Commentary: What a cancer survivor’s wrongful dismissal case says about the employer-employee relationship

Would a company force an employee to resign after 17 years because it could not accommodate her recovery from stage-three cancer? In Singapore, an Employment Claims Tribunal found that this had effectively happened to an administrative assistant at an international school and awarded her S$20,000 in damages.

The employee had asked to work from home twice a week and leave early on some days so she could attend rehabilitation. Those requests became a source of conflict with her employer. She eventually resigned, but the tribunal ruled that the resignation amounted to wrongful dismissal.

The case, alongside other recent wrongful-dismissal disputes, raises a broader issue for employers: how should they respond when a worker becomes temporarily inconvenient in operational terms? The writers, SUSS professor Victor Seah and Singapore Cancer Society chief executive Tan Kwang Cheak, frame the answer through the idea of a psychological contract.

Unlike a formal employment contract, this relationship is unwritten and has no legal force. It nevertheless shapes expectations about loyalty, recognition and career growth. When those expectations collapse during illness or after years of service, the resulting sense of betrayal can be lasting. The administrative assistant wrote on her final day that she felt “unsupported and unfairly treated” despite her long service.

The writers note that one in four Singapore residents is estimated to face a risk of developing cancer during their lifetime. With cancer incidence rising among younger age groups, more workers may have to balance treatment, recovery and employment. Their argument is that temporary limits on an employee’s availability should be treated as a normal part of working life, rather than something employers try to remove from the workplace.

“

unsupported and unfairly treated