share on
With the first Workplace Fairness Bill passed in Parliament, we hear from four legal experts and Sunningdale Tech's CHRO Julia Koh on the need for alignment between these legal frameworks, and how HR teams must stay ahead of the curve by ensuring seamless synergy between the evolving regulations.
The Workplace Fairness Bill, passed by Singapore's Parliament on 8 January 2025, marks a significant step in addressing workplace discrimination. As the first of two Bills under the Workplace Fairness Legislation (WFL), it defines key protections for employees against discrimination based on:
- Age
- Nationality
- Sex, marital status, pregnancy status, and caregiving responsibilities
- Race, religion, and language
- Disability and mental health conditions
To prepare for these changes, companies must implement formal grievance-handling procedures, a key requirement under the Bill. Currently, only six in 10 firms have such systems in place.
With a second Bill expected later this year, both pieces of legislation will take effect concurrently in 2026 or 2027. As organisations prepare, legal experts are identifying key trends in HR decision-making and risk mitigation.
To explore these critical issues, Sarah Gideon speaks with four legal experts on how businesses can navigate discrimination claims and ensure compliance — all while adapting to an evolving legal landscape.
When considering how HR can legally safeguard hiring, promotion, and termination decisions to prevent potential discrimination claims, Francis Chan, Executive Director, Titanium Law Chambers, emphasises the need to first understand how "discrimination" is defined under the new law.
"It is 'making an adverse employment decision on the ground of a protected characteristic'," Chan explains.
"An adverse employment decision can range from denying a promotion, choosing not to hire or dismissing someone because of a protected characteristic."
Despite many organisations condemning discrimination, Chan has observed that it still occurs in practice.
“This happens because acts of discrimination are committed by individuals, sometimes deliberately and sometimes inadvertently, despite the organisation’s clear zero tolerance stance against it and acts of discrimination are usually only brought to the organisation’s attention when it is too late i.e. when a complaint or claim is made against the company.”
"HR practitioners must therefore be keenly aware of this "source" of discrimination before any preventive measures can be taken."
To mitigate these risks, Chan underscores the need for structured and robust internal processes, including interview guidelines and clear promotion metrics.
"With these in place, the likelihood of managers for example straying from the process is low and with less room for inherent biases to creep in."
Beyond compliance, structured processes also serve as both an educational tool and a deterrent.
"This will educate employees who may have otherwise inadvertently committed discriminatory acts, and also serve as a firm reminder to those would have deliberately discriminated not to do so.
"On the company’s part, this would also show that the company has reasonably taken steps to ensure that its employees comply with the law," he adds.
Echoing Chan, Megan Chia, Partner, Commercial and Criminal Litigation, Tan Rajah & Cheah, highlights the importance of understanding the nuances of protected characteristics and their exceptions.
"Ultimately, the legislation has been crafted to balance the protection against workplace discrimination on the one hand and allowing sufficient operational flexibility for employers to meet genuine business needs."
To align with the Workplace Fairness Bill, Chia shares: "Employers can begin by re-examining and recrafting their workplace policies, employee handbooks, and educating employees and stakeholders on the Bill," she shares, citing the five key protections for employees against discrimination.
From an HR perspective, proper documentation of decision-making processes is equally critical.
"This goes towards not just record keeping but ensures that employment decisions are carefully considered and reasoned out."
But what happens when discrimination complaints arise? How should HR handle an employee’s discrimination complaint to ensure legal compliance and minimise risk?
David Smail, Partner, Head of Employment, Singapore, DLA Piper addresses this question in three parts, saying: "“First, HR should acknowledge the complaint promptly and assure the employee that it will be investigated fairly. Delayed or vague responses can make an already upset employee feel ignored, which only escalates things.
Secondly, Smail stresses the importance of conducting investigations properly while maintaining proportionality. Not all complaints warrant a full-scale inquiry, but every case should involve at least a basic fact-finding process.
