Debate on how to protect workers will move from ensuring benefits to finding new jobs as retrenchments rise

Even as protections are debated, the next pressure point on this promise is emerging: getting retrenched workers and fresh grads into jobs.

ST PHOTO: LIM YAOHUI

Published Oct 09, 2026, 08:15 PM

Updated Oct 09, 2026, 08:15 PM

SINGAPORE – The growing need to protect workers dominated question time in Parliament on Oct 6, as MPs increased scrutiny on Government efforts to cushion layoffs amid a spike in retrenchments.

In response, the authorities opened the door to more worker protections – signalling possible action against employers who are financially able to pay retrenchment benefits but do not.

The questions come against the backdrop of a larger political promise: Prime Minister Lawrence Wong’s pledges that there will be no jobless growth in Singapore, and that though the Government may not be able to protect every job – it will protect every worker.

But even as protections are debated, the next pressure point on this promise is emerging: getting retrenched workers and fresh grads into jobs.

Scrutiny on the adequacy of current employment legislation came from the ruling party’s MPs. Thirteen PAP MPs, including four labour MPs, filed questions on retrenchment for Oct 6 against one Workers’ Party MP.

This came after statistics in September showed retrenchments reached 4,620 in the second quarter of 2026 – the highest figure since the pandemic. The rate of retrenchment was 2.0 per 1,000, above the Manpower Ministry’s (MOM) non-recession norms of 1.5 to 1.7 per 1,000 employees.

The 15 questions filed, the most on retrenchments in this term of Government, asked for more safeguards, pointing to weaknesses in existing protections.

One is the lack of legally-mandated retrenchment benefits. PAP MPs suggested this may be insufficient – an argument which lawmakers from both parties have made in the past.

Labour MPs Yeo Wan Ling (Punggol GRC) and Melvin Yong (Radin Mas) asked to strengthen the tripartite advisory – the recommended practice by the Government, unions and employers, which is not legally binding.

Yeo asked what safeguards there are for workers in non-unionised companies to ensure that the advisory on retrenchments is meaningfully adhered to. Meanwhile Yong asked if MOM sees a case for strengthening the prevailing norms in the advisory, particularly for workers who are most vulnerable.

In response, Acting Manpower Minister Jasmin Lau said that the authorities are considering taking administrative action against employers in egregious cases, where an employer with the financial ability to pay refuses to.

This was a shift from the Government position in February that Singapore does not mandate benefits because an approach that provides business flexibility while protecting workers achieves better outcomes.

This language has softened over 2026 as retrenchments spiked. During an August debate on the WP’s economic plans, where the opposition party asked for mandatory retrenchment benefits, the Government agreed with this need, but said it would consult employers and unions before deciding.

Lau this time round stopped short of promising a blanket mandate, warning that some employers face financial difficulties, and that a rigid obligation could risk more jobs.

In 2025, 88% of employers that retrenched workers paid benefits. Of those that did not, about one in five cited financial difficulty.

This means nearly one in 10 employers that laid off workers did not pay benefits – usually two weeks to a month of salary per year of service – for reasons other than financial difficulty.

Another area PAP MPs pressed the Government on was the effectiveness of current laws on mandatory notifications of retrenchments, which do not require employers to notify the authorities or unions before telling affected staff.

Labour MP Patrick Tay (Pioneer) asked about the difficulty of reaching workers when notifications come in after they have left the company, while Alex Yeo (Potong Pasir) asked if MOM would review the adequacy of advance notice for laid-off workers.

Union-linked MPs have previously pushed for early notifications to be put into law, arguing that later notifications slow down the process of helping workers.

The spike in retrenchments may spur the Government to consider this now, after long resisting it due to the possibility of increasing costs for businesses.

Lau told MPs these issues are being looked at as part of an ongoing review of the Employment Act – Singapore’s main employment law, which has not been comprehensively amended since 2018. The recommendations from the group working on this are due by end-2026.

The Government may opt for a softer approach, as it faces pressure to legislate for a problem whose shape is still unclear.

Legislative changes will be hard to roll back if the situation shifts drastically again, and the authorities may prefer to wait until things are clearer before moving.

