A ‘Reference’ that can Ruin Your Future: The Migrant Worker Feedback System
What is the feedback system?
The Ministry of Manpower maintains an online ‘feedback’ system (otherwise known as a ‘reference channel’) in which employers are able to leave their contact details about a migrant worker they have previously hired. Prospective employers will be able to contact the previous employer for feedback. Employers can use this tool when they wish to share feedback about a worker they have hired.
A worker will not know this has occurred until a prospective employer or recruitment agent makes a new application. At that point, the prospective employer or agent will be alerted to the fact that the ex-employer has left a ‘personal reference’. The employment agent or prospective employer making the application will be provided with the contact details of the former employer, who can then make unverified allegations about the worker, thereby jeopardizing their chances of being hired. While a prospective employer can ignore the feedback and still hire the worker despite the feedback, it is unlikely that employment agents and employers will continue with the application.
How can this be weaponised against workers?
This ability of employers to potentially ruin a worker’s chances of returning to Singapore to work makes the threat of ‘blacklisting’ a powerful tool (although the reference channel is not a blacklisting tool; in many workers’ minds, being left a reference is equated to being blacklisted), one that employers and agents regularly and effectively wield to threaten and coerce workers into not making claims against them or into agreeing to unfavourable terms of employment.
Workers who have been exploited by their employers do not have a similar channel to leave their details to give feedback. This exacerbates the imbalance of power that already exists between a worker and employer.
In a response to Parliamentary Questions filed in April 2026, the MOM stated that migrant workers are not notified when their past employer “offers to be a referee. This confidentiality allows for employers to share candid feedback…”
In other words, a migrant worker may remain unaware that a former employer has agreed to serve as a referee until they submit a new work pass application. This lack of prior knowledge can lead to inefficiencies, as workers may expend time and resources attending interviews and pursuing job opportunities that ultimately cannot materialize. Workers also have no means of defending themselves against unverified allegations, and would not know what these allegations are.
There are also no known repercussions for employers who make untrue allegations against their former employees.
In one case assisted by HOME, a worker successfully reclaimed unpaid wages by her former employer. She was repatriated and sought new employment in Singapore. She found one but the prospective employer suddenly withdrew the offer. They informed her that her former company had brought up issues regarding her performance and attitude.
When she pressed, it was discovered that the ex-employer had registered as a referee for her on the MOM portal.
HOME escalated the matter to MOM and asked that the reference be removed. MOM declined to remove the previous employer as a referee and responded that:
employers can submit a request to be a referee for their ex-employees;
Such requests remain valid for two years; and
can be withdrawn by the employer at any time.
Further, MOM stated that:
the reference feedback system serves as a voluntary platform for former employers to provide references;
it is not an official MOM record against workers;
Prospective employers retain full discretion to hire workers regardless of any reference provided.
In other words, for a two-year period, unless the employer withdraws the reference, when a new employer applies for a work pass, MOM’s system notifies them that a former employer has offered a reference and provides their contact details. In her case, the ex-employer used this "information channel" to leave negative feedback, retaliating against her for the previous salary dispute.
Recommendation:
HOME recommends the abolition of the feedback system.
The ability for employers to give unverified feedback to prospective employers allows employers to effectively threaten and coerce workers into not making claims against them or into agreeing to unfavourable terms of employment.
It can also be utilized as a means to punish workers if they assert their rights.
It is time to establish a fairer system in which workers themselves provide referees and details of former employers to prospective ones — the same way employees in other industries provide references.
Published 05/05/2026