsuccessful, the individual must attempt mediation, with adjudication only as a last resort.
8. The first Bill passed in January introduced the requirement for all firms to put in place a grievance handling process for workplace discrimination. This allows employees and employers to settle their differences amicably while preserving the employment relationship.
9. Notwithstanding this, we are mindful that not every instance of grievance handling within the firm will be successful. The next step in the dispute resolution process is for parties to attempt mediation. The new section 36D of the Act sets out the requirement that claimants must attempt mediation before they can bring a claim to adjudication in the Court. Mediation allows parties to have open conversations in a safe space to arrive at a mutually agreeable outcome, tailored to their respective needs.
10. We have heard feedback that workplace discrimination cases could involve complicated situations that are not as straightforward. So, the mediator managing such disputes would need to be well-trained to facilitate the process sensitively. We agree with the feedback, and I want to assure Members that MOM will do its utmost to build up the capabilities of our mediators so that they have the requisite skillsets to mediate workplace discrimination disputes fairly and professionally.
11. We have already started the work to uplift the capabilities of mediators at the Tripartite Alliance for Dispute Management (TADM) to prepare for the WFA. Today, TADM mediators handle a range of employment disputes up to $30,000. We will further strengthen the capabilities of TADM mediators so that they will have the skillsets and the competencies to navigate workplace discrimination claims when the Act comes into force. This includes customised training programmes to equip them with varied mediation approaches to deal with complex workplace discrimination disputes, and inclusivity and sensitivity training to better serve a range of individuals, including persons with disabilities and persons with mental health conditions.
12. We will also appoint other mediation service providers such as the Singapore Mediation Centre to mediate higher value claims above $30,000. We will set more stringent requirements on mediators for higher value claims, including possessing legal qualifications or having relevant experience mediating employment disputes. These measures I believe are crucial so that the mediation process is robust and effectively resolves disputes.
13. Finally, the option of last resort. If parties are still unable to come to a resolution amongst themselves after mediation, an individual can commence a workplace discrimination claim at the Employment Claims Tribunals (ECT) or the High Court, as stipulated in the new section 36A.
14. Let me now set out how we have designed the adjudication of workplace discrimination claims. We want to avoid workers and employers being embroiled in lengthy litigation, often associated with high legal costs for both sides. We have therefore designated the ECT to be the main forum to hear workplace discrimination claims. This provides more workers with access to an affordable and expeditious dispute resolution forum to seek redress.
15. Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, for the benefit of Members who may be unfamiliar, let me elaborate on how the ECT works. The ECT was established in 2017 to hear employment claims up to a claim value of $30,000. It adopts a judge-led approach with simplified rules and procedures, and legal representation is not allowed. Parties should find it easier to navigate the ECT's simplified process with the Judge's proactive approach, compared to the process in the Civil Courts that is governed by formal procedural rules and where parties have to take the lead in proceedings. Without the need for lawyers in the ECT, the ECT itself is also more accessible to individuals who might otherwise be unable to pursue legitimate claims due to financial constraints. With these unique features, the ECT provides a more affordable, expeditious and easier-to-navigate alternative to the Civil Courts. For instance, most cases at the ECT are resolved within six months, while employment-related cases in the State Courts are resolved within 18 months, about three times more.
16. Let me explain what the claims process looks like in practice. Judges will actively lead the proceedings by directing parties to speak, asking questions to gather relevant facts, and making it clear when issues raised by parties are out of line and irrelevant. After each party has presented their case, the judge will consider all the facts and relevant evidence given by the parties before making the judgment. Overall, this is a far more outcome-oriented and expeditious process.
17. To make the ECT's affordable and expeditious adjudication process accessible to more workers, we will expand the ECT's jurisdiction to hear workplace discrimination claims up to and including $250,000. This mirrors the limit for civil claims heard at the District Courts.
18. The expansion of the ECT's monetary jurisdiction does not mean that we expect workplace discrimination claims to be of higher value than other employment claims today. Instead, the intent is to allow for the vast majority of workplace discrimination claims to be heard in the ECT. The higher limit ensures that the majority of workers, including professionals, managers and executives (PMEs) who earn higher salaries, can access the ECT's more affordable and expeditious process for workplace discrimination claims.