"Talk to the people involved, gather relevant documents, and assess whether company policies (and now, the new legislation) have been breached. Keeping detailed records is crucial in case the issue gets challenged down the line," he notes.
He also shared instances where companies inadvertently worsened the situation by retaliating against the complainant — whether through subtle career roadblocks or social exclusion.
"This is a huge legal risk. Even if the original complaint was weak, a retaliation claim can be much harder to defend."
"Even when no wrongdoing is found, HR should still follow up with the employee and explain the outcome. In some cases, mediation or additional training might help. The goal isn’t just to close the file – it’s to make sure employees feel heard and prevent small issues from turning into big legal problems."
Building on this, Celeste Ang, Principal, Singapore, Baker McKenzie Wong & Leow, highlights that a major risk stemming from an employee’s discrimination complaint is the possibility of a retaliation claim against the employer.
"In this regard, the Act establishes a legal prohibition against employers from retaliating against their employees, which will encourage employees with genuine claims/grievances to come forward."
"However, the wide ambit of such a prohibition also raises concerns as to a potential influx of retaliation claims that employers may face."
She notes that retaliation is broadly defined and can encompass actions such as dismissal, failure to fulfil contractual obligations, workplace harassment, or any other adverse treatment related to employment.
She also points out that employees who file grievances or take action under the Act could potentially claim retaliation if they are later dismissed or face other adverse actions, even if those decisions are based on legitimate business reasons such as redundancy or poor performance.
Finally, she adds: "Further, it is unclear from the Act as to what constitutes a failure to fulfil a contractual obligation and subjecting the employee to a detriment in relation to employment.
"Accordingly, it is crucial that HR professionals keep a proper record of all issues and matters discussed in emails or meetings with any employees, to ensure that the employer may mitigate the risk of being accused of retaliating against an employee following a discrimination complaint."
Concluding the discussion, the four legal experts emphasise the importance of a proactive stance in shaping workplace policies and the steps HR can take to future-proof these policies ahead of the second Bill.
Here’s what each of them has to say.
According to Chan, as a basic first step, HR practitioners should understand what obligations employers have now and moving forward.
"But beyond ensuring that their organisations comply with the minimum basic legal requirements, organisations should also strive to ensure that their workplace policies reflect best practices.
"This is the best way to future proof these policies as legal goalposts may shift but best practices tend to have more longevity and applicability in the workplace."
"HR practitioners would also know that having progressive best practices also benefit their organisation greatly in several ways – employee retention, employee morale, lowered risk of complaints and claims, just to name a few."
On Smail's end, he believes that with the second Bill set to be released soon, discrimination claims will likely follow the same TADM (Tripartite Alliance for Dispute Management) mediation and ECT (Employment Claims Tribunal) adjudication process as salary and wrongful dismissal claims.
"While this isn’t new, we do expect more employees to test the system once they realise there’s a clearer route to challenge employment decisions.
"Employers who haven’t had to navigate TADM or the ECT before would be wise to familiarise themselves with the process now."
Ang’s perspective is that while it may not be possible to pinpoint exactly what new mechanisms might be introduced in the second Bill, employers should anticipate tweaks to the existing regime, including the ECTs, for adjudicating disputes related to workplace discrimination.
"To that end, the legal measures which HR professionals could take would be similar to those that employers would typically expect to take in a business-as-usual situation."
She lists several important measures, including:
- Ensuring proper document record-keeping and retention of employee data (e.g., hiring, performance, termination records);
- Implementing robust anti-discrimination, anti-harassment and anti-retaliation policies, and
- Implementing grievance handling processes.
"As regards establishing grievance handling processes, HR professionals may wish to refer to the TAFEP’s resources, which include the Tripartite Standard on Grievance Handling and the Grievance Handling Handbook."
"By establishing grievance handling processes in line with TAFEP guidelines, employers can reduce the scope for employees to make complaints against the employer."
Lastly, Chia affirms that with the long lead time before the first Bill comes into effect, HR should concentrate their efforts on normalising the values of anti-workplace discrimination, and constructing and developing procedures for implementation ought to take centrestage.
