As the second and final part of the Workplace Fairness Act 2025 (WFA), the Workplace Fairness (Dispute Resolution) Bill (Dispute Resolution Bill) was tabled in the Singapore Parliament on 14 October 2025 introducing a newly created statutory tort of discrimination.[1]
The statutory tort of discrimination provides individuals with a new legal right to seek relief in workplace discrimination cases even where no contractual relationship exists (e.g., in the hiring context). The procedural requirements, claim limits, time bars and confidentiality restrictions under the Dispute Resolution Bill also strive to balance the interests of individuals and employers in resolving workplace fairness disputes in a confidential, amicable and cost-effective manner.
The first part of the WFA, passed in early 2025, sets out the substantive legal prohibitions against certain discriminatory behaviours in the workplace and mandatorily requires employers in Singapore to implement grievance handling procedures to meet compulsory requirements. The Dispute Resolution Bill (inserting new provisions into the WFA) now deals with the legislative framework vis-à-vis the procedure for individuals to make private claims against their employers in an action for discrimination under the WFA.
In this update, we outline the following key points arising out of the Dispute Resolution Bill:
- when a workplace fairness claim may be brought and potential remedies;
- procedural prerequisites for employees/individuals to commence adjudication;
- judicial forum and corresponding limits of claim;
- time bars; and
- confidentiality of proceedings.
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; Workplace Fairness – Singapore enacts landmark legislation to tackle workplace discrimination and harassment.
As the WFA (including the Dispute Resolution Bill) is expected to come into force in 2027, and all legislative requirements are in place, employers in Singapore should proactively take steps to ensure that they abide by the mandated fair employment practices,[2] to avoid facing potential private actions by individual employees and/or enforcement action by the Singapore Ministry of Manpower (MOM).
When a workplace fairness claim may be brought and potential remedies
At present, individuals with workplace discrimination allegations can only bring private actions against their employers if they had been wrongfully dismissed. There is currently no legal avenue for individuals to seek monetary or non-monetary relief from companies in respect of harms suffered due to workplace discrimination that does not involve the termination of employment.
Once the Dispute Resolution Bill is passed into law, individuals’ rights in all stages of employment will be expanded. Any individual who has been a subject of an alleged discriminatory employment decision made by an employer (within the scope of Section 17(1) of the WFA) may bring a civil action for a statutory tort of discrimination against the employer.[3] Broadly, Section 17(1) of the WFA provides that it is discrimination for an employer to make an “employment decision” (as defined under the WFA) that adversely affects an individual on the ground of a “protected characteristic” (as specified under the WFA).[4]
Under this new statutory tort of discrimination, an individual may claim damages against the company, or in cases involving termination of employment, reinstatement of employment.[5]
Procedural prerequisites to commence adjudication
The dispute resolution framework for workplace fairness claims promotes parties’ attempts at resolving the dispute amicably among themselves, with court adjudication as the last resort.
To that end, regardless of the quantum of claim, individuals will be expected to first resolve any disputes within the company through the company’s internal grievance handling processes (which companies shall be required to have pursuant to the WFA). Any unresolved dispute shall be subject to mandatory mediation (through filing of a mediation request to the Commissioner for Workplace Fairness) before a claim can be filed for adjudication.[6] Even after a claim has been filed, parties will be subject to an ongoing duty to consider amicable resolution. These requirements mirror the current processes in place for other employment disputes heard by the Employment Claims Tribunal (ECT) and are consistent with the Rules of Court that promote mediation and other alternative dispute resolution mechanisms.
Judicial forum and corresponding limits of claim
The forum for adjudication of workplace fairness claims depends on the claim amount in each case:
- The ECT will be empowered to hear workplace fairness claims with a value of up to and including SGD 250,000 – this is an enhanced limit, as compared to its current limit of SGD 20,000 (or in certain situations, SGD 30,000) for salary-related and wrongful dismissal claims. Parties heard at the ECT shall be subject to a simplified procedure, with no right to legal representation, so that disputes may be resolved in a cost-effective and expeditious manner.
