Skip to main content
Advertisement

Voices

Hot Take: Flexi-work guidelines have us debating if workers or bosses win, but what we really need is more workplace trust

Hot Take: Flexi-work guidelines have us debating if workers or bosses win, but what we really need is more workplace trust

Singaporeans can’t seem to agree on whether the opening up of requests for flexible working arrangements is a step forward, backward, or even sideways. But what if it's not a step in any direction at all?

As a kid, I asked and pleaded and begged my mum for a puppy. 

Whenever she ran out of ways to dodge the question, she’d bring out the big guns: “Ask Dad.” She was confident that Dad would say no, and that would be the end of it.

But what happens when Dad doesn’t say no?

On Tuesday (April 16), a tripartite workgroup unveiled the Tripartite Guidelines on Flexible Work Arrangement Requests. 

In these guidelines, the group — a collaboration between the Ministry of Manpower, National Trades Union Congress and Singapore National Employers Federation — stipulates that all Singapore firms should set up processes to receive and handle formal requests from employees for flexible work arrangements.

This should come as no surprise, with the overwhelming majority of young adults continuing to prefer remote or hybrid working arrangements even as we put the Covid-19 pandemic in the rear-view mirror. In 2023, most of Singapore’s Gen Zers (69 per cent) and millennials (70 per cent) said they would seek out job opportunities elsewhere if their current employer were to mandate full-time on-site work, according to Deloitte research. 

As vocal as workers have been about not returning to the office full-time, employers have been just as vocal about wanting them back in the workplace. In October 2023, LinkedIn reported that seven out of 10 leaders in Asia-Pacific believed their companies would be “forced to wind back progress” on flexible working. 

After spending all of 2023 circling each other like two rival boxers in a ring, it seems the two opposing sentiments are finally coming to a head — and Tuesday’s announcement may have just rung the bell.

POINTLESS, USELESS, HOPELESS

Members of the public poured into the stadium to place their bets, alternating between hollering support and huffing displeasure. 

A large group quickly arrived at the conclusion that the move was, ultimately, a toothless display — a whole lot of fanfare over no real, tangible change.

Workers can now request flexible work arrangements — so what? Companies can still easily reject such requests, they said. Big deal.

Members of the public poured into the stadium to place their bets, alternating between hollering support and huffing displeasure at the new scheme.

Many took it upon themselves to remind others that employers are “not that nice”, with several voicing fears and expectations that workers will likely rue the day they attempted such requests (or have such requests granted) when their performance appraisals are negatively affected, not to mention their salaries or bonuses.

Even if this comes out to something, said some, such a move will still be “unfair”. After all, not everyone would be able to benefit from such flexibility, including service and frontline workers. Equality fails again. 

BABY STEPS?

Another camp of spectators threw their support behind the move. It may not be much, they said, but at the very least, it’s a step forward for better worker welfare in Singapore.

For young adults, access to flexible work arrangements makes it easier to take care of ageing parents and relatives as well as kids. For older folks, flexibility enhances their ability to find and keep jobs as they age. 

Yes, non-office workers may never have this privilege or possibility, but that’s all the more reason to count your blessings, advised this group.

Many also said that opening up such requests could be a step towards addressing other chronic issues in Singapore — for instance, nudging the nation’s minimum annual leave requirement up from the current seven days.

TRUST ISSUES

At first glance, the new guidelines seem like a classic case of splitting the baby. As the saying goes: “No one is very happy, which means it’s a good compromise.”

We can’t seem to agree on whether this is a step forward, backward, or even sideways. But what if it’s not a step in any direction at all?

Really, the new guidelines are an opening: A door to more conversations between employers and employees about how to re-evaluate and improve both business performance as well as worker welfare. 

So maybe the real point we’re all missing is this: What does it say about Singapore work culture that this door wasn’t already open to begin with?  

Interestingly, a decent chunk of responses chose to warn of "abuse" of flexible work arrangements on both sides of the aisle: Greater freedom means employees will go MIA or slack off; greater remote access and looser structures means employers will make staff work after hours and on public holidays. 

Crowds in the Central Business District on April 26, 2022. The new guidelines are an opening: A door to more conversations between employers and employees about how to re-evaluate and improve both business performance as well as worker welfare, says the author.

Clearly, the issue is not really about who's in the office and when. It’s about trust between bosses and workers. 

And that trust seems to have broken somewhere along the way — more inimically than we’ve all realised.

TRUST GOES BOTH WAYS

Repairing that trust starts with recalibrating our base view of jobs and work. 

At the end of the day, nobody wants to do badly at their job and nobody wants their company to fail. Of course, there are always occasional exceptions to the rule, but broadly speaking, we’ve all got that Majulah Singapura mindset — we all want better outcomes for our careers and businesses, as well as ourselves. 

We’re all on the same side. It’s not a zero-sum competition. It's give and take, not win or lose.

But the simple truth is this: Expecting any one single move, no matter how big or small, to be a one-size-fits-all fix for all our problems will never turn out well. 

These guidelines aren’t meant to be a perfect solution, but a starting point that forces employers to come to the table and listen to their staff. Whether that conversation results in a win-win outcome depends on both sides' willingness to give and take.

To be honest, I never got that puppy. Dad said no. 

But I did get to give a pretty cool five-minute presentation on why I thought I deserved that puppy — a presentation that earned me two hamsters.

In the public debate on flexible working arrangements, we don’t have to split the baby, and we definitely don’t have to throw it out with the bathwater. 

ABOUT THE AUTHOR:

Melissa Lee Suppiah is a deputy editor at TODAY where she oversees commentaries. 

Source: TODAY
Advertisement

Recommended

Advertisement