Most Political Parties promises JOBS (but what worker wants is REGULAR employment where rights according to law increases the longer they work with SAME employer), and money in terms of increased wages. For most workers, increased RETIREMENT age is not a benefit they enjoy because they DO NOT have Regular Employment. Increase MATERNITY/Paternity Benefits - how can short-term employees benefit?
Is this trend because most candidates/politicians are NOT WORKERS - but are EMPLOYERS or business owners/investors??? - thus worker rights is a LESSER concern > they are more inclined to improve rights of EMPLOYERS and businesses rather than workers. THUS, should Malaysian workers and their families continue to support politicians and political parties that are PRO-EMPLOYER..PRO-BUSINESSES - how many politicians have really campaigned for improving Worker Rights?
UNDERSTAND WHAT MALAYSIAN WORKERS WANT - AND INCLUDE IN PARTY PROMISES AND ELECTION MANIFESTOS...IF YOU WANT SUPPORT OF WORKERS AND THEIR FAMILIES...
Politician and Political Parties - this is WHAT Malaysian workers NEED - and the government must provide: (a) REGULAR employment with same employer until retirement; (b) DIRECT employment with principal (all workers at workplace on contract of service with principal/owner of workplace) (C) Ensure all workers in the workplace have the SAME Employer(the principal/owner of workplace) > if not you deprive WORKERS the ability to improve RIGHTS through a stronger union of ALL Employees (No workers of 'OTHER' Employers please (d) Removal of RECOGNITION by employer or reduce from 50%+1 to 10%+1 since now more than 1 union permitted at workplace; (d) Restoration of QUOTA no more 30% migrant worker at ANY workplace to protect LOCAL workers; (e) Introduce UNIVERSAL Pension for ALL workers after retirement age; (f) Adopt UNIVERSAL Basic Income(where government will TOP-UP if monthly income is lesser); (g) A policy to protect worker's employment in light of AUTOMATION/AI (h) Change law to double amount due if employer fails to pay workers wages, Overtime, Work on Rest Days > now worker fight and the Court orders employer to pay JUST amount DUE - not double/triple or even with 10% interest > a PRO-EMPLOYER law and anti --WORKER
1 - REGULAR EMPLOYMENT (kerja TETAP hingga persaraan) until retirement age. This means that worker benefits/rights will increase based on the number of years of employment. It also restores the right of a wrongfully dismissed worker to claim REINSTATEMENT(a return back to their employment). It does not PREJUDICE the employer, who can terminate an employee if there is a serious employment misconduct or a serious breach of employment contract. If the employer no longer needs an employee, there is RETRENCHMENT that can be used. Regular employment employees can benefit when the state changes RETIREMENT age. It also will enable employees to truly enjoy maternity/paternity benefits.
A worker starts work, his needs are less...then worker gets married has a family - his NEEDS increases with time. Workers 'settle down' buy houses to live until old age.. The law provides increasing rights if working with SAME employer. It also provides RETRENCHMENT/TERMINATION Benefits if worker worked for more than 12 months (many short-term non-regular EMPLOYEEs does not get this - their right to claim REINSTATEMENT by reason of wrongful dismissal is also a JOKE > because your right to employment with the same employer shrinks when you are on short-term employment contracts compared to REGULAR employment where it is secure until retirement age.
Short term employment contract will have to be ABOLISHED save for very limited situations.
REGULAR employment until RETIREMENT is a FUNDAMENTAL need for Malaysian workers. EMPLOYMENT SECURITY with the same employer -
2 - DIRECT Employment with the SAME (a) principal or owner of that agricultural or industrial undertaking, constructional work, trade, business or place of work; or that statutory body or that authority ...for ALL WORKERS working at the workplace. Thus, the elimination of workers of another employer at the workplace.
This is JUST - and it is also most important for UNIONIZATION - a UNION or workers collectively has more power and ability to convince employers to agree to BETTER rights and better working conditions. However, if the workers are only a smaller percentage of Employees of the principal, etc then the UNION is weak as the employer can still 'happily' use other non-employee workers to carry on its business > now there is also NO LEGAL LIMIT as to the number of non-employee workers that can be used at a workplace.
A non-employee worker has NO RIGHT to demand the principal or the owner of the workplace to provide better RIGHTS - for they are NOT employee and have NO Employment Agreement, and the Owner/Principal has NO EMPLOYMENT obligations/duties with non-employee workers. Now, the Labour Suppliers that provide their employees as workers at the workplace has NO POWER OR CAPACITY to change working conditions and rights at the workplace - so for these workers asking the Labour Supplier(or Contractor for Labour) employer for improvement of working conditions is USELESS.
We need a LAW that imposes EMPLOYER obligations on the Principal/Owner of workplaces for other workers working at their workplaces as workers(but are not EMPLOYEES of the principal) > that should include the occupational safety and health, the right to EQUAL pay and benefits as other workers(employees of the principal) working at the workplace. These worker-employee of another work under the direct supervision of the principal/owner of workplace.
