SINGAPORE: A Singapore employee who lost her job after making medical reimbursement claims for vitamins and skincare products has been awarded more than S$17,000 after a tribunal ruled that her dismissal was wrongful. The case was one of six similar claims that succeeded at the Employment Claims Tribunals.
The unnamed company had dismissed about 40 employees after an internal review uncovered questionable medical-benefit claims linked to a clinic identified only as “Clinic X.” Workers were accused of claiming non-medical retail items under outpatient medical benefits.
Tribunal magistrate Mr Jared Kang Chern Wey found the company failed to prove that at least six of those workers had acted dishonestly, Channel NewsAsia (CNA) reported (May 18). One employee, referred to as Ms C in court documents, received S$17,332 in compensation after the tribunal ruled that her actions didn’t justify dismissal. She submitted 62 reimbursement claims worth almost S$10,000 between March and September 2023.
The purchases included supplements, vitamins and skincare products, for which Ms C didn’t consult a doctor before making the claims. The company later argued that the claims were outside policy rules and accused her of intentionally abusing the system.
Judge: No signs of staff trying to deceive the employer
During the investigation, Ms C explained that she first heard about Clinic X from her colleagues. She said clinic staff advised customers to keep receipts below S$200 because lower amounts didn’t require itemised breakdowns when submitting reimbursement claims. She believed the claims were allowed because many colleagues were allegedly doing the same thing.
The tribunal noted that if the policy had truly been obvious and well understood, it would be unusual for so many employees to submit similar claims without raising alarm bells earlier. Mr Kang also pointed out that there was no sign that Ms C tried to hide anything. She used standard claim channels, submitted genuine receipts and didn’t alter documents or bypass checks. And when the company raised concerns, she even agreed to repay the money.
The magistrate said those actions didn’t match someone trying to deceive an employer. Instead, he found she appeared to believe the claims were acceptable until told otherwise.
Tribunal: Staff negligence alone doesn’t amount to just cause for dismissal
The company’s disciplinary committee initially recommended a warning letter and a full cut to Ms C’s 2023 performance bonus, but after the company’s global head of human resources questioned why someone labelled “dishonest” would receive a relatively mild punishment, the committee later revised its recommendation to termination.
Mr Kang said that the sequence weakened the company’s argument. He also noted that other employees with similar spending patterns were reportedly not dismissed, raising concerns about consistency in punishment. The tribunal eventually found that Ms C had acted negligently by relying on informal workplace practices instead of checking formal policy rules. Still, negligence alone didn’t amount to just cause for dismissal.
She was awarded compensation covering three months of lost salary and additional damages linked to the wrongful dismissal. Her request for an S$13,000 performance bonus, however, was rejected because the bonus was discretionary.
Message to employers: Accusations of dishonesty carry serious consequences
The ruling comes as companies tighten internal controls over medical and employee benefit claims amid rising healthcare costs. The tribunal’s findings also send a message to employers: accusations of dishonesty carry serious weight and need strong evidence.
The case demonstrated how workplace habits can sometimes obscure policy lines, especially when practices silently spread among employees without formal checks or clarification.
Mr Kang used the judgment to highlight legal confusion surrounding wrongful dismissal laws in Singapore following changes introduced by the Employment (Amendment) Act 2018. He said the law has become harder to interpret and warned that undefined standards could lead to inconsistent outcomes across cases.
The company has also reportedly filed appeals against all six tribunal decisions.
A workplace lesson hiding inside the dispute
The lesson learned from this case is that unclear workplace practices can slowly become accepted behaviour until enforcement suddenly changes direction.
While employees still bear responsibility for carefully checking company rules, employers also need to produce policies that are easy to understand and consistently enforced to prevent matters from spiralling into dismissals and legal disputes.
This article (Employee gets awarded over S$17,000 as compensation from her company for wrongful dismissals involving medical claims) first appeared on The Independent Singapore News.
