Impact of Upcoming Fairer Workplace Legislation on Workplace Culture And Current Approaches to Deal With Workplace Discrimination

17 Mr Patrick Tay Teck Guan asked the Minister for Manpower with regard to the proposed legislation on workplace discrimination (a) what are the scope, progress and expected rollout date; (b) what will be the role of unions, union leaders and tripartite partners in the implementation and execution of this law; and (c) whether there will be ground and stakeholder consultations in the promulgation process.

18 Mr Desmond Choo asked the Minister for Manpower in view of the upcoming review of strengthening legislation for a fairer workplace (a) how does the Ministry intend to prevent the inadvertent development of a litigious workplace; and (b) whether the Ministry will be conducting a public consultation.

19 Mr Liang Eng Hwa asked the Minister for Manpower (a) what are the current approaches by which the cases of workplace discrimination have been handled; (b) what are the various recourses available to workers; and (c) how the upcoming legislation against workplace discrimination can help achieve better outcomes.

20 Miss Cheng Li Hui asked the Minister for Manpower (a) whether the Ministry can provide a timeline on how long it will take for the TAFEP guidelines to be enshrined into our laws; (b) what is the projected timeline to resolve employment disputes, from conciliation and mediation to the Employment Claims Tribunal; (c) whether any party is expected to shoulder any costs if the matter is taken to the Employment Claims Tribunal; and (d) whether the anti-discrimination laws will apply during the interview and recruitment stage.

21 Mr Sharael Taha asked the Minister for Manpower with regard to the upcoming legislation of TAFEP guidelines, how can the Ministry (i) balance the concerns of both employees and employers; (ii) ensure that the workers reporting workplace discrimination can be protected without changing the tone of relationship between employers and employees, which may lead to a litigious workplace culture; and (iii) engage business leaders and the HR community to ensure that the new measures do not become overly onerous and deter employers from setting up operations in Singapore.

22 Ms Yeo Wan Ling asked the Minister for Manpower (a) in the past three years, how many workplace discrimination cases filed with the Ministry are gender discrimination in nature; (b) what are the top three types of gender-related discrimination filed; (c) how many are resolved via current platforms like the Tripartite Alliance for Dispute Management and Tripartite Alliance for Fair and Progressive Employment Practices; and (d) with the proposed tribunal system, how will the Ministry enhance the recourse and remedial actions, especially for gender-related workplace discrimination.

The Senior Minister of State for Manpower (Dr Koh Poh Koon) (for the Minister for Manpower): Mr Speaker, Sir, with your permission, may I take Question Nos 17 to 22 together, please.

Mr Speaker: Yes, please.

Dr Koh Poh Koon: Sir, Members have filed numerous questions on the topic of workplace fairness and I thank them for their interest in this very important topic.

The tripartite partners' approach to enhancing workplace fairness has been a successful journey. Compared to the year 2006, when the Tripartite Alliance for Fair and Progressive Employment Practices (TAFEP) was first formed, the HR practices of firms have improved significantly. This was the right approach. Rather than rush to legislate, the tripartite partners recognised that education to cultivate the right workplace norms and values was the foremost and more fundamental task. We did not want the process to become legalistic or confrontational. It is better if disputes can be resolved amicably.

Year by year, we have progressively stepped up our efforts, including coupling education with enforcement against discriminatory employers, thus advancing the cause of fair and merit-based HR practices.

Today, we have a set of Tripartite Guidelines on Fair Employment Practices, which is familiar and well-accepted by employers and workers alike. The vast majority of employers comply with the Guidelines. If there is a complaint, TAFEP uses these Guidelines to evaluate and advise the parties concerned. About two-thirds of reported cases are not substantiated. The majority are misunderstandings which are clarified and where both parties do not pursue the matter further.

Where TAFEP finds gaps in the employer's HR practices, TAFEP would counsel the employer. Most employers accept and make amends. Very rarely does the employer dispute the assessment and refuse to correct their actions. In cases where discrimination is substantiated, TAFEP would refer the employer to MOM, which can restrict it from hiring foreign workers. Therefore, the process of mediation is, in itself, an opportunity for employers and employees to close the gaps in their understanding of the requirements. We will continue to maintain the strong emphasis on mediation even as we strengthen the legislation.

Ms Yeo Wan Ling asked specifically about gender discrimination. Over the last three years, about one in seven reported cases each year fell into this category. Most related to employers specifying their preference for a particular gender in their recruitment advertisements. In about 30% of these cases, discrimination was substantiated after further investigation and the errant employers had their work pass privileges curtailed.

The Tripartite Committee on Workplace Fairness, co-chaired by the Minister for Manpower Dr Tan See Leng, NTUC Secretary-General Mr Ng Chee Meng and Singapore National Employers Federation (SNEF) President Dr Robert Yap, convened last month and took stock of the progress made. We recognised the calls made by Members in this House previously, including Mr Patrick Tay, Mr Saktiandi Supaat and Mr Louis Ng, for the Tripartite Guidelines to be legislated. We concluded that legislation could be a helpful next step to take and updated the Prime Minister on our assessment.

Mr Liang Eng Hwa asked how legislation will achieve better outcomes. Legislation builds on the progress made with our current approach. With legislation, we can broaden the range of remedies available. This can benefit both workers and employers.

For workers, the remedies could give them direct redress, rather than indirectly through enforcement action against the employer. For example, such redress is available for wrongful dismissals today. Employees can claim for compensation or for reinstatement to their former employment. For employers, curtailment of their work pass privileges, which has a significant impact on their overall business operations, can, in some cases, be disproportionate to the breach. Even if there is some mitigating factor, there are no alternative penalties that could provide for a more calibrated approach. Legislation will also send a strong signal that society does not condone discrimination at the workplace and further entrench the fair employment standards that we have built up over the years.

The Tripartite Committee on Workplace Fairness has not completed its work yet. It will continue the next stage of its deliberations, to define the scope of future legislation and design a legal framework that is balanced and in the best interest of Singapore and Singaporeans.

This includes looking into how we can avoid the unintended consequence of fostering a litigious workplace culture, something Mr Desmond Choo and Mr Sharael Taha are also concerned about. We should have a claims process where mediation is the first and necessary step, with appearances before the Tribunal as a last resort. This has worked well for the handling of salary-related and wrongful dismissal cases.

To Mr Patrick Tay's question, in the case of unionised employees, the union is involved in the mediation process today. This is something the Tripartite Committee should also consider and study for the new claims process.

Anxieties about workplace discrimination can also be driven by perceptions. Not every complaint means that the employer has done something wrong. The process must be fair to both the worker and the employer. By adopting an even-handed approach, we can avoid a situation where employers are deterred by excessive legal compliance to further expand their businesses.

Several Members asked about how the Tripartite Committee will gather and balance the views of different stakeholders. The Tripartite Committee comprises a diverse group of business, union, Government and HR practitioners. It intends to conduct wider consultations and engagements with these groups as well as the general public to ensure its deliberations and eventual recommendations are well-balanced.

The Tripartite Committee aims to complete its work in the first half of 2022. The Government will then consider its recommendations and, if accepted, start work to prepare legislation. In the meantime, I would like to reiterate that TAFEP and MOM will ensure the Tripartite Guidelines continue to be practised and upheld.

As fair and merit-based HR practices have already been promoted for so many years, even SMEs would be familiar with the requirements. TAFEP will continue to step up education and outreach, even as the Tripartite Committee continues its work.