SINGAPORE – While dismissals during probation are permitted under Singapore’s employment law, experts say employers who cite poor performance as the reason must be ready to back it up with proper documentation.
This advice is underscored by a recent case in which the Employment Claims Tribunals (ECT) awarded a woman the maximum $30,000 compensation for her “sudden and unjustified” dismissal just before her six-month probation was up.
She was told her performance had fallen short of the standards required for confirmation and was given two weeks’ notice. She then filed a wrongful dismissal claim.
The magistrate concluded that the employer had failed to justify its decision that the woman, an audit manager, had not passed probation.
The court ruling has raised concerns among employers about the potential legal risks of dismissing employees on probation.
Ministry of Manpower (MOM) data showed there were 2,168 wrongful dismissal claims in 2025, although it does not provide a breakdown of cases filed by employees on probation.
Human resources (HR) professionals said dismissals during probation are relatively rare.
Akshay Mendon, director of leadership hiring at global executive search firm Mercuri Urval, said: “Companies do spend a lot of time and money on hiring, so in my experience, they do try to retain employees and make things work, within reason.”
Juliet Tan, founder of HR consultancy firm Emplifi, also noted that for most organisations, failing probation remains the exception rather than the rule.
The importance of documentation
Nonetheless, the ECT’s ruling decision acts as a reminder for employers to provide proper documentation to protect themselves against claims of wrongful dismissal.
HR professionals said employers should also provide regular feedback, giving employees enough time and opportunity to improve, instead of waiting until the end of probation to raise concerns.
Subjective comments such as “not committed enough” or “not the right fit” may be difficult to defend if the expected standards were never clearly explained, said Yvonne Tan, director of recruitment agency Dynamic Human Capital, a subsidiary of manpower consultancy Elitez Group.
She added that written records of performance discussions, together with a fair process, will help protect the company if the dismissal is later challenged by affected employees. This entails providing examples of missed expectations, detailing the support or mentorship provided, and allowing employees to respond before a final decision is made.
In addition to proper documentation, Mendon said, companies need to be “very careful” about how this is communicated to the employee.
For example, he recommended flagging performance issues early – say, in the first month – addressing them quickly, documenting the feedback, being clear on what needs to be improved, and setting a date to review progress.
Who can file the claim
Not every employee, however, is eligible to bring a wrongful dismissal claim. Eligibility depends on factors such as the employee’s role and length of service.
Under the Employment Act, managers and executives must complete at least six months of continuous service to qualify for wrongful dismissal claims, unless they are let go without notice and without severance pay.
This group includes employees with executive and supervisory responsibilities, such as formulating business strategies and managing operations, as well as professionals with specialised skills, such as advocates and solicitors, and chartered accountants.
Non-managers and non-executives are not subject to a minimum service requirement.
In the case of the audit manager, having served the employer for six months and 10 days made her eligible to file a wrongful dismissal claim.
The Singapore National Employers Federation (SNEF) said the six-month threshold was agreed by the tripartite partners because “managerial and executive roles often require a longer period for employers to assess an employee’s suitability, job fit and performance before making a decision on continued employment”.
The six-month threshold has also proven decisive in another ruling published on Aug 3. In this case, a software manager failed in his wrongful dismissal claim after the court found that he was not a “relevant employee”, for he had served for only five months and 27 days, and was paid salary in lieu of notice.
However, Tan of Dynamic Human Capital cautioned that the six-month rule is “not a free pass” for employers to terminate employees before the six-month mark.
Tan said: “The decision should be based on legitimate reasons, supported by proper documentation, and not made simply to avoid potential claims.”
When to extend probation
When employers need more time to assess an employee, extending the probation period may be a better option than making a premature decision, HR professionals said.
This may be appropriate when onboarding has been disrupted or when an employee is showing signs of improvement, said Tan.
“It should not be used simply to delay a difficult decision. Any extension should clearly state the duration, reasons, improvement targets and final review date.”
Mendon said an extension may be warranted if performance concerns have not been communicated earlier. “Sometimes, performance issues surface only later, especially in the Singapore ecosystem – where many roles have a regional scope, and managers and stakeholders travel frequently.”
Emplifi’s Tan suggested extending probation by one to three months with clear, written 30-day milestones.
However, if the issue involves “fundamental behavioural or cultural misalignment”, extending probation merely delays the inevitable, she said.
“In these cases, initiating a prompt contractual exit while honouring all notice terms is fairer to both parties.”
More than just a trial period for employers, HR professionals said probation also allows employees to assess whether the role and organisation are the right fit.
SNEF said: “Whether it’s during or beyond the probationary period, either party may also end the employment relationship in accordance with the terms of the employment contract and applicable employment laws, without providing any reason.”
