share on
The sequence of events in the migrant worker's case, which involved salary arrears and repatriation, underlines the need for clear processes and communication when organisations are handling disputes with migrant workers.
The recent public back‑and‑forth over the case of migrant worker Ali Md Kawsar, who faced salary arrears and repatriation following the termination of his employment, has largely been framed as a dispute between a civil society group and the authorities. But behind the headlines is a story that should concern HR leaders and employers: how a salary dispute, if not handled well, can spiral into illegal employment risk for everyone involved.
Addressing the matter in a joint statement on Wednesday (14 April 2026), Ministry of Manpower (MOM) and the Tripartite Alliance for Dispute Management (TADM) said Ali approached MOM on 31 December 2024 to report alleged salary arrears and unauthorised deductions by his former employer, Buildwerkz Builders. At that point, MOM officers advised him to first try to settle the matter with the employer and to return for help if the issue remained unresolved.
A few days later, on 2 January 2025, he filed a formal salary claim with TADM. TADM issued him a Special Pass so that he could stay in Singapore legally while his claim was being managed. According to TADM, contrary to Ali’s own later account, TADM had also issued a Change of Employer letter, which allowed him to seek alternative employment. However, he did not take the offer up.
Three mediation sessions followed, but no agreement was reached. The dispute then moved to the Employment Claims Tribunals (ECT), which ruled in Ali’s favour. In September 2025, his former employer paid him his outstanding salary in full. MOM also investigated his complaint and took enforcement action against the company for making unauthorised salary deductions without written consent.
When the food quality issues were raised by Ali, MOM had engaged his employer and the caterer to address the matter, and improvements were made to the quality of food accordingly. Since then, there has been no further feedback on food quality raised by Ali.
Per the statement, despite having formal avenues to seek legal employment while pursuing his claims in Singapore, Ali worked illegally from February to July 2025. MOM and TADM clarified that once this information came to light, the ministry opened an investigation into his illegal employment. While that investigation was ongoing, he was still allowed to take up a six‑month job under the Temporary Job Scheme (TJS) in October 2025. In February 2026, enforcement action was taken against him for the earlier illegal work, though he was allowed to complete the TJS role until the end of March 2026.
So, what can HR take away from this case?
The case above reaffirmed the need for organisations to handle disputes with your own workers appropriately as it can influence what they do next. If the relationship breaks down and a worker feels abandoned, there is a higher likelihood of them seeking informal work. It is imperative to have clear communication about their status, options for legal employment, and referral to official channels to reduce the risk for others.
For HR and employers, this case offers a more grounded reminder: salary disputes and illegal work are often two sides of the same coin. Managing one without paying attention to the other is no longer an option.
"MOM takes all complaints from workers seriously and will investigate breaches of employment laws where there is evidence of wrongdoing.
"Similarly, we take a firm stance on illegal employment practices. Work pass holders who engaged in illegal employment will have their work passes revoked and will be prohibited from seeking employment in Singapore," the statement concluded.
On HRO's checks, the referenced posts are no longer available online.
READ MORE: 10 arrested, 41 assisting in MOM's probe into employment-related offences in Singapore
share on
