The SkillsFuture Jobseeker Support Scheme — One Year On

Afiqah Binte Mohamad Imran and Wah Tee Liat
Aug 30
9 min read

In this Explainer, find out…

How is the SkillsFuture Jobseeker Support scheme different from unemployment insurance schemes in other countries?
Why does the scheme impose an income cap and a points-based job search system instead of just paying everyone who loses their job?
Why were six in 10 applications rejected in the first year of the JS Scheme and what does that say about who the scheme is actually reaching?

Introduction

“We have held the line in these cases, as the scheme is meant to support those made unemployed involuntarily due to reasons such as retrenchment, cessation of business, dismissal or termination due to illness, injury or accident, rather than those who have chosen to leave.”

That was what Minister for Manpower Dr Tan See Leng said when defending the eligibility rules of the SkillsFuture Jobseeker Support (JS) Scheme in Parliament. It is worth taking a closer look at this statement, because it shows the tension at the heart of this unprecedented scheme. How do you build a safety net that is generous enough to help Singaporeans while making sure it is not so loose that it stops working as intended?

Announced by Prime Minister Lawrence Wong at the 2024 National Day Rally, the JS Scheme was rolled out by Workforce Singapore (WSG) from 2025 onwards. The JS Scheme aims to provide temporary financial help for up to six months. Such financial assistance is meant to complement other training and reskilling support programmes such as the SkillsFuture Level-Up Programme.

Notably, the JS Scheme is unprecedented because it represents a “first step in providing [financial] support for involuntarily unemployed workers”. As National Trades Union Congress (NTUC) Secretary-General Ng Chee Meng shared in 2024, this policy is the result of some 10 years of negotiations between NTUC and the Ministry of Manpower (MOM). At times, MOM and NTUC did not see eye-to-eye during the negotiations. The current JS Scheme has therefore been branded as a significant effort for the Government to “reset their approach” towards supporting the unemployed.

In this Policy Explainer, we will discuss how the JS Scheme has panned out for the involuntarily unemployed, a year since the launch of the scheme. We begin by canvassing the rationale behind the JS Scheme. Thereafter, the mechanism behind the JS Scheme is considered. Finally, we consider potential reasons that explain why 60 per cent of the more than 7,200 who applied have been turned away. In doing so, we unpack the group of people the JS Scheme is in fact reaching.

Why was the JS Scheme Implemented?

Let us begin by considering the rationale behind the JS Scheme. As stated above, the JS Scheme is unprecedented in offering financial support for the unemployed. Indeed, the Government has traditionally had reservations on implementing direct financial unemployment support. This position has been heavily influenced by the concept of moral hazard. The idea is that if people are protected from the consequences of a risk, they lose some of the incentive to guard themselves against it. Placed into the unemployment context, moral hazard suggests that when unemployment benefits are available, some individuals may be happy to be unemployed for longer than necessary.

This is why the Government has avoided anything resembling direct unemployment payouts for so long. Instead, support came almost entirely through reskilling schemes. This approach has provided support for jobseekers thus far. Schemes such as the SkillsFuture Level-Up Programme, NTUC’s e2i career centres, WSG’s Career Conversion Programmes, and Mid-Career Pathway Programmes have collectively placed more than 60,000 jobseekers into new roles.

However, a potential issue is that these programmes all share the same blind spot. Although they address workers’ skills gap, they do not address the income gap. Someone who loses their job still needs to pay rent and put food on the table, while attending these programmes. The pressure to do so may push jobseekers to grab the first available job to make ends meet, even when it is a poor fit for their skills or experience. There has therefore been a gap in providing basic financial security in the immediate term so that workers can secure more meaningful employment.

This gap in support for unemployed workers has further been exacerbated by several trends which can contribute to increased involuntary unemployment. First, AI may disrupt the employment prospects of junior workers at the entry level and older workers who struggle to catch up with the technology. Second, as Singaporeans live and work longer, there is a recognition that switching jobs, whether involuntarily or not, is becoming a norm throughout our careers in the long-term.

Given the above trends, the JS Scheme was introduced to mark “a paradigm shift” in the Government’s approach to unemployment.

How does the JS Scheme Work?

At its core, the JS Scheme offers up to S$6,000 over six months to lower and middle-income Singaporeans who lose their jobs involuntarily. Importantly, workers must have become unemployed involuntarily to be eligible for the JS Scheme. Potential reasons for involuntary job loss include retrenchment, business closure, illness, or other circumstances beyond the applicant’s control.

Eligibility Criteria

To qualify, applicants must have earned an average of S$5,000 or less a month over the past 12 months of employment, and must live in a property with an annual value under S$31,000. A property’s annual value refers to an estimate of what it would be worth if it was rented out.

To accompany the application, these documents must be submitted as supporting evidence:

An official letter or notice of termination issued by the applicant’s former employer;
Central Provident Fund (CPF) Transaction History over the past 15 months, only showing Employment Contributions; and
If the applicant lost their job due to health issues, they can also submit a Medical Certificate or doctor’s letter.

If applicants are rejected, they are also able to submit an appeal for their case and be considered once again for the scheme.

What Happens Upon Selection

Upon being selected for the scheme, applicants are required to earn at least 10 points every month for the first three months. Thereafter, applicants are required to earn five points a month for the next three months. They can earn points through job-search activities like career coaching, planning a career path using WSG’s CareersFinder tool, updating one’s resume online, and networking sessions. The requisite points must be earned every month to continue receiving payouts.

The payouts are designed to taper over time. The first month offers up to S$1,500, the second and third up to S$1,250 and S$1,000 respectively, and months four through six offer up to S$750 each. There is also a built-in ceiling. Monthly payouts are capped at the jobseeker’s past average monthly salary. Someone who was making S$1,000 a month before losing their job would not receive over S$1,000 a month from the scheme, even though the general cap is higher.

