• Mr Zaqy Mohamad and other Malay-Muslim political officeholders spoke out about an investigation into Tangs store
• This is after TODAY published a report on a part-time sales promoter allegedly being told to remove her hijab
• Ms Nadia Samdin, MP for Ang Mo Kio GRC, said that discriminatory hiring practices do not have a place in Singapore
• Mr Zaqy said that another department store had reviewed its uniform policy after a similar incident

SINGAPORE — Following an incident at Tangs department store where a promoter was allegedly told that she cannot wear her hijab or religious headdress, Mr Zaqy Mohamad called on employers to regularly review their workplace policies and consider the views and sensitivities of their employees.

The Senior Minister of State for Manpower also said that companies should be thoughtful of the policies and practices they set and practise inclusivity.

Mr Zaqy was among a handful of Malay-Muslim political officeholders to speak out about the issue on Wednesday (Aug 19).

TODAY reported on Tuesday that the Tripartite Alliance for Fair and Progressive Employment Practices (Tafep) is looking into an incident where Tangs employees allegedly asked Ms Nurin Jazlina Mahbob, 20, a part-time promoter at a pop-up booth, to remove her hijab in order to be allowed to work on its premises. 

The woman who hired Ms Nurin to man the booth in late July then made public the incident on social media, saying that it was a “ridiculous” demand by Tangs.

Giving its statement, Tangs said that there was a lapse in communication with Ms Nurin’s employer on the dress code and it is cooperating with Tafep’s investigations.

In a Facebook post on Wednesday, Mr Zaqy called the incident an “important issue for the community”, adding that Tafep has made it clear that recruitment and hiring practices should be based on merit and the worker’s ability to perform the job.

“Religious attire should generally be allowed at workplaces, unless employers have uniform, or dress code requirements which are suited to the nature of their work, or for operational and safety reasons.

“It is important for employers to communicate their uniform policy or dress code clearly and sensitively to their employees and jobseekers and their stakeholders,” he said.

Weighing in on the issue, Mr Saktiandi Supaat, Member of Parliament (MP) for Bishan-Toa Payoh Group Representation Constituency (GRC), said that such incidents “need to be addressed (and) more so in this current economic environment and difficult employment outlook”.

He hopes that all employers “abide strongly” by fair employment practices so that “we come out stronger from this Covid-19 crisis and, at the same time, our Singaporean core workers — regardless of race, language or religion — feel taken care of”.

Ms Nadia Samdin, who is MP for Ang Mo Kio GRC, said on Facebook that discriminatory hiring practices — including those against age, gender, ethnicity or religion — do not have a place in Singapore.

“It was really disheartening to read (about the incident) and I am glad Tafep is addressing it,” she wrote. “I also commend the business owner for standing by her part-timer, Ms Nurin, and bringing this issue to light”.

Mr Zaqy also mentioned that Tafep had told him of another major retail store that reviewed its uniform policy to include religious headgear after receiving feedback from its stakeholders. 

TODAY understands that the retailer is Isetan, which came under the spotlight in 2014 for a similar incident where a sales assistant was allegedly asked to leave the store for wearing a hijab.

‘AN EXCUSE’

Commenting on the latest incident, the Association of Women for Action and Research (Aware) called for a comprehensive anti-discrimination legislation to protect against discrimination on the basis of race and religion, among others.

“Otherwise, prejudiced behaviour will only continue in Singaporean workplaces,” the gender equality advocacy group said on Facebook.

Aware noted that although Tafep has stated that religious wear should be allowed in workplaces unless there are specific uniform or dress code requirements, this guideline “seems to excuse some employers, who can ‘require’ workers not to wear religious attire”.

“Sometimes — as in (the Tangs) case — the official reason for this is the notion of ‘professional’ appearance,” Aware said. 

“Yet, standards of professionalism are all too often arbitrary and underlaid with implicit bias.”