It is unclear whether the retrenchment spike reflects short-term pressures in specific industries, or a structural shift driven by artificial intelligence, tariffs or other factors. Over three in four retrenched workers in the second quarter lost their jobs to restructuring, but Lau said her ministry cannot yet isolate AI’s effect.

Sustained high retrenchment numbers and more evidence that they are the result of a long-term trend like AI reshaping industries will lead to more pressure from MPs from both parties to legislate.

One middle way forward is for the Government to adjust the tripartite advisories and guidelines instead of legislating new worker protections.

Guaranteeing benefits could cushion retrenchment for workers, but MPs’ push for early notification points towards what could be the larger issue: re-employment.

The point of advance notice is to get workers into new jobs faster, and on that front the numbers have slipped.

Lau noted that the proportion of retrenched residents returning to employment within six months declined from 60.7% in the first quarter to 54.9% in the second quarter of this year.

Fresh graduates are also taking longer to get hired into full-time employment, she added.

This has deeper implications for the Government’s pledge to protect workers rather than jobs. The promise points to the overall unemployment rate rather than quarterly retrenchment figures as the wider scorecard.

The rate remains low at 2.9% for residents in Q2, despite the spike. But for it to stay low, workers need to get into jobs and fresh graduates need to get hired.

For now, the Government wants to do this without changing how it targets its hiring support.

Towards the end of question time, Lau turned down a suggestion from Shawn Loh (Jalan Besar GRC) to give tiered support to firms to hire workers, based on how long they have been unemployed for.

She said a better approach is to train workers well and make sure they have the right skills to get jobs on their own.

That system includes the NTUC’s company training committees, which PM Wong said the Government would scale to deal with disruption, and the new Skills & Workforce Development Agency.

The outcomes from these two organisations, which have been central to the Government’s strategy to deal with job disruption, will likely be the next point of MPs’ scrutiny.

If hiring trends continue, they will soon feel political pressure to produce.

即便在对保护措施进行辩论的同时，这项承诺面临的下一个压力点正在出现：如何让被裁员工和应届毕业生找到工作。

ST 照片：林耀辉

发布于 2026 年 10 月 9 日晚上 8:15

更新于2026年10月9日晚上8:15

新加坡——10月6日，国会质询时间，保护工人权益的需求日益增长，议员们对政府在裁员激增的情况下为缓解裁员影响所做的努力进行了更严格的审查。

作为回应，当局为加强对劳动者的保护敞开了大门——这表明可能会对那些有经济能力支付裁员补偿金却不支付的雇主采取行动。

这些问题的出现，源于一项更大的政治承诺：总理黄循财承诺新加坡不会出现无就业增长，虽然政府可能无法保住每一个工作岗位，但会保护每一位劳动者。

但即便在讨论保护措施的同时，这项承诺面临的下一个压力点正在出现：如何让被裁员工和应届毕业生找到工作。

执政党议员对现行劳动法的充分性提出了质疑。包括四名劳工党议员在内的十三名人民行动党议员就10月6日裁员一事，向一名工人党议员提出了质询。

此前，9月份的统计数据显示，2026年第二季度裁员人数达到4620人，为疫情爆发以来的最高数字。裁员率为每千人2.0人，高于人力部（MOM）设定的非经济衰退时期每千人1.5至1.7人的标准。

提交的 15 个问题（是本届政府任期内关于裁员问题最多的一个）要求提供更多保障措施，并指出现有保护措施的不足之处。

其一是缺乏法律规定的裁员补偿金。人民行动党议员认为这可能不够——两党议员过去都曾提出过类似的观点。

工党议员杨婉玲（榜鹅集选区）和杨明杰（拉丁马士选区）要求加强三方咨询机制——这是政府、工会和雇主推荐的做法，但不具有法律约束力。

杨询问，对于非工会企业的员工，有哪些保障措施可以确保裁员建议得到切实执行。同时，杨询问人力部是否认为有必要加强该建议中现有的规范，特别是针对最弱势的劳动者群体。

对此，人力部代理部长刘嘉敏表示，对于有经济能力支付工资却拒绝支付的严重案例，当局正在考虑对雇主采取行政措施。

这与新加坡政府二月份的立场有所不同，当时政府表示，新加坡不强制要求员工享受福利，因为在保障员工权益的同时，为企业提供灵活性的做法能够取得更好的结果。

随着裁员人数激增，2026 年的相关措辞有所缓和。在 8 月份关于工人党经济计划的辩论中，反对党要求政府强制发放裁员补偿金，政府虽然认同这一需求，但表示会在做出决定前咨询雇主和工会的意见。

