The Workplace Fairness Act 2024[1] (WFA) was passed into law by the Singapore Parliament (Parliament) on 8 January 2025, signifying a significant step in legally prohibiting certain discriminatory behaviours in the workplace, and mandatorily requiring employers in Singapore to implement grievance handling procedures to meet compulsory requirements.
This landmark legislation marks a paradigm shift from the current framework of using regulatory guidelines (namely, the Tripartite Guidelines on Fair Employment Practices[2] (TGFEP), which does not have the force of law) and limited enforcement levers (primarily the curtailment of work pass privileges for the hiring of foreign employees) to encourage employers to adopt fair employment practices in Singapore. The WFA is the first part of two intended pieces of legislation, with the second piece of legislation (covering private actions by individual employees) to be enacted in 2025.
Employers in Singapore should therefore proactively take steps to ensure that they abide by the mandated fair employment practices[3], to avoid facing potential private actions by individual employees and/or enforcement action by the Singapore Ministry of Manpower (MOM).
In this update, we set out our commentary on the key points that employers should be mindful of regarding the scope of the WFA and its mandatory requirements. Please refer to our earlier blogposts for our summary on the underlying policy considerations and key high-level requirements of the WFA: Singapore steps up controls over workplace fairness and discrimination; Singapore publishes Final Report on upcoming Workplace Fairness Legislation.
Definition of “employment decision”
At the outset, the WFA focuses on the acts of an employer which fall within the definition of an “employment decision”.
In summary, an “employment decision” made by an employer is limited to the following:
- at the pre-employment stage, any decision in connection with the hiring process (e.g., inviting job applicants for interview, asking for documents from job applicants, and making or not making an offer of employment);
- at the in-employment stage, any decision in connection with: (i) appraisal, evaluation or measure of performance; (ii) promotion; (iii) demotion; and (iv) provision of training; and
- at the end-employment stage, any decision regarding termination of employment, with or without notice (or payment in lieu of notice), including for redundancy or retrenchment.
For the in-employment stage, decisions that do not fall under the scope of an “employment decision” include:
- decisions relating to employee benefits (such as leave, healthcare benefits or flexible working arrangements) and working environment (such as provision of lactation rooms and prayer rooms) – this is to ensure employers retain the flexibility to implement progressive HR practices, and design competitive and fair benefits packages depending on their employees’ and business’ needs;
- decisions relating to salary and remuneration that are unrelated to an individual employee’s performance or rank – e.g., an employer’s decision to reduce salaries of a certain group of employees where there is a recession, or an employer’s decision to allocate discretionary bonuses to certain employees to prevent them from joining a competitor; and
- decisions relating to disciplinary action taken against an individual employee that are unrelated to promotion or demotion – e.g., reassignment to a different team, suspension of work, forfeiture of bonus or reduction of salary.
Definition of “protected characteristics”
Employers are prohibited from discriminating against employees on the ground of 11 “protected characteristics” under the WFA, namely: (a) age, (b) nationality, (c) sex, (d) marital status, (e) pregnancy, (f) caregiving responsibilities, (g) race, (h) religion, (i) language ability, (j) disability and (k) mental health condition.
While “sex” under the WFA does not include sexual orientation and gender identity, the TGFEP will continue to cover instances of workplace discrimination of individuals due to sexual orientation and gender identity, and such individuals may seek protection under the Singapore Penal Code 1871 and the Protection from Harassment Act 2014 (which protect all victims against violence and harassment, regardless of sexual orientation or gender identity).
Definition of “discrimination”
Based on the definitions of “employment decision” and “protected characteristics” (summarised above), the WFA prohibits three distinct forms of discrimination (subject to the specific exceptions elaborated on below):
- Discrimination against individuals: Employers shall not make an “employment decision” that adversely affects an individual on the ground of an existing, suspected, assumed or believed[4] “protected characteristic” of the individual, including where the ground relating to a “protected characteristic” was one of several reasons for the employment decision.
In this regard, indirect discrimination and discrimination by association will not amount to discrimination against individuals under the WFA. Such acts were excluded from the scope of the WFA on the basis that legislating against such acts may create uncertainty and cause parties to be more litigious.