From legal insights to taking action: How Sunningdale Tech is navigating workplace fairness compliance
While legal experts provide a framework for safeguarding HR decisions, how are organisations translating these strategies into action? At Sunningdale Tech, Julia Koh, Chief Human Resource Officer and VP, shares how her team is proactively aligning policies with evolving workplace fairness legislation. From tackling challenges to fostering a culture of safe reporting, she offers a real-world perspective on balancing compliance with business needs.
Q What specific changes has your organisation made to its employment policies to align with the Workplace Fairness Bill? Have there been any challenges in implementing these updates?
Sunningdale Tech is committed to ethical, fair, and equal employment practices based on qualifications, abilities, skills, and experience — regardless of age, race, language, gender, gender identity, religion, marital status, pregnancy, health condition, disability, national origin, political or third-party affiliation, veteran status, or caregiving responsibilities.
We uphold the International Labour Organisation (ILO) principles to respect the human rights of workers, and to treat them with dignity and respect.
We adhere to the TGFEP guidelines and recommended practices. Our workers’ union serve as a sounding board to continuously refine our policies and practices.
Our Code of Business Ethics & Conduct and Group Labour Policy reinforce a fair and harmonious workplace, regulate the relationship between the Company and workers, and other stakeholders while supporting business growth and industrial harmony.
To measure our progress, we conduct an annual employee engagement survey and assess leadership effectiveness through performance appraisals. Our recognition award policy rewards behaviours that foster a positive work environment aligned with our core values.
To strengthen communication and education, we are enhancing new hire orientation, annual refresher training, team bonding activities, visual materials, and internal campaigns. We have initiated skip-level engagement sessions to proactively identify and address workplace concerns. We have introduced newsletters that showcases exemplary behaviours.
Our HR team members actively participate in training and dialogue sessions at national and industry level to stay at the forefront of fair employment practices.
We face minimal challenges at this juncture as the national framework aligns with our long-standing core values and people management practices.
Q How does your organisation foster a culture where employees feel safe reporting discrimination? What safeguards are in place to protect them from potential retaliation?
Our whistle-blowing policy and grievance handling procedure provide avenues for workers to raise or report concerns about actual or suspected discrimination, and offer reassurance that they will be protected from reprisals or victimisation for reporting discrimination in good faith.
The whistle-blowing committee has been set up and is empowered to look into all issues/concerns raised by workers. The committee makes the necessary reports and recommendations to the Board, for its review and further action, including disciplinary action, as it deems necessary.
Workers need not identify themselves when submitting issues/concerns to the committee. In the event that workers wish to identify themselves, especially to facilitate any investigations, the interest and identity of the workers will be strictly protected by the company. All issues/concerns raised and identity of the workers will be kept strictly confidential.
The grievance handling procedure provides a structured process for workers to report concerns and an escalation path for prompt and effective management of cases.
No action of any kind will be taken by the company against any worker nor will his/her position in the company be adversely affected by merely raising the concerns/issues; provided always that he/she raises the concerns/issues or allegations in good faith and without malice and has reasonable ground for believing them to be true.
All workers are trained and made aware of these policies through the new hire orientation, annual refresher training, visual materials, and internal campaigns. Our HR team members are trained to handle any concerns/issues brought up by employees.
To conclude, as companies in Singapore navigate the Workplace Fairness Bill, HR leaders must go beyond policy adjustments to ensure both ethical and legal compliance. Organisations such as Sunningdale Tech are strengthening hiring practices, formalising grievance-handling mechanisms, and enhancing employee engagement — aligning corporate values with the nation’s commitment to fair employment.
However, with financial penalties for non-compliance and a second Bill on the horizon, HR teams must collaborate closely with legal experts to build airtight frameworks that mitigate risks.
By staying proactive and leveraging legal expertise, businesses can safeguard themselves against potential claims while fostering a truly inclusive and compliant workplace.
READ MORE: The case for workplace fairness – Why SMEs should care
share on
