NTUC, employers split on retrenchment notice lead time; workers say timely support matters more

SINGAPORE – When logistics executive Azree Aslan was told he had been retrenched in April 2025, he had about 30 minutes left in the working day.

“You don’t have time to let it sink in,” said the 37-year-old, recalling the eventful day.

With a young family to support, he learnt about the SkillsFuture Jobseeker Support scheme only a few days later and applied for it, which provided financial relief.

His experience reflects a wider debate now unfolding over whether companies should be required to notify the authorities and unions before retrenching workers, rather than after layoffs have already been announced.

The National Trades Union Congress (NTUC) is pushing for advance notice, but the Singapore National Employers Federation (SNEF) warned that the proposal carries “significant implementation challenges and uncertain benefits”.

The Ministry of Manpower (MOM) said it will review NTUC’s proposal as part of a broader relook of the Employment Act.

Under current MOM rules, employers with at least 10 employees must notify the ministry within five days after retrenching workers, regardless of the number affected. The requirement was introduced in November 2021 during the Covid-19 pandemic, when companies were under pressure to downsize.

The issue surfaced in Parliament in February during the debate on MOM’s annual budget.

During the debate, labour chief Ng Chee Meng and NTUC assistant secretary-general Patrick Tay asked if companies could provide mandatory retrenchment notifications earlier so workers can receive help sooner.

Responding, Manpower Minister Tan See Leng said mandating such a requirement poses challenges, as retrenchment is a difficult process and often a last resort for companies. He also noted that this “may inadvertently push companies to finalise the retrenchments faster”.

But MOM is not ruling out any option, he said. The ministry is conducting a comprehensive review of the Employment Act and will provide updates in due course.

In a letter published in The Straits Times on Feb 13, SNEF said some companies may be unable to comply with an advance notification regime because retrenchment decisions may be made overseas and communicated to local offices with short notice. It also raised concerns about the commercially sensitive nature of restructuring plans, where premature disclosure could lead to leaks that affect market confidence and employee morale.

At stake is whether earlier retrenchment notification could give workers, unions and government agencies more time to prepare for job losses. But employers warn that forcing companies to disclose restructuring plans too early could risk leaks of sensitive information and complicate difficult business decisions.

Drawbacks of current system

NTUC’s push has the support of some industry players, including human resources (HR) professionals.

While notification allows the authorities to monitor trends and activate post-layoff assistance, support largely begins only after decisions have already been communicated to workers, said senior workforce and skills policy adviser Ives Tay.

Ms Evangeline Chua, a master professional certified by the Institute for Human Resource Professionals (IHRP), noted that because the authorities are often alerted only after issues arise, it “requires further effort to arbitrate, remediate and recover”. The current five-day rule, a reactive measure, raises questions about the intent of the policy, she said.

“Was it meant to serve as an administrative record for the Government to track unemployment data and help to facilitate affected workers in their job seeking efforts?” she said. “Or does MOM play an assurance role that affected workers are treated with dignity, respect and fairness?”

Some argued that earlier notification gives unions a better chance to help workers – a key argument in NTUC’s push. Affected employees could receive support even before being laid off. For example, agencies and tripartite partners could widen redeployment opportunities for affected workers, said Mr Ives Tay.

He added that Singapore’s framework is both “relatively unusual” and “relatively light-touch”, noting that the authorities typically receive retrenchment information only after workers have already been informed.

“When intervention begins only after retrenchments are finalised, the window to match workers into other roles is often much smaller.”

Founder of recruitment agency Recruit Fast Joshua Woo said one limitation of the current system is that third-party recruiters are not formally involved in such transitions. But if there is advance notification, workforce agencies and recruiters could help shorten the time gap between job loss and re-employment.

Ms Viviene Sandhu, co-managing partner at Clifford Law, said even a short window of advance notification allows for better preservation of employment records. She noted that it also allows wage recovery processes to begin before assets are frozen or dissipated.

She urged affected employees to, as far as possible, retain records of their employment, including contracts, payslips, Central Provident Fund (CPF) contribution statements and written communication relating to wages or termination.

“Where a business subsequently enters liquidation, workers should ensure that they are registered as preferential creditors and file a proof of debt with the liquidator. While these steps do not guarantee recovery, they are necessary to preserve any prospect of it.”

For employers, earlier notification may also help them avoid public relations fallout, some observers said.

Because notification comes after workers are informed, any consequence has to be dealt with under the media spotlight, said Ms Chua.

“The question arises as to what MOM and the unions can meaningfully do at that stage. By then, the impact on affected individuals has already taken place and, if the situation becomes public, it may also affect the company’s reputation.”

She said MOM could mediate between employers and unions earlier, reducing the likelihood of errant employer cases becoming “public spectacles” that undermine Singapore’s reputation as a stable place for business.

Online travel platform Agoda drew widespread public criticism after a severance document circulated on social media showed that retrenched staff were instructed not to report the retrenchment to MOM, unions and the authorities. About 50 employees in Singapore were affected in its retrenchment exercise in September 2025.