这次刘先生没有承诺强制执行全面规定，而是警告说，一些雇主面临财务困难，而严格的规定可能会危及更多就业岗位。

2025年，裁员的雇主中有88%支付了员工福利。在未支付福利的雇主中，约有五分之一表示遇到了财务困难。

这意味着近十分之一的裁员雇主没有支付员工福利（通常为每服务一年支付两周到一个月的工资），而原因并非财务困难。

人民行动党议员向政府施压的另一个领域是现行裁员强制通知法律的有效性，这些法律没有要求雇主在告知受影响的员工之前通知当局或工会。

工党议员郑德源（先驱选区）询问，当工人在离职后才收到通知时，如何才能联系到他们；而杨荣文（波东巴西选区）则询问人力部是否会审查裁员通知的充分性。

与工会有关联的议员此前曾推动将提前通知写入法律，他们认为，延迟通知会减慢帮助工人的进程。

裁员潮的激增可能会促使政府考虑这一措施，此前政府一直因为担心增加企业成本而抵制这一措施。

刘先生告诉议员们，这些问题正在作为对《雇佣法令》（新加坡的主要雇佣法，自2018年以来未进行全面修订）持续审查的一部分进行研究。负责此项工作的团队将于2026年底前提出建议。

由于政府面临着立法解决一个尚不明确的问题的压力，因此可能会选择较为温和的方式。

如果形势再次发生剧烈变化，立法变更将很难撤销，当局可能更愿意等到情况更加明朗后再采取行动。

目前尚不清楚裁员潮是反映特定行业的短期压力，还是由人工智能、关税或其他因素驱动的结构性转变。第二季度被裁员工中，超过四分之三的人是因为公司重组而失业，但刘女士表示，她的部门目前还无法确定人工智能的影响。

持续的高裁员人数，以及越来越多的证据表明这是人工智能重塑行业等长期趋势的结果，将导致两党议员施加更大的压力，要求立法。

一种折中的办法是政府调整三方咨询意见和指导方针，而不是立法制定新的工人保护措施。

保障福利可以缓解裁员对工人的影响，但议员们推动尽早通知的做法表明，这可能才是更大的问题：重新就业。

提前通知的目的是为了让工人更快地找到新工作，但在这方面，相关数据已经下滑。

刘指出，被裁居民在六个月内重返工作岗位的比例从今年第一季度的 60.7% 下降到第二季度的 54.9%。

她还补充说，应届毕业生找到全职工作所需的时间也越来越长。

这对政府保护劳动者而非就业岗位的承诺有着更深远的影响。该承诺将整体失业率而非季度裁员数据作为更广泛的衡量标准。

尽管第二季度出现激增，但居民失业率仍保持在2.9%的低位。然而，要保持低失业率，劳动者需要找到工作，应届毕业生也需要找到工作。

目前，政府希望在不改变其招聘支持目标的情况下实现这一目标。

在质询时间即将结束时，刘镇东拒绝了惹兰勿刹集选区议员罗绍文提出的建议，即根据失业时间的长短，向企业提供分级支持以帮助他们雇用工人。

她表示，更好的办法是好好培训工人，确保他们具备自主找到工作的技能。

该系统包括全国职工总会的企业培训委员会（黄英贤总理表示，政府将扩大其规模以应对可能出现的混乱），以及新的技能与劳动力发展局。

这两个组织一直是政府应对就业中断战略的核心，它们的成果很可能成为议员们下一个审查重点。

如果目前的招聘趋势持续下去，他们很快就会感受到政治压力，不得不提高产量。