MPs and Senators are most disappointing - do they not care about gig Workers - how could the vote for the Gig Workers Bill which had so many flaws - which will violate worker rights.
DO NOT BLINDLY vote for any laws that the government tables - study in and consider its impact on workers and the ordinary Malaysian. Is the Gig Worker law pro-worker, or is it pro-Employer? Did you consider this when you voted for it? KICK OUT USELESS MPs - that simply vote without even considering the impact of the law to their constituents and the people in Malaysia.
The name of the Bill is Gig Workers Bill - It thus makes it most clear that Gig Workers are recognized as workers.
So, why is the employer referred to as Contracting Party not employer? Who is the employer or Contracting Party of Grab drivers, delivery riders - should it be Grab, and not restricted to some agent or companies who has the right to act on behalf of Grab?
Gig Workers are a special kind of workers -and as such should have worker rights, including union rights. Where is the provision with regard to maternity rights/benefits, sick leave, employee benefits like EPF and Perkeso like employer contributions, etc...
If a Gig Worker is involved in an accident whilst performing Grab driver or delivery services, should not Grab be liable? Should not the gig worker be entitled to paid sick/hospitalisation benefits?
Some comments of what the Bill is lacking to the detrimental to the Gig Workers ?
GIG WORKERS BILL is lacking > it seems to forget certain rights of any worker of any kind or type - by denying these workers one fundamental right, i.e. to fight for better rights and working conditions either individually or collectively as a Trade Union. By the use of the words of words like 'Gig Workers Association' - is it intentional that they did not accept such association as Trade UNION - was it to deny gig workers trade union rights?
Why use the term 'Contracting Party' and not EMPLOYER? Let's take GRAB - is GRAB the Employer, or is it now going to be some independent agent or company that obtained a franchise from GRAB - will GRAB even be acknowledged as the Employer or the 'Contracting Party' of the Gig Worker. Will GRAB only be the 'platform provider' and have no liability towards Grab drivers be they payment of services rendered, etc?
If there was no Gig Workers Bill or Act, worker reasonably have a right to be represented by lawyers of their choice in their dealings with the 'Contracting party' or 'employer' - BUT then this Madani Government BILL Explicitly DENY the right of the worker to be represented by lawyers of their choice in dealing with the 'employer', in disputes at any level. Why did the Madani Government EXTINGUISH the right of the Gig Worker to be represented by lawyers...through this Bill?
RIGHT OF REPRESENTATION BY A LAWYER denied??
A great injustice when the GIG WORKER's right to be represented by a lawyer at the HEARING of dispute - See Section 36(3)
The Bill now says that the 'Contracting Party' may be represented by its employee (and most companies with just employ a person with legal skills/qualifications or a non-practicing lawyer as the employer representative)
And the Gig worker can only be represented by a 'any official or member of Gig Worker's Association' OR 'any of his family member'
HENCEFORTH, the INJUSTICE to the Worker -- a legally illiterate worker fights against a Contracting Party, who has the ability to retain as employee a legally trained person as employee..
SO - AMEND to ensure that the worker has the right to be represented by a lawyer of his/her choice, any other persons competent in labour law like ex labour officers, maybe other trade union members, etc..
WHY disadvantage the 'Gig Worker' by denying him the right to be represented by a lawyer? Official or member of the Gig Worker's Association may just be some other GIG WORKER who would also not have the needed skills/expertise to BEST represent the worker.
Should not the Gig Workers Association be also recognized as a TRADE UNION - why is the Government in the proposed BILL differentiating it and not calling it a Trade Union?
So, will the Gig Workers not be represented in the International Labour Organisation (ILO) - rightfully they should be considered workers, hence represented by the worker/employees representative at the ILO -so, Gig Workers right to be in a Trade Union should be recognised or their Associations be deemed to be a Union, with the right to join confedation of unions like MTUC. Or are we looking at making ILO a 4-party body? Which Minister would be responsible for Gig Workers?
The law also by its silence tries to deny the GIG WORKER his/her right and ability to fight and get better rights and benefits from his/her CONTRACTING Party(the 'Employer") - Why not just call it the EMPLOYER - why avoid the term to protect the 'contracting party' ....
Hello, the GIG WORKER wants to get BETTER TERMS and CONDITIONS - and that is why the Gig Worker already has come together with other GIG WORKERS to form a Gig Workers Association - Did the PM Anwar Ibrahim's Madani Government and our current Members of Parliament think that the 'association' was just for partying and having fun ?
The GIG WORKERS are workers - and thus they now can JOIN any TRADE UNIONS - who will collectively represent workers and fight for their RIGHTS or for BETTER RIGHTS with their 'Contracting Party'(i.e. 'Employer') - Will they be able to PICKET, and use the Industrial Court and the Labour Courts? - OR did this GIG WORKERS BILL just the SHUT THE DOOR to all GIG WORKERS access to justice through Labour and/or Industrial Courts?
The BILL creates a NEW mechanism for dispute resolution - but why?
Is the Gig Workers Bill to protect 'contracting party' or 'employers' - and to suppress the rights of the Gig Workers , and their right to fight for better rights and working conditions?