19. The higher claims limit will only apply to workplace fairness disputes and not other types of employment claims, such as salary-related claims and wrongful dismissal. Workplace discrimination issues are inherently sensitive and can be socially divisive, especially when they concern matters such as race and religion. Designating the ECT as the main forum to hear workplace discrimination disputes will provide a less adversarial setting for such claims to be resolved, preserving our workplace and social harmony.
20. While we have strived to make the dispute resolution process accessible, we recognise that some parties may still require guidance through the process. I would like to assure our workers and employers that additional support is available for parties who may need it.
21. First and foremost, TAFEP remains the first port of call for workers and employers who need advice and assistance on workplace discrimination. For instance, TAFEP can guide claimants on the criteria for a WFA claim, direct them to the relevant guides and resources, and outline their options for them. In addition to TAFEP's advice, unions can also help their members – both workers and employers. Union representatives can represent parties at mediation sessions and ECT hearings. Workers may be represented by their union per the status quo for ECT proceedings today. Unionised companies can now also be represented by their unions such as SNEF, for claims between $30,000 and $250,000, and if the worker filing the claim can also be represented. So, in other words, the union for the employers can represent them if it is above $30,000, up to $250,000 but only if the worker filing the claim can be represented. This is a new feature for employers, who currently cannot be represented by their unions in the ECT, as they may need support for higher value claims.
22. I have outlined how claims up to and including $250,000 will be managed at the ECT. For higher value claims above $250,000, these are better heard by senior judges on the High Court bench, with legal representation. This is also the case for other types of high-value employment claims today. I do not expect many workplace discrimination claims to be commenced in the High Court.
23. Given the inherently sensitive nature of workplace discrimination disputes, all workplace discrimination claims, whether in the ECT or the High Court, will be heard in private. This means that the media or members of the public cannot attend the hearings. Private forums create a safe environment where parties can share their honest views and focus on the ongoing case, without third parties present who may publicly misrepresent and sensationalise issues, resulting in inflamed social tensions. This protects the reputations of both the workers as well as the employers.
24. Finally, the new section 36E also sets out specific time bars or specified time bars within which individuals must submit the mediation request to initiate their claim. These time limits typically vary from one to 12 months depending on the claimant's circumstances. Time bars encourage individuals to come forward earlier before the evidence degrades over time and it also provides our employers with some certainty that incidents from the past will not be dredged up years later. We believe this is a balanced approach as it is practised for other employment disputes and in other jurisdictions as well.
25. Let me move on to the third part of my speech, which covers the safeguards to ensure a fair and just adjudication process. In our public engagements, we heard a concern, particularly from employers and HR professionals, about the risk of frivolous and vexatious claims and of unreasonable inflation of claim values. Let me take some time to address these concerns. To be clear, individuals with genuine cases of workplace discrimination should be able to seek redress. However, frivolous and vexatious claims weaken our workplace harmony and employers should not be burdened by such claims. Employers will be able to apply to the judge for frivolous claims to be struck out. Judges will also be empowered to strike out claims on their own motion and can award costs against an individual who pursues a claim that is without merit. In addition, individuals filing such claims can be investigated by the Police for abusing the Court's processes. If they persist in raising unmeritorious claims, they can be restricted from commencing further legal proceedings.
26. We also heard feedback that with the increase in the ECT's jurisdiction, there is a risk of claim amounts not being pegged appropriately. Workers may not know how to go about justifying their claim amounts and employers may be concerned about unnecessary inflation of claim values. MOM will work with tripartite partners to explore ways to address this in the implementation. Claimants will still need to prove their losses to justify the damages claimed; and judges will also make a fair and balanced assessment of the reasonableness of the claim amount.
