The Humanitarian Organization for Migration Economics (HOME) has urged the government to provide a 12-month transport subsidy to companies employing migrant workers, to support their transition away from lorries as a mode of transport.
The call comes alongside HOME’s recommendation for a phased ban on transporting workers in lorries, detailed in a report released on 19 March 2025.
The NGO proposed an 18-month transition period for larger firms and a 36-month period for smaller firms to fully eliminate the practice.
The proposed subsidy could be structured as grants to help businesses acquire buses and minivans, and to hire or train more drivers.
HOME also suggested that early adopters of the ban should receive the subsidy immediately, along with a one-off grant, to incentivise compliance.
Safety concerns and risks
The use of lorries to transport migrant workers has long been criticised due to safety risks.
HOME’s report highlighted that workers travelling on lorries are highly vulnerable in collisions or sudden stops, as lorries lack seatbelts and protective barriers. The risk is heightened when workers are transported alongside heavy work equipment.
According to HOME, continuing this practice suggests that society is willing to prioritise business cost savings over workers’ safety. The organisation has called for an outright ban on the use of lorries for worker transport.
HOME’s study, which included focus group discussions with 34 migrant workers, found that many workers experience overcrowding, discomfort, and exposure to harsh weather conditions while travelling in lorries. Some described being injured by falling equipment, while others reported long wait times for lorries, reducing their rest time after work.
Source: ItsRainingRaincoats
A migrant worker interviewed in the report stated:
“24 people and their harnesses, and chemicals, ladder, there is hardly any space for us. We sit on our materials and wherever we find space between the materials. And it is not always 24 people, sometimes it is 26, sometimes even 29 people are pushed into the lorry. We have to sit on our tools… Things fall down at sharp turns, we get hurt.”
Another worker described the experience of overcrowding:
“All are pushed to the front and on each other. Injure head, injure hands.”
The issue is exacerbated by poor maintenance and enforcement, with some workers expressing frustration that their safety is neglected in favour of cost-saving measures. One worker put it bluntly:
“We will not want lorry, employer wants lorry, it is important for them to save money.”
HOME argued that continuing this practice suggests that society is prioritising business cost savings over workers’ safety.
The organisation has called for an outright ban on lorry transport, stating:
“By maintaining the practice of lorry transport, as well as justifying it with arguments such as cost efficiency for businesses, the implication is that our society is willing to prioritise these factors over migrant workers’ safety and lives.”
Lorry involved in an accident at the intersection of Punggol East and Punggol Central on 1 March. (Photo: Shin Min)
Government’s stance and industry concerns
Despite repeated calls for reform, the government has stated that a complete ban is not feasible for many small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs).
In February 2025, Senior Minister of State for Transport Amy Khor reiterated that banning lorries could force some companies to shut down, leading to job losses and delays in infrastructure projects.
She cited the specific needs of specialist trades, where workers and equipment must be transported together to multiple locations in a single day.
Khor also pointed to an ongoing shortage of bus drivers, which affects the feasibility of alternative transport options.
Proposed solutions and international examples
HOME’s report outlined several measures to mitigate these concerns. It recommended government collaboration with industry partners to establish dedicated bus companies and provide support for firms looking to train in-house drivers.
The NGO also suggested repurposing decommissioned public buses, which currently have a three-year gap between their statutory lifespan as public and private buses.
Additionally, HOME called for stricter enforcement of existing safety regulations, such as limits on working hours for drivers and mandatory installation of speed limiters in lorries.
In January 2025, Minister for Home Affairs K Shanmugam noted that only 50 out of 17,000 eligible lorries had installed speed limiters, despite regulatory requirements.
To provide alternative transport options, HOME proposed subsidised public transport passes for migrant workers. It argued that since workers travel outside peak hours, their use of public transport would not significantly impact commuter traffic.
A Bangladeshi worker in the focus groups pointed out that workers are already forced to wake up hours before their shifts and endure long journeys in unsafe conditions:
“The company does not care for worker’s life because of their own greed. For this lorry transportation we have to wake up really early in the morning, 4 am and we go to bed very late around 11 pm–12 am. This impacts our entire day. We are so tired after work. Our bodies are totally gone by then and we end up dozing off in the lorry at the end of the day and when there is a sudden brake we are bound to get injured.”
To further reduce transport challenges, HOME recommended locating migrant worker accommodations closer to worksites. The report suggested that current dormitory models should be reviewed to minimise long commutes, potentially integrating worker housing within local communities.
Growing calls for a ban from civil society and professionals
HOME’s report referenced the government’s previous initiatives, such as the S$35 million set aside in 2009 to retrofit school buses with seat belts, as evidence that transport safety reform is achievable with government leadership.
The organisation urged the government to introduce safety requirements in public construction contracts, ensuring that firms employing safer transport practices are prioritised.
Beyond HOME, other groups have been increasingly vocal in their demand for an outright ban on lorry transport for migrant workers.
In 2023, more than 50 civil society and community organisations signed a joint statement calling for an end to lorry transport. Student groups have since joined the movement, highlighting the dangers and indignity of the practice.
A collective of over 300 healthcare workers recently renewed calls for reform, following a 1 March 2025 accident in which five migrant workers were hospitalised after their lorry collided with a car in Punggol.
The petition, submitted just days before the accident, directly challenged the government’s defence of lorry transport, arguing that financial concerns should not outweigh human lives.
“We too often see migrant workers in the emergency department, intensive care unit, surgical and orthopaedic wards, and sometimes even in mortuaries—as a result of injuries from unsafe lorry transport,” the petition stated.
The healthcare workers also pointed out that between 2011 and 2020, 58 workers died in road accidents involving lorries, while 4,765 others sustained injuries.
They questioned why the government was not using the S$1.1 billion collected in foreign worker levies in 2020 to help businesses transition to safer transport alternatives.
Despite mounting pressure, the government has maintained that a complete ban would be difficult due to financial and logistical challenges.
While the government remains hesitant to enforce a total ban, HOME and other advocacy groups continue to push for structural reforms to ensure the safety and dignity of migrant workers in Singapore.
The post HOME urges government to subsidise transport shift for migrant workers appeared first on The Online Citizen.
