Two migrant workers in TWC2’s office trying their best to calculate what they are owed in unpaid salaries based on scraps of payslips that do not conform to required formats.

Salary and labour are intrinsically linked, with fair compensation being a fundamental consideration for work performed. The Ministry of Manpower (MOM) has mandated all employers to provide itemised pay slips to employees covered under the Employment Act. This rule has been in place for years, since 1 April 2016.

Additionally, salary payments must be made via bank transfer, except for workers not residing in dormitories, who may receive cash payments.

The rules sound good (though they could be better, as discussed below) but what is the reality for workers? We pick four workers at random and speak with them about their experiences.

Mohsin (name changed) tells me he regularly receives electronic payslips from his employer in two ways – via a mobile application and in pdf form sent by email. Having worked in Singapore for ten years, he has taken the time to understand the content of his payslips thus has been able to monitor the amounts regularly. Unfortunately, even with the well organised and detailed payslips in hand, he is still plagued with salary issues. It’s one thing to be nicely formatted; it’s another to be truthful!

Mohsin pulls out several of his printed payslips to show me and highlights the severely reduced overtime hours and fixed salary that were itemised. He explains that whenever he raised a question about incorrect amounts on the payslip, he would be dismissed by the company staff with reasonings that he did not agree with. His requests for corrections were never favourably answered, leaving him feeling discontented.

Jamal (name changed) too has worked in Singapore for ten years, in his case as a maintenance worker. He is still paid in cash. The rule about having to make salary payments through a bank may not quite apply in his case because he is not housed in a dormitory.

Fortunately, he has not had issues with the amount of salary received despite the lack of proper documentation provided to him by the company. The only record of his compensation is a salary voucher, which he is asked to sign, and which is retained by his employer. No copy is given to him. Despite receiving the right wages, he still ended up facing a problem as a result of  the absence of payslips.

It’s like this: Jamal was recently injured in an accident. Under the law, the amount in compensation he should get is based on his average salary over the past twelve months. However, without documentation given to him, Jamal has not been able to prove what his average salary was. Payments made in cash also meant that he did not have bank statements showing the amounts sent to him each month either. In lieu of proper and accurate documentation, Jamal has had to fall back on the basic salary stated on his In-Principle Approval for a Work Permit issued more than two years ago. It states the basic salary at the start of his employment, but does not show what his increments since then were nor the average overtime hours he has worked. If he had gotten detailed itemised payslips, as required by law, he wouldn’t be in this quandary.

Fazal (name changed) chips in to say he too has been receiving his salary in cash. He recalls having to sign a salary voucher each month, with no copy given to him. He is unhappy with the payment format and he shares that what he received was lower than what was expected, but we don’t have time to go into why. He does add, however, that his attempts to address this issue with his employer have been unsuccessful.

The fourth man we speak with, Mitul (name changed), also does not get electronic or paper payslips. So he resorts to calculating his expected salary by using his time card as reference. He then checks his total against the amount that shows up in his bank statement (he is paid through his bank account).

Apparently, payslips are drawn up in the company’s office, Mitul says, because his employer allows him to have a quick look at them each month. Copies should be given to Mitul – that’s what the law requires – but snapping a photo of the payslip is the most Mitul is allowed to do, and only sometimes.

Mitul complains to me that the details in the payslips are vague and the itemisations unclear. There have been times when he tried to question the incorrect salary amounts, but he would receive harsh responses and threats from his employer without appropriate resolution. These responses, he says, sometimes invoke threats of violence, but Mitul seems to have become inured to them. They are common gestures, he says.

Our four interviewees do not paint a pretty picture as to the effectiveness of MOM’s rules. Flouting is quite widespread. But, more than that, flouting is associated with under-payment. Overall, based on the experiences of the individuals we talked to, having access to a well itemised payslip does appear to be more helpful than not. The system is far from perfect, but the payslip enables the workers to better clarify their salary status. What’s more important, perhaps, is the employers’ intent and integrity, whether to compensate their workers fairly, or not.

We make the following recommendations:

Firstly the exception allowing employers to pay workers in cash if workers stay outside dormitories should be eliminated. It is open to abuse, as some employers may then choose not to place their workers in dormitories. All Work Permit holders should have their salaries paid into bank accounts regardless of where they stay.

Secondly, anytime any other department of MOM, whether dealing with salary claims, injury or other claims, comes across a worker who does not have itemised payslips or has not been paid via bank, the matter should be referred to the enforcement branch immediately. It should not merely be treated as a civil claim to be resolved between private parties, but has to be seen as a wilful violation of the Regulations by the employer.

Thirdly, once such a referral is made to the enforcement branch, there should be a complete audit of compliance with respect to all other Work Permit holders under the same employer.

Fourthly, should a salary claim reach the Employment Claims Tribunal and the employer is shown not to have issued detailed itemised payslips to the claimant (the worker filing the claim) the Tribunal should draw an adverse inference from this failure to issue proper payslips.

Mohsin 15354; Jamal 15094; Fazal 6223; Mitul 5588