How does the JS Scheme Affect Different Stakeholders?

We now turn to consider successes and potential issues raised by the JS Scheme, particularly from the perspective of the stakeholders involved.

Some Successes for the Scheme

From the perspective of various beneficiaries of this scheme, the JS Scheme has been positive. For example, Mr Rahmat Mohamad is a beneficiary who explained that these jobseeker payouts were able to tide him through his hardest periods. Through these monthly payouts, Mr Rahmat received some relief from the financial constraints of unemployment. This gave him time to focus on his job search and career courses, without needing to find an unsatisfactory job merely for the sake of heading off mounting bills. At the same time, Mr Rahmat was also able to leverage on other schemes to assist him, such as an additional monthly training allowance and ComCare assistance.

This sentiment seems to be corroborated by how over 80 per cent of approved applicants were able to get at least one payout by end-2025, with over half of the beneficiaries finding a job in the same period. Hence, the data seem to suggest that the policy has been working effectively for its beneficiaries.

A Potential Problem

However, it is perhaps pertinent to note that only 40 percent of applicants were approved for the JS Scheme. By April 2026, just 4,000 out of 10,000 applications had been accepted, short of the Government’s own target of supporting 60,000 workers annually. The single biggest reason for rejection was exceeding the S$5,000 income cap. As a result, the current number of approvals is far lower than the projected 60,000 beneficiaries a year that this policy aims to reach.

Another common reason for rejection is the lack of supporting evidence for involuntary termination. Documents to prove that the termination was involuntary must be submitted. Examples include termination letters or email exchanges with the employer initiating termination. Hence, applications that only include resignation letters, payslips or CPF transaction history would not be approved.

So, Who is Being Excluded?

Apart from rejections due to ineligibility or lack of sufficient evidence, the JS Scheme’s design may exclude certain groups of workers from applying for its benefits.

First, gig workers and freelancers are excluded. The Ministry of Manpower (MOM) does not consider the non-renewal of their contracts as involuntary unemployment as they choose to take on such work, knowing renewal is never guaranteed. Hence, even if their contracts expire and they are unable to find gigs or source work, non-renewed contract workers remain excluded from the JS Scheme.

A key concern is whether it is possible to distinguish between contract workers who have chosen not to seek further contracts or extensions, as compared to those who are unemployed for reasons beyond their control. Indeed, economist Walter Theseira has noted that there is a risk that some JS Scheme payments go to workers who are not involuntarily unemployed if eligibility for the JS Scheme is extended. That said, it is still vital to note that this exclusion leaves out a segment of the modern workforce.

Second, older and long-term unemployed workers are excluded, and for reasons which may be less obvious. To qualify, applicants need to have worked at least six of the past 12 months. This requirement excludes anyone who has already been job-hunting for a long time. There is a considerable number of workers in such a position. For example, in 2025, more than 14,600 people in Singapore were classified as “long-term unemployed,” most of whom were 50 or older.

Third, certain professionals, managers, executives and technicians (PMETs) may also be excluded from the current JS Scheme. The current income ceiling for the JS Scheme is below the median gross monthly income of PMETs, which currently stands at about S$7,600. This exclusion can be significant given that more PMETs are experiencing involuntary unemployment. In turn, proposals have been raised in Parliament for the current income ceiling to be raised to S$7,600. This expanded safety net would reach over half the Singaporean workforce as the current median income of Singaporeans sits at S$5,775.

What might the Future of the JS Scheme look like?

As we look ahead, it is unlikely that the JS Scheme will remain stagnant. This much has also been acknowledged by the Government. For example, it has been clarified that reviews will be done in the future to determine whether the income ceiling for the JS Scheme should be raised.

Another issue worth considering is the extent of support disbursed under the JS Scheme. Particularly, some commentators have noted that the amount of financial support provided “may not represent a significant change from the traditionally cautious approach to unemployment benefits”. Additionally, the JS Scheme is time-limited to six months. In turn, it has also been asked whether this is sufficient time for those who have been away from formal learning for extended periods to acquire and master new skills. If left unaddressed, these gaps may reduce the effectiveness of the JS Scheme in supporting the involuntarily unemployed. It may also not enable this group of workers to work their way back towards employment.

Perhaps even more boldly, commentators have also suggested extending support to those who “voluntarily take career breaks for caregiving or personal illness”. Such periods of transition can also come with stress and individuals may also need to focus on other priorities without being overwhelmed by financial woes.

Given these suggestions and concerns, it does appear that the breakthrough achieved by the JS Scheme in providing financial support is merely a starting point in Singapore’s changing approach to unemployment.

Conclusion

Taken together, one might indeed welcome the JS Scheme as offering a safety net for those who face involuntary unemployment. For beneficiaries like Mr Rahmat, it is clear how these schemes work as a trampoline to allow them to bounce back from setbacks.

Yet one year on, one might equally begin to question what the scheme may look like moving forward. On the one hand, the scheme must operate sustainably. On the other hand, however, there are groups like PMETs earning above S$5,000, or even gig workers and freelancers who appear to also require support.

Ultimately, the success of the JS Scheme should not be measured based on the value of its payouts. Rather, the JS Scheme needs to be evaluated based on the value it brings to citizens by supporting the vulnerable. In a changing employment landscape, one hopes that the first step taken by the JS Scheme can be continuously calibrated for the economy of the future.

This Policy Explainer was written by members of MAJU. MAJU is a ground-up, fully youth-led organisation dedicated to empowering Singaporean youths in policy discourse and co-creation.

By promoting constructive dialogue and serving as a bridge between youths and the Government, we hope to drive the keMAJUan (progress!) of Singapore.