Debated in Parliament on 5 Oct 2021.
Mr Edward Chia Bing Hui asked the Minister for Manpower what enforcement actions can the Ministry take against errant employers found to have practised workplace discrimination especially on grounds of age and race.
Sir, the Ministry of Manpower (MOM) and the Tripartite Alliance for Fair and Progressive Employment Practices (TAFEP) takes a serious view of workplace discrimination, including the use of age or race as a selection criterion. Other than requiring employers to attend corrective workshops conducted by TAFEP, employers can be advised to rectify lapses in their HR processes. MOM will not hesitate to take enforcement actions against discriminatory employers such as curtailing their work pass privileges in more serious cases. We urge employee who experience any workplace discrimination to approach MOM or TAFEP for assistance.
Mr Edward Chia.
Thank you, Speaker. I would like to ask the Senior Minister of State a supplementary question. Can the Ministry actually do more in the area of greater awareness of fair employment best practises among employers, such as adopting similar like BizSafe framework, where senior executives of firms undergo structured training. And further to that, making it a requirement to attend such training first before one can participate in Government tenders, so that firms are clearly motivated to deepen knowledge in this particular area of fair best practices.
Sir, indeed, one approach that we want to emphasise is education of both employers and employees on what constitutes workplace discrimination. So, we will take the Member's suggestions and study how we can better do this at workplaces by actively correcting stereotypes and changing employers' mindsets through more promotional efforts.
Mr Sharael Taha.
Thank you, Mr Speaker, Sir. I thank the Senior Minister of State for the reply.
With regard to the Senior Minister of State's reply on workplace discrimination, can the Minister consider naming these errant employers who are found to have practised workplace discrimination, with the intent that by naming them, both the company and the employees in the company will be motivated to adopt fair employment practices as soon as possible?
Can the Ministry also consider that given that SMEs account for more than two-thirds of employment in Singapore, can such training for SMEs before they can recruit or hire individuals be made compulsory?
Sir, I thank the Member for his idea to actually name and shame some of these employers who may have adopted discriminatory practices. Currently, firms that may have some degree of discriminatory practices may be put on a Fair Consideration Framework, or FCF, watch list. Firms that are on this watch list, technically, they have not flouted any rules yet but, perhaps, some of their practices may be veering on the grey margins. It is through putting them on the watch list that we use it as a way to engage the firms and signal to them that their practices have to be improved. In most instances, employers who are on this FCF watch list have been responsive to TAFEP's engagement efforts and expanded the employment of local employees. In this instance, such engagement is also an educational effort for companies or firms that may not be aware, upfront, of the nuancing of the guidelines on fair employment.
I think we want to take a very educational approach because not every firm that may on prima facie seems to have infringed on some of the regulations, could be doing it in a very deliberate way. Sometimes, through these efforts, firms do change their practices for the better.
Naming firms, sometimes, could also end up having a negative consequence because it would then frustrate their efforts to recruit and hire people. It may then have the negative consequence of impeding some of the business functions that these firms have as well. We would want to probably go on the more educational approach.
As I said, for firms that, despite our efforts to engage them, refuse or have persisted in their discriminatory actions, we will take enforcement actions against them.
Mr Patrick Tay.
I thank the Senior Minister of State for the sharing. I have one supplementary question. Essentially, the Labour Movement, together with Singapore National Employers Federation (SNEF), has been engaging more than 10,000 professionals, managers and executives (PMEs) in the past year.
One important observation, as the Senior Minister of State rightly pointed out, education is important. But the HR community as well as the employment agents and agency community are two communities which, we feel very strongly, need to be better educated, be given knowledge and awareness of some of these advisories, guidelines, including legislation, particularly, as many of them are from multinational companies and across the globe.
So, can I suggest to the Senior Minister of State to pay particular attention to these two groups?
Sir, I thank the Member for his comments. Indeed, HR practitioners and employment agencies are areas of engagement that MOM would want to focus on because they form the link between the employers and the hiring practices of the companies. So, we will increase our engagement with these intermediaries such as HR practitioners.
PAPERCUTS