Nature of Discrimination in Cases that Breached Tripartite Guidelines on Fair Employment Practices

Over the past three years, the Tripartite Alliance for Fair and Progressive Employment Practices (TAFEP) handled an average of 400 discrimination cases annually, including those arising from proactive checks by the Ministry of Manpower (MOM) on discriminatory hiring practices.

In about 50 cases each year, the employers were found to be in breach of the Tripartite Guidelines on Fair Employment Practices and had their work pass privileges suspended. About 60% of such cases involved nationality-based discrimination, and about one-third involved gender and age discrimination, split about equally between the two. The remaining cases involved other types of discrimination such as race, marital status or family responsibilities.

Apart from suspending work pass privileges, MOM also issues warnings to employers for less severe breaches, such as lapses in their HR practices which resulted in miscommunication and discrimination in the recruitment process. In these cases, TAFEP will step in and advise the employers on the required rectifications. MOM issued an average of 40 warnings annually.

MOM takes a serious view of discrimination at the workplace. Over the past three years, there has not been a repeat offender.

I thank the Minister of State for her answer. I think that was very helpful. Just a few supplementary questions. Firstly, would the Government consider publishing these statistics on an annual basis?

Secondly, does the Government regularly conduct a survey on perceptions of discrimination? I did actually ask this in the House in the last term and my understanding is that such a survey is carried out occasionally. But could there be a regular cycle to understand within the job market what are the perceptions of discrimination on the part of jobseekers?

And thirdly, could the Minister of State share if there are cases of companies from this group who have been found to engage in discriminatory practices who have not been amenable to pressure by way of having their foreigner work passes curtailed, because they do not employ foreigners, and therefore, they are not amenable to the warnings and the pressures from MOM based on the current tool-kit.

I thank the hon Member Mr Leon Perera for the supplementary questions. I will take the three questions together. On whether MOM tracks perceptions of discrimination, we do track public perception of fair employment practices through regular opinion polls, and also, more detailed surveys of employment practices over time. Notwithstanding the progress made by employers over the years, MOM did observe an increase in the percentage of local jobseekers who perceived discrimination during the job search process between 2014 and 2018. MOM will continue to conduct regular surveys so that we have a good pulse of public opinion on this matter.

On whether there were companies that were not amenable to the warnings and pressure from MOM because they did not hire foreign workers, for cases of discriminatory dismissal, as an example, the employer can also be ordered by the Employment Claims Tribunals to compensate the employees. In addition, if the firm is an employment agency, demerit points could be imposed. If sufficient demerit points are accumulated, the licence could be suspended or revoked.

We also take companies to task for false declarations of fair hiring practices. In the past, we have sought legal action against such companies.

On whether we will publish statistics regularly on companies in breach of fair hiring practices, we will consider doing so if we think it helps in clarifying public opinion of the situation on the ground as well as in shaping employers' behaviour, to correct their behaviour towards fair employment practices.

I thank the Minister of State for the reply. Could I ask if we are going to review the penalties under the tripartite guidelines? It sort of makes sense if you discriminate based on nationality, we curtail your work pass privileges. But if you discriminate based on gender, on family responsibility, then the penalties to curtail the work pass privileges sort of do not make sense. I know the Minister of State shared some of the other penalties earlier, but I am just wondering overall, we can review the penalty framework so that it is aligned with what the discrimination is about.

We just reviewed the penalty framework in 2020 and we will continue to review it further if necessary. Thus far, we have not seen any repeat of discriminatory practices from the companies that were penalised.