How Singapore employers can modernise employment contracts for hybrid and cross-border roles

Singapore employers are rapidly embracing hybrid work and cross-border hiring, but many employment contracts are largely still written for a world where everyone sits in the same office or in the same country.

The gap is not cosmetic – it can expose organisations to legal, financial, and employee relations risks when terms fail to reflect how people actually work today.

For Alvin Tan Yong Joon, managing director at Kinexus Legal LLC, the problem is less that traditional contracts are obsolete, and more that they are incomplete.

"I wouldn't call traditional contracts 'outdated.' Many of the clauses continue to work," Tan told HRD. "However, I would say they are 'incomplete' for the way we work differently now."

Digital connectivity, remote collaboration tools, and artificial intelligence have all shifted how employees work and how employers manage, but many contract templates remain rooted in an era when these did not feature as strongly.

The most visible shift is location. Roles are now designed with the assumption that employees can work from home, a co‑working space, or another country for prolonged periods.

Recent data from Indeed Hiring Lab, drawn from job postings in October 2025, show that 8.2% of roles advertised in Singapore explicitly mentioned phrases such as "work from home" or "work remotely" in the job description, up from 7.7% a year earlier.

This expanding flexibility can trigger downstream issues around immigration, work passes, tax exposure, workplace safety and health, performance management, and data security, according to Tan.

"With remote work being featured in job offers, businesses’ due diligence on local laws, employment contracts and policies must reflect these issues," he said.

Three practical clauses to check

When modernising contracts for hybrid and cross-border roles, Tan recommends HR focus first on three practical clauses that are often missing.

The first is ensuring that there is an approval process for work mobility.

"The risk exposure is very different for an employee of a Singapore employer who is remote working within Singapore, versus overseas," he said. "The approval process helps employers consider and mitigate risks."

Second, contracts should specify the employee's official working time zone.

"This ensures clarity on working hours and deadlines, reducing disputes and facilitating performance management," he explained.

Third, employers should consider a contractual right to require employees to return to the office, or to Singapore, under defined circumstances.

"This safeguards the employer's right to recall staff when operational needs make physical presence essential, and reduces disputes," Tan said.

Keeping contracts in sync with evolving arrangements

Even when HR teams understand remote-work risks, the challenge is keeping the original contract in sync when work arrangements evolve after contracts are signed.

Tan brings up a Singapore High Court case, Carlsberg South Asia Pte Ltd v Pawan Kumar Jagetia [2022] SGHC 74, which shows how undefined terms and post-contract conduct can collide.

The contract in question provided a ‘Relocation Allowance’ to support the employee's move from India to Singapore. In practice, however, he later spent significant periods in India. The employer later tried to claw back the allowance, arguing that he had not truly "relocated."

The court ruled in favour of the employee. "Relocation" was never defined, and the employer had effectively accepted the hybrid arrangement by allowing him to remain in India and even providing a company car there.

The dispute also covered an ‘Annual Benefits Package’ that appeared to cover items such as the employee's children's education.

The employer said this should only apply if his family moved to Singapore. But pre-contract emails showed the package was meant as a general cash allowance to give him flexibility over his personal needs. The court hence ruled that it was not tied to a relocation obligation.

The case highlights drafting traps when hybrid and cross-border arrangements evolve post-contract, according to Tan.

"For example, if a benefit was meant to be given for 'relocation,' parties must re-examine their intentions for this if the employee is later placed in a hybrid or cross-border role back in his home country," he said.

"If certain allowances were meant to be location-linked but the contract does not say so clearly, HR teams should consider varying the contract at such point to clarify any future adjustments. The same principle applies for other contractual terms that may be impacted when work shifts overseas or becomes hybrid."

Practical roadmap for HR

In modernising employment contracts, Tan advised HR leaders to first diagnose the current state of their workforce and policy framework, including:

• Who works where.
• What the policies currently cover.
• What the business’s rules on work location and mobility are.

The second step involves determining where the policy gaps are on remote-work approval and recall, benefits portability, confidentiality, workplace safety, incident response, and surveillance, etc.

"Then, address the policy gaps and also set your governing law and dispute resolution forum. Decide what sits in the contract versus the handbook, as this has bearing on change control and enforceability," Tan advised.

Third is the implementation of the following:

• Publish and communicate the policy stack, such as a formal flexible work arrangement or work-from-home/anywhere policy, a PDPA‑compliant surveillance policy, a remote working safety checklist, etc.
• Set up simple approval procedures for employees, and approval matrices for decision-making.
• Put in place monitoring systems for who works where and for how long, as guardrails against local law restrictions.
• Finally, invest in communication and training. Managers need to understand the changes because in one way or the other, they tend to become employees' first port of call for questions, according to Tan.

There are higher-stakes moments when getting a legal eye is prudent. "On bringing in specialists for legal advice, bring them in early especially for long overseas stints and senior hires," he said.

"Do also consider bringing them in when local laws have rules e.g. the right to disconnect, that are not aligned with expectations of the role. Also bring them in for complex events, such as cross-border misconduct or retrenchments."

Updating employee contracts

Borderless work hence creates new complexities that must be dealt with contractually. As part of his work as a practising lawyer, Tan also designs and conducts a training for employers at the Singapore Management University (SMU) Academy on employment law in the digital age that addresses these issues.

For organisations who already have employees working remotely or across borders, Tan said employers should offer fresh consideration when updating contracts.

"For variations to be legally enforceable, there must be legal consideration. For example, tie contract updates to discretionary payouts," he said.

It is also important for employers to consider grandfathering legacy terms with a grace period in appropriate situations, as well as explain the "why" behind the need to update contracts.

"For example, be clear on the rationale and explain that the update is due to e.g. requirements or developments in law; to protect you against injury; protect your personal data; to give you a fair and consistent due process, etc. The explanation should of course be tailored to the change. Tone is important," he said.

Explaining the "why" is also crucial to maintain a positive employee experience.

"When employees understand the 'what' and 'why,' trust goes up even if there are restrictions," he said.

"For existing employees, a well-drafted internal policy and a clear approval process would help. For job candidates, briefly explaining policies upfront can also go a long way."