- Discrimination by direction, instruction or policy: Employers shall not issue, communicate or publish any discriminatory direction, instruction or policy, in writing, which directs, instructs, or influences any officer or employee of the employer to make, on behalf of the employer, any “employment decision” that adversely affects an individual, or such “employment decisions” generally, on the ground of any “protected characteristic”. In this regard, it is immaterial whether the employer, in fact, makes any employment decision on the ground of a protected characteristic.
- Discrimination by advertisement or description: Employers shall not publish or cause to be published in Singapore[5], a job advertisement or description (for possible employment in Singapore with the employer) that mentions (expressly or by implication) a “protected characteristic” as a condition, criterion, requirement, advantage, disadvantage or disqualification for employment.
Key exceptions to “discrimination”
There are certain exceptions where discrimination on the ground of a protected characteristic will not be unlawful under the WFA. These exceptions relate to:
- Genuine job requirements: Discrimination is allowed where a protected characteristic is a genuine requirement of a job. This can be satisfied: (i) if, having regard to the nature of the job, the job cannot be reasonably performed by an individual unless the individual has or does not have the protected characteristic; (ii) if the job needs to be performed by an individual who has or does not have the protected characteristic to preserve the health or safety of the individual and others; (iii) if the job needs to be performed by an individual of a particular sex to preserve standards of privacy of any individual; or (iv) if any written law or regulation requires the job to be performed by an individual who has or does not have the protected characteristic.
- Age: Employers are allowed to prefer older individuals (over younger individuals) in hiring.
- Singapore citizens and permanent residents: Employers are allowed to prefer Singapore citizens and permanent residents in all their employment decisions.
- Religious groups: Religious groups are allowed to restrict certain office or employment to individuals professing their religion.
- Disability: Employers are allowed to favour disabled individuals (over abled individuals) in hiring.
Fair consideration of applications
As a mandated fair employment practice aimed at strengthening the local workforce core, the WFA codifies into law the current Fair Consideration Framework job advertisement requirements and the duty to fairly consider job applicants[6], for all applications for Employment Passes and S Passes (i.e., the work passes required to bring in skilled foreign labour into Singapore)[7]. By doing so, the MOM will have a greater range of enforcement levers calibrated to the severity of the breaches, and further deter discriminatory employers.
Grievance handling process and prohibition against retaliation
Crucially, the WFA will mandatorily require employers to develop a written process (which has to be communicated in writing to all employees in Singapore) under which the employer commits to —
- inquire into each grievance raised by an employee to the employer;
- review each grievance raised by an employee to the employer;
- inform each employee who has raised a grievance, in a stated manner, of the outcome (if any) of the review mentioned above;
- keep, for a stated period, a written record of every inquiry and every review mentioned above; and
- not disclose to any person, unless reasonably necessary: (i) the identity of any employee who raised a grievance, or (ii) any information in relation to any inquiry or review mentioned above.
Based on the plain language of the WFA, we note that:
- Not all forms of employee grievances (or whistleblowing) are covered by the WFA. The definition of “grievance” under the WFA is limited to grievances in relation to any discrimination by the employer or harassment by the employer or another employee of the employer. “Harassment” means any act or conduct constituting harassment under the Singapore Protection from Harassment Act 2014.
- A distinction has been made between “inquiry” and “review”. In particular, employers are only required to inform each employee who has raised a grievance of the outcome (if any) of a review, but not an inquiry.
- It appears that the outcome of the review will only need to be conveyed to the employee who raised the grievance, and not any other employees involved in the allegations or any other relevant stakeholders. There does not appear to be any exceptions to the requirement to notify the outcome of the review to the employee who raised the grievance.
- As regards the mandatory confidentiality requirements, it remains to be seen if further guidance will be provided by the MOM on what “reasonably necessary” refers to. In practice, there are various circumstances in which disclosure of otherwise confidential information may be necessary for the purposes of conducting a proper investigation.
Retaliation by employers will be legally prohibited under the WFA. The WFA adopts a broad definition of “retaliation”, which covers not just the employee who raised the grievance but any other person, including those who may be assisting the employee in raising his/her grievance.