- All claims above SGD 250,000 will be heard by the General Division of the High Court of Singapore (High Court). As such claims of a higher quantum are likely to be more complex, parties are allowed legal representation and will be subject to the usual Rules of Court and evidence, which contain stricter procedural safeguards.
For pre-employment claims (relating to discriminatory hiring decisions), the claim limit is expected to be capped at SGD 5,000,[7] given that no employment relationship has been established.
Time bars
As with other statutory employment claims, requests for mediation under the WFA must be submitted within prescribed time limits:
| Stage of employment | Time bar for submission of mediation request |
| Pre-employment (i.e., hiring) | • One month after date of notice of decision not to hire (being the alleged discriminatory employment decision), or when such notice is deemed to have been given; [8] or • Two months after the date of the alleged discriminatory employment decision, if no notice of the decision was given.[9] |
| In-employment (e.g., appraisal, promotion, demotion, training) | • Six months after date of notice of the alleged discriminatory employment decision; or • Six months after the date of the alleged discriminatory employment decision, if no notice of the decision was given.[10] Exceptions apply where an employee is pregnant or takes maternity leave. |
| End-employment (i.e., dismissal, retrenchment or termination) | One month after the last day of employment.[11] Exceptions apply where an employee is pregnant or takes maternity leave. |
The Dispute Resolution Bill further provides that notice of an employment decision may be express or implied.[12] The issue of whether and when notice has been given may potentially be a subject of contention between the parties.
Confidentiality of proceedings
To ensure amicable resolution of workplace fairness disputes, all claims brought under the WFA shall be heard in private,[13] regardless of claim amount. Third parties (including the public and media) will not be privy to the proceedings. The confidential forum is intended to minimise publicity, protect the privacy of parties, eliminate the involvement of third parties who may misrepresent the dispute and avoid politicisation of workplace discrimination issues.
Implications for employers
As noted, the WFA (including the Dispute Resolution Bill) is expected to come into force in 2027. In the meantime, companies in Singapore are expected to carefully review and revise their HR practices to ensure they comply with the WFA as well as the existing Tripartite Guidance on Fair Employment Practices (which will continue to act as regulatory guidelines on all forms of workplace discrimination not covered by the WFA). In particular, HR personnel and senior management should be cognisant of: (a) the specific requirements under the WFA, so that employment decisions can be made fairly and legally; and (b) the procedural aspects of this newly created statutory tort of discrimination, so that any grievances or private claims brought by individuals can be handled appropriately. Attention should also be paid to when an employer may be deemed or presumed to have provided notice of a decision to not hire an individual, for the purposes of determining the applicable limitation period / time bar in respect of a potential claim.
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 text of the Dispute Resolution Bill (https://sso.agc.gov.sg/Bills-Supp/17-2025/Published/20251014?DocDate=20251014), the relevant press release (https://www.mom.gov.sg/newsroom/press-releases/2025/1014-workplace-fairness-dispute-resolution-bill-factsheet); and the MOM’s prior public consultation conducted on the Dispute Resolution Bill (https://www.mom.gov.sg/newsroom/press-releases/2025/0826-public-consultation-on-workplace-fairness-act-second-bill).
[2] Parties are expressly prohibited from contracting out of the operation of the WFA: see section 41 of the WFA.
[3] See Section 36A.
[4] For details on the definitions of “employment decision”, “protected characteristic”, “discrimination” and key exceptions, see our earlier blogpost: Workplace Fairness – Singapore enacts landmark legislation to tackle workplace discrimination and harassment.
[5] See Sections 12A(3) and 36N(2).
[6] See Section 36D.
[7] See Section 36E(5).
[8] See Section 5(3). For instance, where the individual has applied to the employer for possible employment and, as of the date one month after the application, the employer has not taken any step towards an offer of employment to the individual, including inviting the individual to an interview, test or examination for the purposes of possible employment or asking for information or documents from the individual for the purposes of possible employment, the employer shall be presumed, unless the contrary is proved, to have decided not to hire an individual. In such circumstances, the employer is deemed to have given notice of the decision to the individual one month after the job application was made.
[9] See Section 36E(2).
[10] See Section 36E(3).
[11] See Section 36E(4).
[12] See Section 36E(8)(b).
[13] See Section 36O.