Mr Chua Kheng Wee Louis asked the Minister for Manpower with the introduction of the Tripartite Guidelines on Flexible Work Arrangement (FWAs) Requests from December 2024 (a) whether there is any target or expected percentage of (i) firms that offer and (ii) employees that are covered by, formal FWAs; and (b) whether there are any legal ramifications for firms that do not adequately implement the guidelines.
Ms Gan Siow Huang: I thank Members for their questions on flexible work arrangements (FWAs) and the recently launched tripartite guidelines on FWA requests. In the past few years, many Members in this House and the Labour Movement have called the Government to do more to encourage FWAs.
We have a rapidly ageing population. One in four Singaporeans will be above 65 years old by 2030. More of us will have to juggle caregiving responsibilities while working. There will also be more seniors who want to continue working, but in a more flexible manner. FWAs are, therefore, another important initiative to help us optimise our local workforce potential in the long term.
Employers who implement FWAs well will also benefit, as they will be able to hire from a larger local manpower pool. Hence, we formed a Tripartite Workgroup last year to develop a set of tripartite guidelines on FWA requests. The guidelines will take effect on 1 December this year. The Workgroup consulted extensively with employees, the unions, employers and human resource (HR) professionals.
The consensus was that we should not mandate FWAs or set hard targets. There are a myriad and spectrum of businesses, service types and sector-specific needs which vary widely and serve different segments of the economy, including essential services. For FWAs to be successful, it must make businesses sustainable for the employers.
It does not make sense to require businesses to offer FWAs even when it negatively impacts business and affects employment prospects for Singaporeans. Employers should, therefore, continue to have the prerogative to determine work arrangements that work for the team, the business and the clients.
What the guideline does is to require employers to properly consider employees’ formal FWA requests. The aim is to establish the right norms, and enable employees and employers to have constructive discussions, so that both sides can work out FWAs that are mutually beneficial.
Employers must therefore consider FWAs based on business grounds, such as job requirements and impact to business productivity. Tripartite partners agree that this is a reasonable and practical approach which balances the needs of both employees and employers.
In the same spirit, the Workgroup felt that employers should be given sufficient time to discuss with employees their FWA requests and also consider how they can adjust workplace practices to accommodate FWAs. Otherwise, employers may decide to reject the request outright. The Workgroup landed on two months which is similar to other jurisdictions, such as the United Kingdom.
Employees who feel that the employers have not considered the FWA request based on proper process should first discuss and try to resolve disagreements internally through their company’s grievance handling process. Unionised employees can also seek advice from their respective unions. Thereafter, if the dispute is still not resolved, they may seek help from the Tripartite Alliance for Fair and Progressive Employment Practices (TAFEP).
TAFEP would take up an educational approach and engage the employers to help them comply with the guidelines. Employers who are recalcitrant may be issued a warning by the Ministry of Manpower (MOM) and be asked to attend mandatory HR training.
Several Members have asked about the impact of the guidelines on employers in different sectors and how we can help employers comply. I must emphasise that FWAs do not equate to work-from-home only. There is a variety of FWAs that employers can adopt depending on the industry context and the specific job role, while still maintaining productivity and ensuring that business needs are met.
For instance, those in sectors and jobs where the work must be done on-site may not be able to work from home, but employers can still explore options, such as flexi-time and flexi-load. To be clear, the formal process for requesting FWAs, as recommended in the guidelines, will be useful mainly for organisations that do not have any process yet for their employees to request for FWAs.
Where there is an existing process, whether formal or informal, and it is working well for both employers and employees, the employer should use the process stipulated by the company to request for FWAs. What is most important is for the employees and employers to be able to discuss and land on arrangements that address their respective needs and constraints and maintain harmonious working relationships.
To help employers, TAFEP and the Institute for HR Professionals (IHRP) will be rolling out a range of resources this year. Besides self-help resources, such as case studies, templates and e-learning modules, which are already available on TAFEP’s website, TAFEP will be conducting monthly briefings for employers starting from May. The first few runs have already been fully subscribed.
TAFEP will provide more guidance to help employers understand the types of FWAs they can offer to employees with different needs, such as senior employees who may prefer flexi-load or mobility-challenged workers who may need telecommuting arrangements. The resources and briefings will guide employers on how to comply with the guidelines. But, more importantly, how to implement FWAs well, such that it supports business needs.
Employers can also tap on grants, such as the Productivity Solutions Grant, to offset the cost of adopting FWAs, such as consultancy services, to redesign jobs or business processes and upgrade the IT system to support FWAs. Small and medium enterprises (SMEs) may require more targeted support.
TAFEP and IHRP will work closely with the Association for Small and Medium Enterprises (ASME) and the SME Centres, to organise briefings and training workshops to help SMEs in FWA implementation.
Members have also asked about the potential impact of the guidelines on Singaporeans’ employment prospects, be it through increased outsourcing to remote workers elsewhere or greater reliance on foreign manpower. With or without these guidelines, remote work and outsourcing are already global trends, particularly after the COVID-19 pandemic.
Whether the trend will continue depends on whether employers feel that it makes business sense and employers will need to weigh the pros and cons. Similarly, even if the foreigners are not working in Singapore, they will still be competing with us when working in companies overseas. What is more important is for our workers to continually upskill, sharpen our competitive edge and stay productive. We will, then, be able to compete effectively for jobs, not just in Singapore, but globally.
Mr Speaker, to conclude, I would like to emphasise a few key points. FWAs are an increasingly important tool for employers to attract and retain talent. The guidelines specify the need for a process for requesting and considering FWA requests, but do not mandate that every FWA request must be approved. The guidelines allow employers to decide on the FWA request, depending on what works for the team, the business and the clients. The guidelines aim to shape the right norms and expectations around FWAs.
Employees ought to use FWAs responsibly, even as their employers develop HR capabilities and processes to implement FWAs well and productively. Finally, we will continue to provide resources and tools to support this and hope that employers and employees will both do their part to achieve win-win outcomes and ultimately more inclusive workplaces in Singapore.
Mr Speaker: Mr Louis Chua.
Mr Chua Kheng Wee Louis (Sengkang): Speaker, just two supplementary questions for the Minister of State. The first is that I understand that based on the guidelines, cost, productivity and feasibility concerns are possible grounds for rejection of FWA requests. But I am also concerned that this could give employers a lot of leeway to actually not consider the FWA requests, where these are actually possible.
So, on the part of the employees, should there be concerns that their FWA requests are not adequately considered, beyond mediation and follow-up discussions with management, what are some of their recourse? The second part is I also understand that the Civil Service will be taking up these guidelines, so, just to understand what sort of percentage of civil servants will be able to access some form of formal FWAs after this is adopted?
Ms Gan Siow Huang: Employees who feel that their employers have not considered their requests properly, not based on business grounds but perhaps personal bias, can approach the union members or the union leaders if they are unionised companies. If not, they can go to TAFEP. TAFEP will be very happy to walk through with the employers on their responsibilities under the guidelines.
The Civil Service embraces FWAs. Just like the private sector, we have a very big Civil Service and there are different job roles, different working environments. We similarly need to give flexibility for the supervisors, managers to discuss with the staff on what sort of FWAs would work, not just for that one person asking for the FWA, but also how it affects the rest of the co-workers, and the services and the output that need to be delivered as well.
Ministry of Manpower
7 May 2024
https://sprs.parl.gov.sg/search/#/sprs3topic?reportid=oral-answer-3590
Office of the Leader of the Opposition 