The WFA prohibits retaliation where the employer:
- dismisses the employee;
- refuses to offer either – (i) re‑employment to the employee under section 7A(1) of the Singapore Retirement and Re‑employment Act 1993 (RRA); or (ii) an employment assistance payment to the employee under section 7C(1)(a) of RRA (unless section 7C(1)(b) of the RRA applies to that employee);
- deducts the salary of the employee;
- fails to fulfil any obligation in its contract of service with the employee;
- harasses the employee; or
- subjects the employee to any other detriment in relation to the employee’s employment[8],
because the employee has, or the employer knows, or suspects, that the employee or any other person intends to:
- bring proceedings against the employer or any other employee of the employer under the WFA;
- give evidence or information in connection with proceedings brought against the employer or any other employee of the employer under the WFA;
- allege that the employer or any other employee of the employer has committed an act which would amount to a civil contravention or serious civil contravention under the WFA;
- raise a grievance to the employer; or
- otherwise do anything under or by reference to the WFA in relation to the employer or any other employee of the employer.
In mandating such grievance handling processes, the MOM has recognised that employers will need to adopt a balanced and nuanced approach, to support employees with genuine concerns, but also to triage and manage cases to avoid burdening themselves with frivolous or vexatious claims[9].
Importantly, it should be noted that whistleblowers and individuals who complain in good faith to the MOM regarding an alleged breach of the WFA will receive certain protections, including protections from: (a) liability for breaches of any code of professional ethics or conduct; (b) civil and criminal liability; and (c) identification by witnesses in proceedings under the WFA.
However, whistleblowing and retaliation that are unrelated to workplace discrimination and harassment will not be protected under the WFA, and there remains no overarching protection for whistleblowers in Singapore that would apply to all forms of whistleblowing.
Individuals and employers not subject to the WFA
Platform workers and independent contractors (engaged under a contract for service) will not be covered by the WFA. To address the lack of protection under the WFA, the TGFEP will be updated to clarify that platform operators and corporate service buyers should not discriminate based on non-job-related characteristics. The MOM will also investigate complaints and take action against employers who place workers on contract for services to circumvent their legal obligations.
It should also be noted that employers employing less than 25 employees (on an entity level, as opposed to a group level) will be exempted from the requirements of the WFA in the first five years of the WFA coming into force, so that smaller businesses will have more time to build up their HR capabilities during this grace period – save for requirements under the WFA in relation to fair consideration of job applicants prior to any application for relevant work passes, which will apply to all employers regardless of size[10].
Potential penalties against employers and their officers
Generally, all acts of discrimination (falling within the scope of the WFA) and contraventions of fair employment practices mandated by the WFA (regarding fair consideration of applications, grievance handling process and prohibition against retaliation) will amount to a “civil contravention” for which administrative financial penalties can be imposed by the MOM[11].
The range of potential administrative financial penalties that the MOM can impose are to be prescribed via subsidiary legislation. While the prescribed range will vary depending on the type of civil contravention, the prescribed amount of the administrative penalty shall not exceed S$5,000 for each occasion, and S$10,000 for each second or subsequent occasion of the civil contravention.
In lieu of or in addition to administrative financial penalties for a civil contravention, the MOM can issue mandatory directions to an employer to take the appropriate action to bring the civil contravention to an end, remedy, mitigate or eliminate the effects of the civil contravention, and prevent the recurrence of the civil contravention. An employer who, without reasonable excuse, fails to comply with such direction shall be guilty of a criminal offence (punishable by a fine not exceeding S$5,000, in the case of companies).
Furthermore, an employer may commit a “serious civil contravention” in certain circumstances involving repetitive or systemic conduct. For instance, an employer that has committed a second or subsequent act of discrimination against an individual (whether or not the same individual) will be considered to have committed a serious civil contravention. A serious civil contravention can also be committed where an act of discrimination against an individual was directed, instructed or influenced by a discriminatory direction, instruction or policy. Certain forms of retaliation – including dismissal of an employee, refusing to offer re-employment to an older employee who has reached his/her retirement age, or committing a second or subsequent act of retaliation against the same employee within a year – will also amount to a serious civil contravention.
Civil penalties for serious civil contraventions can only be imposed by the Singapore court. In the case of companies, the maximum quantum of a court order for civil penalty shall be up to S$50,000 for the first order, and up to S$250,000 for every subsequent order.
