May 20, 2026

As Singapore continues adapting to post-COVID workplace norms, flexible work arrangements (FWAs) have emerged as both a normalised workforce expectation and a source of tension within organisations. Although tripartite guidelines introduced in December 2024 require employers to formally consider employees’ requests for FWAs, ‘Why the stigma over flexible work persists in Singapore’ (Channel NewsAsia, May 2026) elucidates how many workers still face unfair stigma, mistrust, and subtle career penalties when utilising such arrangements.

On the ground, there is strong demand for FWAs as part of achieving better work-life balance. A 2024 Ministry of Manpower survey found that more than 65% of workers considered flexibility an important factor when choosing a job, second only to salary. While formal arrangements have become increasingly common, with around 70% of firms offering some form of flexibility and most requests reportedly approved, many employees still hesitate to request FWAs. A key issue identified is the persistence of ‘presenteeism’ culture, which is the belief that employees who are physically present in the office are more committed and productive. Employees interviewed by Channel NewsAsia (CNA) described situations where remote workers were excluded from informal communication, scrutinised more heavily or perceived as receiving unfair privileges. Some also worried that requesting flexibility could affect promotion opportunities or even job security. These concerns were especially acute among caregivers balancing work with childcare or eldercare responsibilities.

Rather than stemming from flaws in the policy itself, many implementation challenges surrounding FWAs arise from entrenched managerial mindsets and workplace culture. According to the Institute for Human Resource Professionals, some managers continue to struggle with decoupling physical employee attendance from the quality of submitted deliverables. As a result, the effectiveness of FWAs often depends less on formal approval processes and more on the degree of managerial trust and organisational support within each corporation. This broader cultural resistance was reinforced by findings from ‘Revisiting Flexibility Stigma: How Framing Remote Working Shapes Bias Against Remote Workers’ (Gender, Work & Organization, 2026) by Assistant Professor Wang Senhu (NUS Sociology & Anthropology) and Professor Chung Heejung (King’s College London). Surveying 473 managers in Singapore, the study found that remote workers were consistently perceived as less committed and promotable compared to employees working full-time in the office, despite broader evidence suggesting that flexible workers are often equally, if not more, productive. Particularly striking was the finding that such stigma intensified when remote work was framed primarily as a caregiving accommodation rather than as a legitimate mode of productive work. In doing so, FWAs become associated with notions of reduced ambition and weaker career commitment.

Against this backdrop, experts argue that Singapore’s next phase of reform should prioritise cultural transformation over additional policy tweaks. Instead of treating flexibility as an exceptional privilege granted selectively, organisations should be encouraged to normalise outcome-based performance evaluation and redesign work around deliverables and service standards. Stronger management training, more transparent evaluation systems, and clearer communication of flexible work policies should also be utilised as crucial steps towards reducing bias and ensuring fairer treatment of employees utilising FWAs.

The debate surrounding flexible work extends beyond workplace preferences and increasingly intersects with Singapore’s broader socioeconomic challenges. With the country facing persistently low birth rates, an ageing population, and growing caregiving responsibilities, workplace flexibility is becoming closely tied not only to employee well-being, but also to labour force participation and long-term economic resilience. While Singapore has made substantial progress in institutionalising FWAs, genuine acceptance will depend on whether organisations can move towards embracing flexibility as a sustainable feature of modern work.

Read the Channel NewsAsia article here.

Read ‘Revisiting Flexibility Stigma: How Framing Remote Working Shapes Bias Against Remote Workers’ here.