The Employment Claims Tribunal is part of the State Courts

On a Tuesday morning in February 2025, Harivansh (name changed) logged in via video link to the Employment Claims Tribunal. The magistrate had scheduled this date and hour to deliver his decision following a hearing held about two weeks earlier. Harivansh was all nervous. He had never had a case pursued all the way to the Employment Claims Tribunal before, and the decision could turn out either way.

He knew however, that his case was well-prepared. TWC2 had helped him organise his thoughts and his evidence. But even so, his arguments ventured into territory quite unfamiliar to him. Everything about the experience – dealing with formal court processes, providing written statements and understanding the details of specific clauses in the law – had been new to him. He had to learn fast.

“From start to end, madam [a TWC2 volunteer] guided me patiently and assisted with all the documentation,” said Harivansh, “even working tirelessly to the point where I had to remind her to rest.”

However, the outcome was not in madam’s hands. It was in the magistrate’s hands, and at 9am, Harivansh was going to find out what the decision would be.

Three jobs so far, all had salary short-payments

Then aged 26, Harivansh first came to Singapore from India in September 2019, employed as an engineering technician under an S-Pass. A relative secured this job for him, and he had to pay the relative $4,500 for it.

The contracted-for salary was $2,500 a month as documented on his IPA (see explanation in Glossary) but Harivansh was only paid $1,000 monthly. Initially it was paid in cash but during his last five months on the job, he was paid through his bank account.

He certainly wasn’t happy with the short-payment of his salary, but did not file a claim. With so many months’ salary paid in cash leaving no evidence, he wasn’t sure how any claim might stand up against the likely denials from the employer. He knew too that as soon as he filed a claim, the employer would be so angered that he would lose the job immediately. Between the fear of repatriation and a belief – widespread from migrant workers in Singapore – that the Ministry of Manpower (MOM) favoured employers, he chose to look for a new job than assert his right to his contracted salary.

Harivansh’s second job was as a night-shift delivery driver. He started work in September 2021 and was also on an S-Pass. This time, his monthly salary as stated on his IPA was $2,700. However, he worked extra hours as well and while the employer kept timecards (which would detail these extra hours), his payslips made no mention of them.

Completely frustrated, two years on in September 2023, he finally found the courage to file a salary claim. It was for about $12,000, specifically for the unpaid overtime hours. The TADM unit of MOM, which handles salary claims, arranged for a mediation session between him and the employer, and somewhat to Harivansh’s surprise, the matter was settled there and then. A week later, he received a cheque from the employer paying the agreed settlement sum.

This positive experience made him more trustful of Singapore’s dispute resolution system.

Third job, third salary problem

Harivansh was unusual in that he spoke English fluently. That might have helped him get a new job even while he was filing a salary claim against his second employer. He came across the job vacancy from a post on Facebook.

He joined the company, his third employer, in September 2023 as a tipper-truck driver. It was a construction company. He was again on an S-Pass, with a basic salary of $1,850 plus a fixed monthly allowance of $1,650. In total, $3,500 a month.

Immediately, problems began, like in both previous companies.

Although his salary was paid through bank transfer, he was consistently short-paid. While he was always paid something each month, payslips were not issued, so it was impossible to verify how the amounts had been computed. There were many elements of short-payment: overtime, rest day pay, public holiday pay, unauthorised deductions, unpaid annual leave, and so on. Together, they added up to a situation that was more complicated than what he experienced at the second company which was a straightforward overtime claim. Not knowing the details of legislation governing salary entitlements for each of these elements meant that he wasn’t sure how much he should be claiming.

Furthermore, he was once again concerned about losing the job should he confront the boss over the matter by filing a formal claim. This fear held him back even as he got more frustrated when his request to take paid annual leave was denied. At this point in time, he was ten months into the job, and he had earned paid leave entitlement. His request was only for five days, but was refused. The company cited an internal policy that only allowed one month of unpaid leave every two years. Harivansh had not yet worked two full years.

Eventually, enough was enough. He was not going to take such arbitrary, unfair treatment lying down. Harivansh went to MOM and filed a salary claim on 9 September 2024. Two weeks later, he found TWC2 and came to consult with us. We calculated the owed amounts based on provisions in the Employment Act, and arrived at an amount over $28,000.

However, the Employment Claims Act sets a cap of $20,000 for claims. An employee can claim more than that, but in such an event, the claim has to be pursued through the normal civil suit process, involving lawyers, etc, whereas the mediation-and-Tribunal process under the Employment Claims Act would be nearly cost-free (there are filing costs and other minor costs), and possibly quicker too.

Harivansh agreed to claim $20,000 through mediation. If that failed, he would have recourse to the Tribunal process.

In late November 2024, about two months after he filed his salary claim, he and his employer agreed to a settlement at a mediation session. The terms of the settlement are confidential, but Harivansh seemed more than happy. He was probably also relieved that the salary claim did not have to be escalated to the Tribunal for judgement. If it had, it would add a couple more months to the wait, prolonging his anxiety.

Yet, the opening paragraph speaks of him awaiting a judgement by a Tribunal magistrate in February 2025. So, what happened? The story continues in Part 2.

15504