Back to the archive

The encyclopedia · People & Management · Operational decision · 2023–2024

Lazada cut hundreds of jobs without consulting Singapore's union — the terms made it worse

Alibaba's Lazada retrenched staff across Southeast Asia in January 2024 without union consultation; NTUC said it was 'deeply disappointed'

Lazada · 2024-01

What happened

On 3 January 2024, Alibaba-owned e-commerce platform Lazada retrenched staff across Singapore and other Southeast Asian markets. The company did not specify a total, but affected workers numbered in the hundreds, and the cuts touched regional headquarters functions as well as country operations. It was the second round in months — a smaller retrenchment had followed in October 2023.

The Singapore round immediately became a labour-relations story. The Food, Drinks and Allied Workers Union (FDAWU) said it had not been consulted, and NTUC — the national labour movement — said it was 'deeply disappointed' that Lazada had not worked with the union before the exercise. Under Singapore's rules, unionised companies are expected to engage the union on retrenchment, and Lazada's workforce was organised.

The terms compounded the damage. Retrenched workers who wanted to keep vested but unvested shares were reportedly required to sign a 12-month non-compete clause — a condition widely read as punishing departing staff for the company's own restructuring. The episode landed while speculation about a Lazada IPO was circulating, framing the cuts as pre-listing cost-trimming.

Lazada's parent Alibaba had been restructuring across its commerce businesses, and the layoffs were part of that broader efficiency push. But the execution — the skipped consultation, the non-compete condition — turned a routine reduction into a public lesson in how not to retrench in Singapore, and it handed the company's critics a story that outlasted the news cycle.

Why it happened

  • Skipping the union consultation in a unionised Singapore workplace converted a routine reduction into a public labour-relations failure — the process miss cost more than the headcount ever would.
  • Attaching a 12-month non-compete to vested shares told departing staff they were being treated as risks, not people — a terms decision that made redundancy feel like punishment.
  • The timing after an October 2023 round and with an IPO on the table framed the cuts as book-dressing, so the market read intent into what could have been read as restructuring.
What it costHundreds of jobs; union trust; IPO optics damagedcostly

The lesson

A layoff's cost is set by how it is done, not by how many it removes — the consultation, the notice and the terms are the story, and the headcount barely registers in it.

Aftermath

Lazada completed the retrenchment and continued under Alibaba's restructuring. The episode became a reference point in Singapore for how quickly a process failure in a retrenchment turns the employer's own reputation into the casualty.

Sources

spotted an error? The club wants to know.

Comments · 0

    Sign in to join the comments.

    More like this

    Somewhere, someone solved the problem this company failed at. 2nd Opinion →