The retrenchment exercise at Agoda has raised critical questions, not about the scale of job losses, but about the clauses in its severance agreements. Employees were reportedly told they risked losing their payouts if they approached MOM, unions, or initiated formal proceedings.
From a legal standpoint, such clauses are likely unenforceable under Singapore’s Employment Claims Act and broader labor protections. Yet their very inclusion is deeply concerning. They highlight:
⚖️ Overreach in employment practices – attempting to contract out of statutory rights.
🛑 Chilling effects on grievances and whistleblowing – deterring employees from exercising their statutory rights.
📉 Reputational and trust risks – undermining organizational credibility in how retrenchments are handled.
This incident underscores why fairness and transparency in employment decisions are under sharper scrutiny than ever. With the forthcoming Workplace Fairness Legislation (WFL), retaliation against employees who lodge complaints or seek assistance from regulators will be explicitly prohibited.
With the Workplace Fairness Legislation on the horizon, organizations must stay ahead and be prepared to:
Align policies with Workplace Fairness requirements
Manage retrenchments and grievances transparently
Safeguard both organizational interests and employee rights
👉The lesson is clear: severance agreements should never compromise statutory protections. Retrenchments are not just a matter of financial settlement, but also a test of an employer’s commitment to fairness, compliance, ethical responsibility and to preserving trust.
Comments