In another example, home-grown bakery Twelve Cupcakes was thrust into the spotlight after it abruptly dismissed about 80 employees in October 2025. MOM is investigating the company for non-payment of salaries and other potential breaches. The ministry had said in a joint statement with CPF Board that it will take enforcement action and impose penalties if necessary. The outcome of the investigation is pending.

Confidentiality and other problems of advance notification

While there are arguments for advance notification, those who object to the move often cite confidentiality as a key concern. Employers say potential leaks of market-sensitive information could heighten anxiety and dampen employee morale.

Ms Carol Tan, head of HR for Cigna Healthcare in Singapore and Australia, said mandating early notifications before decisions are finalised “may not always be practical”, as companies are often still exploring ways to preserve jobs.

“Employers typically continue exploring alternatives until the final stages, such as redeployment, job redesign, reskilling or identifying other suitable internal roles.”

Workforce situations may also change during this period, she noted. For example, natural attrition or voluntary resignations may arise, which in some cases can help reduce or even avoid retrenchments.

But these concerns may not apply equally to all businesses or sectors. For example, Mr Woo said early notice requirements may be more practical for larger companies that plan restructuring in advance, whereas smaller businesses often require greater operational flexibility.

For publicly listed companies, Ms Chua noted, a leak about manpower reductions may trigger a stock price dip or even breach insider trading regulations. However, she added, some global companies such as Amazon, IBM and Microsoft have publicly announced retrenchment plans ahead of time, disclosing roles and numbers affected.

Ms Sandhu cautioned that imposing pre-retrenchment notification too early “may not reflect commercial reality” and could even accelerate business collapse. This is because decisions to cease operations – particularly in retail and food and beverage businesses – are often made at the eleventh hour.

“These are often triggered by an immediate cash-flow crisis, a failed financing arrangement or an inability to meet imminent rental or supplier obligations.”

She added that a more realistic reform might be to require advance notification only in urgent, same-day retrenchments.

“This narrower approach recognises the constraints businesses face while ensuring that workers are not left entirely unprotected at the point of collapse.”

Timely support more important than notification timing, say workers

For workers who have gone through retrenchment, however, the debate over notification timing matters less than the support they receive immediately after losing their jobs.

The most crucial time to support affected workers is in the first couple of hours after the retrenchment news, said Mr Azree. An official, centralised website that consolidates various retrenchment resources as part of a support package would be most helpful, he suggested.

Dr Jaslyin Qiyu, who was retrenched in 2024 after working for a multinational firm for about four years, agreed that information such as whom to contact matters most at the point of notification. This includes receiving a clear summary detailing entitlements and what the next 30 days could look like with support from both the employer and MOM.

“It’s not so much about the timing or duration of notifications, but ensuring we have all the information needed to support us the moment we are notified.

“Right now, many workers – especially those without strong HR literacy or professional networks – don’t know what they don’t know.”

Information technology professional Subuwanto Widjaja, who was retrenched in the same year, agreed that such practical support would have been appreciated at the time of need.

“It would be helpful if MOM or unions contacted retrenched workers to inform them of available options, support channels and assistance pathways, as many are unaware of these resources after they are informed about being retrenched.”

Dr Qiyu, who is now a fractional consultant at Mad About Marketing, believes that the most effective support “meets people where they are”, as many workers would not seek help proactively, especially if support mechanisms feel clinical or bureaucratic.

Beyond government portals, she suggested embedding peer support networks or community touchpoints into a retrenchment response to meaningfully improve engagement and outcomes.

“The first thing most workers need isn’t a job fair brochure. It’s understanding exactly what they are owed, when they will receive it and what interim support they are eligible for. This includes severance pay, CPF and tax implications and/or reliefs.”

Seeking a middle ground

Mr Tay, the policy adviser, said the debate on advance retrenchment notification is sometimes “framed too narrowly” as a trade-off between protecting workers and preserving business flexibility.

“The policy challenge is how to give the labour market system earlier visibility of restructuring, without forcing companies to finalise layoffs prematurely,” he said.

Any enhancement to the notification framework should not only strengthen re-employment support for affected employees, but also safeguard confidentiality so organisations can manage transitions in a controlled and responsible manner, said Mr Lester Lim, senior HR manager at professional services firm Kensington Trust Group and a certified IHRP professional.

Policy adviser Tay highlighted that many international labour market systems try to balance transparency with flexibility through structured consultation processes or confidential notifications, rather than purely public early disclosure.

However, there is a fine line between a regulator assisting in a transition and interfering in a business’ right to restructure, said Ms Chua.

“MOM must ensure that mandatory notice doesn’t evolve into a ‘permission-seeking’ process that stifles business agility,” she added.

Dr Tan See Leng said MOM is consulting tripartite partners and considering suggestions to make advance retrenchment notifications mandatory as part of its comprehensive review of the Employment Act. The timeline for the review has not been specified.

Whatever MOM eventually decides on the timing of notification, workers say what matters most is what happens immediately after retrenchment.

“The goal should be to make the first 72 hours after retrenchment feel like the beginning of a supported transition, not a fall off a cliff,” said Dr Qiyu.