Individual officers (including any director, partner, member of the management committee, chief executive, manager, secretary or other similar officer) of companies can be treated as having committed the same civil contravention, serious civil contravention, or offence if the contravention or offence was committed with the consent or connivance of the individual officer. Therefore, individual officers should be cognizant of the WFA requirements and ensure that the company satisfies those obligations to avoid incurring potential personal liability.
Implications for employers
The WFA is expected to come into force in 2026 or 2027. Once it is in force, it is expected that there would be a spike in complaints regarding workplace discrimination and harassment, and there will likely be teething problems with the interpretation and application of the WFA.
In the meantime, companies with operations and employees in Singapore should prepare for the legislative changes, by acquiring a nuanced understanding of the legal requirements, carefully reviewing and revising their existing HR policies and procedures in the context of their global policies (if any), and ensuring that their HR personnel are well-equipped to handle the potential issues that may arise from the new WFA. Companies should also look out for the relevant subsidiary legislation, as well as further guidelines and advisories to be released by the MOM regarding the WFA.
To that end, it is important to note that insofar as the WFA does not cover certain forms of workplace discrimination, the requirements under the TGFEP and the MOM’s existing enforcement levers (in the form of curtailment of work pass privileges) will continue to apply in those areas. The MOM has sent a clear message that workplace discrimination of all forms will not be tolerated, and it will investigate all complaints of workplace discrimination.
For employers with diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) programmes that involve the collection of data regarding the protected characteristics of its job applicants and/or employees, it has been clarified in Parliament that the act of requesting information – in and of itself – is not an adverse employment decision and thus not prohibited by the WFA[12]. However, at the job application stage, employers should only collect information or ask questions that are related to the job requirements to assess an applicant, and explain their reasons for doing so, to avoid any allegations of workplace discrimination. Companies should thus carefully consider the need to collect such information in the first place and, if such information is collected, take steps to ensure that the information collected is not used for any employment decision that would be caught under the WFA, and handle / protect any personal data collected in accordance with the Singapore Personal Data Protection Act 2012.
Please feel free to reach out to us if you would like our assistance or have any queries regarding the WFA or any other employment matter.
[1] See the text of the WFA at: https://sso.agc.gov.sg/Bills-Supp/50-2024/Published/20241112?DocDate=20241112
[2] See the text of the TGFEP at: https://www.tal.sg/tafep/resources/publications/2019/tripartite-guidelines-on-fair-employment-practices
[3] Parties are expressly prohibited from contracting out of the operation of the WFA: see section 41 of the WFA.
[4] Discrimination by perception is thus covered by the WFA.
[5] Publication in Singapore shall include electronic advertisements or descriptions originating in Singapore even if none of the persons capable of having access to the advertisement or description is physically present in Singapore.
[6] https://www.mom.gov.sg/employment-practices/fair-consideration-framework
[7] See paragraph 16 of the Minister for Manpower, Dr Tan See Leng’s second reading speech in Parliament on 7 January 2025 for the Workplace Fairness Bill.
[8] Including pressuring the employee to accept less favourable contractual terms: see paragraph 31 of the Minister for Manpower, Dr Tan See Leng’s round up speech in Parliament on 8 January 2025 for the Workplace Fairness Bill.
[9] See e.g., paragraphs 25 and 33 of the Minister for Manpower, Dr Tan See Leng’s round up speech in Parliament on 8 January 2025 for the Workplace Fairness Bill.
[10] See Section 4(1)(a) of the WFA, and paragraph 27 of the Minister for Manpower, Dr Tan See Leng’s round up speech in Parliament on 8 January 2025 for the Workplace Fairness Bill.
[11] In particular, an employer commits a civil contravention if the employer: (a) commits an act of discrimination against an individual; (b) issues, communicates or publishes a discriminatory direction, instruction or policy; (c) publishes or causes to be published a discriminatory advertisement; (d) applies for a work pass in contravention of section 26(1); (e) fails to develop a grievance handling process satisfying the requirements in section 27(1); (f) fails to inform all its employees in writing of the grievance handling process as required in section 27(2); (g) retaliates against an employee in contravention of section 28(1); (h) contravenes specified regulation issued by the MOM; or (i) provides inaccurate information or particulars to the MOM.
[12] See paragraph 38 of the Minister for Manpower, Dr Tan See Leng’s round up speech in Parliament on 8 January 2025 for the Workplace Fairness Bill.