Like the Peaceful Assembly Act, is the nice sounding Gig Workers Bill yet another law that will erode the rights of workers, including to fight for better terms and conditions.
There are ISSUES faced by Gig Workers like Grab Drivers???
For example, let us take Grab - one problem is that Grab unilaterally fixes the rates - the drivers have no say. Worse, at times Grab offer certain 'promotions' where the rate is significantly reduced - hence reducing the Grab driver's income. When the rate is too high, customers less inclined to use Grab service -hence the Grab driver suffers loss of income. For a 2km journey in KL, sometime we pay RM10 and at another time, it can increase to RM40 (now the worker Grab driver is happy to at least get customers even if the rates is RM15 -better less income than no income because Grab sets a too high cost of use of service... This is one issue that drivers like to raise with Grab, etc... ) Remember the drivers are already out there e pending time and effort but no customers because of the too high rate set by Grab -??? Why is the government not getting involved in fixing maximum minimum rates... No more arbitrary unilateral determination of rates of charges)
At present there is no liability imposed on occupational diseases and injuries/deaths? What happens when the Grab driver gets Covid-19 because Grab made the driver pick up a customer with Covid-19 ? Now, if the Grab cancels a trip -the driver is penalised financially by Grab -to avoid the penalties, the driver will have to pick up a customer with a communicable disease with the risk of getting the disease himself/herself - and no right to even paid sick leave because it was caused by the occupation.
What about the discrimination against foreigners? Why can't foreign spouse of Malaysians also be allowed to take on gig work? WHY can't refugees also be able to do gig work? Think about this...
Does this gig Workers Bill protect the rights of workers overseas who are working for or providing services to local companies -this may include call centre workers, etc...
In the Gig Workers Liability, are the 'employers' or 'contracting party' are foreign companies or local companies registered overseas, and who have their address/offices overseas, hence beyond Malaysian court's jurisdiction - this was not dealt with in the Gig Workers Bill? The law can give Malaysian Courts jurisdiction to hear and decide on disputes, and determine that they are bound by Malaysian law?
Just some quick reflections ---
# To view the Bill, go to the Malaysian Parliament website - and you can view the muck lacking Bill that fails to protect worker rights - What are the MPs doing?
Parliament passes landmark Gig Workers Bill, extending long-overdue protections to 1.2 million Malaysians
KUALA LUMPUR, Aug 28 — A long-awaited and much-needed law — the Gig Workers Bill 2025 — was approved by Parliament today.
With the passing of this Bill, more than 1.2 million Malaysians who earn their livelihoods through the gig economy will now have their welfare protected.
The new law formally recognises gig workers as a distinct category of the labour force — neither traditional employees nor independent contractors — and introduces statutory safeguards through mandatory written service agreements between workers and contracting entities.
Human Resources Minister Steven Sim Chee Keong, in his winding-up speech, said the law finally addresses long-standing “kelompangan” (gaps) in labour protection.
“For far too long, 1.2 million Malaysians in the gig sector have been working daily without proper protection, as if their contributions to the economy did not deserve recognition. This bill ends that injustice,” Sim told the Parliament today.
As of the first quarter of 2025, Malaysia’s total labour force stood at 16.7 million, with 3.45 million people engaged in informal work — representing 20.65 per cent of total employment.
Within this group, about 1.2 million are gig workers and self-employed individuals.
According to the Social Security Organisation (Socso) records, 133,481 workers are contributing under the p-hailing sector and 189,450 under the e-hailing sector via the Self-Employment Social Security Act 2017.
The legislation covers a wide spectrum of gig workers, from e-hailing and p-hailing drivers to freelancers and digital content creators.
Under the new law, all platforms and companies engaging gig workers — including Grab and Foodpanda — must provide contracts that clearly state minimum standards for payment terms, working arrangements, insurance coverage and termination procedures.
To curb unfair practices, the Bill prohibits unilateral rate changes, arbitrary account deactivations and restrictions on multi-platform work.
It also establishes a Gig Workers Tribunal with powers to resolve disputes and order remedies such as reinstatement, compensation or the payment of outstanding wages.
“For the first time, workers will have the right to be heard before any suspension.
“If found not at fault, they will be compensated with half of their average daily earnings — a protection previously unavailable,” he said.
The initiative traces back to March 2024, when the Ministry of Human Resources received a mandate from Prime Minister Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim to design a protection framework for gig workers.
Working with Universiti Malaya, the ministry developed a policy model and consulted widely — across federal ministries, state governments in Sabah and Sarawak, and through nearly 40 engagement sessions nationwide involving about 4,000 stakeholders, from gig workers and platform companies to trade unions, academics and non-governmental organisations.
The draft was even presented at the ILO’s Technical Committee on Decent Work in the Platform Economy in Geneva, ensuring it aligns with international standards.
“This bill is not a product of imagination within an ivory tower. It is built from the voices and aspirations of the rakyat, especially gig economy stakeholders,” Sim said. - Malay Mail, 28/8/2025
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment