One in two individuals, or 54 per cent, who experienced workplace discrimination in Singapore in the past five years did not report it to any authorities.

This was one of many sobering findings from the recent Aware-Milieu anti-discrimination survey of 1,000 respondents.

Top reasons for not reporting included perceiving the discrimination to not be "severe" enough (36 per cent), not trusting internal/external authorities to act on the report (30 per cent) and having insufficient evidence (29 per cent).

Cases seen by the Association of Women for Action and Research's Workplace Harassment and Discrimination Advisory (WHDA) show that institutional barriers, such as the absence of an anti-discrimination policy and dedicated human resources personnel, often drive these fears.

Discrimination in Singapore is neither defined by law nor defined by the Tripartite Alliance for Fair and Progressive Employment Practices (Tafep).

Unsurprisingly, therefore, clients often call WHDA to understand whether their experience even constitutes discrimination. These clients often work at small and medium-sized enterprises that have no workplace discrimination policy, or standards against which to evaluate a discriminatory experience.

It is only natural that employees would not report discrimination if they do not know how to interpret it.

Discrimination often occurs subtly, such as in the form of verbal harassment, where gathering black-and-white evidence is difficult.

Occasionally, there are witnesses to this harassment, but speaking up poses the risk of negative career impacts.

One pregnant WHDA client was repeatedly scolded for "taking too much leave" in front of colleagues, but these colleagues were afraid to speak up as witnesses.

Additionally, employees often hesitate to file reports if their company has a history of inaction against workplace discrimination. Many therefore wish to report their experiences only after they have resigned or had employment terminated. In 2022, three in four clients referred to Tafep by WHDA chose to do so after resigning due to their hostile work environments, or after employment was terminated.

Upcoming legislation must include a comprehensive definition of workplace discrimination to inform and encourage individuals to report. Legislation must protect employees from retaliation, so they do not feel the need to quit before seeking recourse, as well as witnesses.

Furthermore, legislation must allow for a wide variety of evidence, such as text messages, eyewitness accounts, video and audio recordings and surveillance camera footage.

Beyond legislation, a shift is ultimately needed within workplaces themselves. Mandatory sensitivity training, strong internal policies and a supportive environment can encourage employees to come forward rather than suffer in silence.

Apoorva Shukla

Executive, Workplace Harassment and Discrimination Advisory

Association of Women for Action and Research