27. Let me move to the final issue – which is the implementation of the WFA. When we moved the Workplace Fairness Bill in January this year, I had at the time said that the Act was expected to come into force in 2026 or 2027. We have considered, and we have heard feedback from various stakeholders. MOM recognises that ample preparation is critical for successful implementation. Employers need to review their HR processes and workers need to know their protections and what constitutes a legitimate discrimination claim. We will also need time to ensure our mediators are well trained to effectively facilitate workplace discrimination cases. As such, we currently target to implement the Act in end-2027, but we will continue to monitor readiness of all parties and adjust this timeline as necessary. In the meantime, we will step up our education and outreach efforts. TAFEP is working closely with partners, such as SNEF, the Institute for Human Resource Professionals (IHRP), the Singapore Human Resources Institute, and trade associations and chambers, such as the Association of Small and Medium Enterprises, to educate employers on the new legislation. TAFEP will also proactively reach out to SMEs to ensure that they are aware of their responsibilities. In addition, TAFEP is also designing step-by-step guides and templates that SMEs can easily access, understand and customise for their needs. There are also resources, such as briefings, clinics, a webpage housing information on fair employment practices and HR e-learning modules that companies can incorporate into their own in-house corporate training, just to name a few.
28. It is just as important that individuals are also aware of their rights and where to seek help. So, we will provide guidance to jobseekers and employees on what matters can be raised as a workplace discrimination claim. This includes ensuring individuals know where to turn to for help, for instance, within their firm, their unions or to TAFEP. To make the Act simple to understand and apply, we will also develop a handbook to capture the legal provisions and key principles behind the law, for instance, through illustrations and case studies.
29. Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, please allow me to say a few words in Mandarin.
30. 这项第二项法案，是落实《职场公平法》的重要一步。它说明了当雇主和员工有纠纷时，应该怎样公平地解决。我们的目标是打造一个更公平、和谐的职场，增进雇主和员工之间的信任，同时维护双方的利益。我们希望各方先内部协商，有需要时再找第三方调解，只有在真的解决不了的情况下，才交由仲裁或法庭处理。 我们也会让雇佣纠纷索偿庭（ECT）成为主要处理职场歧视案件的平台，并提高索偿上限，让更多员工，包括专业人士和经理，都能受惠。 同时，我们会设立多重保障机制，防止无理或恶意申诉，保障守法雇主的公平待遇。人力部（MOM）将与劳资政职场公平与良好雇佣联盟（TAFEP）、新加坡全国雇主联合会（SNEF）及全国职工总会（NTUC）紧密合作，帮助雇主和员工，为《职场公平法》在2027年底实施前做好准备。
31. Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, this is a landmark Bill. Please also allow me to say a few words in Malay, but please forgive my pronunciation if I get it wrong. But it is very, very important.
32. Rang Undang-Undang Kedua ini tetapkan proses bagi pekerja yang hadapi diskriminasi untuk mencari huraian daripada majikan. Proses ini membantu pihak majikan dan pekerja untuk selesaikan konflik sesama mereka. Ini membantu pastikan keharmonian di tempat kerja. Seorang pekerja harus jalani proses mengurus aduan di syarikat dahulu. Jika gagal, kedua-dua pihak harus cuba mediasi. Pengadilan di ECT atau Mahkamah Tinggi ialah jalan terakhir. Kami ingin berikan lebih ramai pekerja akses kepada forum yang terjangkau dan yang boleh selesaikan tuntutan dengan cepat. Ini sebabnya kami tingkatkan had di ECT untuk tuntutan diskriminasi di tempat kerja. Kami juga tetapkan langkah-langkah untuk cegah dan tangani tuntutan yang remeh.
33. Mr Deputy Speaker, the Workplace Fairness Act, as I have shared in the past Bill is not a panacea to resolve workplace discrimination. Notwithstanding, this is a significant step in our ongoing journey towards fairer and more harmonious workplaces.
34. There is no room for discrimination in our workplaces. When such cases unfortunately arise, we want the parties involved to be equipped with the necessary tools and resources which will then allow them to resolve the issue amicably and expeditiously. The model that we have carefully designed enables workplace discrimination issues to be discussed and to be resolved quickly while ensuring just outcomes. In doing so, we aim to preserve, reinforce and improve all of our existing norms on fair and harmonious workplaces for all. Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I beg to move.