SINGAPORE: Sea’s staff based here will soon have their salaries credited into accounts with MariBank, the digital bank the tech giant owns.
Employees were informed earlier in September of the move, which has prompted questions over whether it is legal for companies to make such mandates.
“Starting from the October payroll, MariBank will be the mandatory salary crediting bank for all Singapore-based employees of Sea,” read an internal memo to employees seen by The Straits Times.
Staff who bank with MariBank could help it improve the product and build trust with the public, the message said.
Staff who update their salary crediting details by Sept 17 will receive a S$100 Shopee voucher. Those who already have their salaries credited to MariBank are also eligible for the voucher.
Employees also enjoy preferential rates and promotions on eligible MariBank personal loans. The staff memo added that the bank expects to introduce more products, features and employee benefits over time.
Sea operates three core businesses through its digital entertainment arm Garena, e-Commerce platform Shopee, and digital payments and financial services arm Monee, previously known as SeaMoney.
The memo left some employees with the impression that they were required to open a MariBank account, and that there could be consequences if they did not.
However, The Straits Times understands that employees who do not wish to use MariBank can retain their existing arrangement.
Despite the memo saying crediting MariBank would be “mandatory”, additional details linked in the announcement acknowledged that some staff may have “personal circumstances that require them to continue using another salary crediting account”.
“In such cases, please reach out to your human resources business partner for a discussion,” the company said.
Khelvin Xu, director at law firm Covenant Chambers, said that employers in Singapore cannot force employees to receive their salary through a specific bank unless it is provided for in the employment contract.
“Since the employer cannot force an employee to use a particular bank account, what is there to discuss if the employee does not wish to switch?”
Without such a contractual right, an employer is unlikely to be able to force an employee to use a specific bank if the employee refuses, he said.
Even if the employer proposes an amendment to the terms of the employment, the employee can disagree with it. It may be necessary for the employer to incentivise employees to agree to this amendment, he added.
Xu noted that it is not an offence for employers to request that staff receive salaries only through accounts in a specific bank. Employees could politely decline on the basis that they are under no obligation to comply, said Xu.
If the employer maintains its position, employees may ultimately be required to decide if it’s worth continuing to stand their ground at the risk of possible adverse consequences, including a dissatisfied employer making their working circumstances difficult. — The Straits Times/ANN
