Who’s protecting workers’ rights?
By Ding Jo-An, The Nut Graph
MALAYSIAN labour law is being reviewed. Why should we care? Because at stake could be the job security of thousands of workers who may not even know what’s in the offing. To date, the proposed government amendments have been classified “secret”, which in itself is problematic.
Still, those who have caught wind of the amendments are raising alarm bells for the nation’s workforce. Malaysian Trades Union Congress (MTUC) secretary general G Rajasekaran has already called the proposed changes to the country’s labour laws the “worst amendments in 40 years”. If the legal amendments are put into place, it could mean employers are able to fire workers at will, explains at least one unionist.
Will the amendments be a benefit or a bane to employees? And what exactly is the government trying to fix in the current employment guidelines through these amendments? Should workers be concerned?
Fired, then what?
Malaysian labour law is generally governed by three separate Acts: the Employment Act 1955, Industrial Relations Act 1967, and the Trade Unions Act 1959. The statutes set out wide guidelines on issues such as working hours, annual leave, dismissal and complaint mechanisms.
Labour lawyer Lim Heng Seng, formerly an Industrial Court chairperson, says there is currently a fairly good balance between employers’ prerogative to dismiss staff and employees’ security of tenure.
Although employers in Malaysia may fire their staff, Lim says they can only do so with just cause. “Anyone dismissed without just cause can file a complaint with the Industrial Relations Department and take it up for dispute resolution,” says Lim in a phone interview.
Lim says the Malaysian system strikes a good balance compared to other jurisdictions. “There is no security of tenure in countries like Singapore and US. In countries like France, employers are scared of being immediately hauled up if they fire anyone.”
Lim, however, says the Malaysian system has become cumbersome, tying up management time and causing long waits for employees to receive compensation or get reinstated after being fired.
“The complaint goes to the Industrial Relations Department; then conciliation is attempted. If that fails, the human resources minister has to refer the matter to the Industrial Court, where there’s further management time,” Lim explains.
Lim says the minister should not be involved in referring individual disputes to court. “Our system allows for individuals, not just trade unions, to bring claims. These individual disputes don’t involve affairs of state such as the possibility of strikes. So why should the minister be tied up in deciding whether each case goes for hearing?”
Lim says that conversely, the UK system places the entire evaluation and mediation system under the courts, hence simplifying the complaint procedure.