SOLUTION:- All workers at any workplace must be made EMPLOYEES of the owner/principal - all the Minister need do, is to give an ORDER pursuant to Sec.2A of Employment Act(see below). Now, the REALITY is anti-worker, definitely weakens Trade Unions, allow for possible DISCRIMINATION - although the same work done, they do not enjoy SAME wages, same EMPLOYEE Benefits, ...
The EMPLOYMENT ACT also envisage that all workers justly ought to be the EMPLOYEES of the principal/owner - thus all workers at the workplace are EMPLOYEES - and thus able to act together including as UNION to demand better RIGHTS and working conditions...
Sec 2A Minister may prohibit employment other than under contract of service [Employment Act]
(1) The Minister may by order prohibit the employment, engagement or contracting of any person or class of persons to carry out work in any occupation in any agricultural or industrial undertaking, constructional work, statutory body, local government authority, trade, business or place of work other than under a contract of service entered into with-
(a) the principal or owner of that agricultural or industrial undertaking, constructional work, trade, business or place of work; or
(b) that statutory body or that authority.
(2) Upon the coming into force of any such order, the person or class of persons employed, engaged or contracted with to carry out the work shall be deemed to be an employee or employees and-
(a) the principal or owner of the agricultural or industrial undertaking, constructional work, trade, business or place of work; or
(b) the statutory body or local government authority,
shall be deemed to be the employer for the purposes of such provisions of this Act and any other written law as may be specified in the order.
(3) Notwithstanding subsection (1), the Minister may by order approve the employment of any person or class of persons by such other person or class of persons (not being the principal or owner) as he may specify but subject to such conditions as he may deem fit to impose.
(4) Any person who contravenes any order made under this section commits an offence.
c) ABOLITION of Short-term contracts a need to support Trade Unions > Now workers decide to form a Trade Union, and submit registration - but by the time the registration is approved, these very workers who formed the Trade Union is no more employees > because the employer chose not to extend or RENEW employment contracts - same fate for pro-Union employees. The EMPLOYER so easily can get rid of employees who support or want to form Trade UNIONs - thus Short-TERM contracts must be ABOLISHED.
d) REMOVE REQUIREMENT FOR RECOGNITION B4 COLLECTIVE BARGAINING AGREEMENTS can be entered into. Malaysia amended laws now allowing the formation/existence of more than 1 Trade UNION - and that is good. Before, a pro-employer UNION may prevent other TRADE UNIONS (who will fight for workers) but no more since law changed in September 2024 > but Malaysian government failed to amend laws with regards RECOGNITION of Trade Unions, which is important before a UNION can enter into a Collective Bargaining Agreement with the Employer...NOW, if the EMPLOYER refuses to recognize a Trade Union . it leads to a 'secret ballot' and the UNION must get 50% plus 1 worker votes and then the EMPLOYER is forced to recognize the Trade Union > and to maintain that same requirement of 50% plus 1 after more than 1 unions can exist at a workplace is FOOLISH and UNJUST. SOLUTION > ABOLISH the need for the 'secret ballot' - and force employers into automatic recognition the moment the Trade Union shows that it has as members at least 5-10%[or lesser] of the workers at the workplace. MAKE it easier for workers to get an EMPLOYER recognized Trade Union - so that they can speedily negotiate and enter into a Collective Bargaining Agreement - which will result in better rights for workers.
d) WRONGFUL DISMISSAL and Claims for REINSTATEMENT law. What worker wants is SPEEDY Trial - so if the worker win, he/she can go back to work without any loss of benefits. THUS, wrongful dismissal cases must be fast, to end within 3-6 Months. A speedy trial is JUST so that the worker can go back to his/her JOB, and it is also JUST for the EMPLOYER > how long can any employer keep the JOB available - too long, then employer will hire another worker, and if REINSTATEMENT is ordered because the DISMISSAL was wrong - will the return of the worker reinstated result in that new 'replacement' worker being kicked out? The FASTER the reinstatement case is dealt with, the better - best if it can be dealt with FAST, no more than 3 months.
e) STATUS QUO for workers and employers whilst WRONGFUL DISMISSAL and Claims for REINSTATEMENT are determined by COURTS. In Malaysia, the POOR WORKER remains jobless and with NO INCOME - best the law is changed, and the Indonesian practice be adopted, STATUS QUO means the EMPLOYER is ordered to give work to worker(and pay wages) as usual, and workers are required to work UNTIL the Court decides whether it is a WRONGFUL DISMISSAL or otherwise. If the Court decides it is NOT Wrongful Dismissal - the worker is JUSTLY out of work. If the Court decides WRONGFUL DISMISSAL, then worker continues work as usual... This is MOST JUST for WORKERS, and this 'status quo' will certainly expedite the trials. STATUS QUO is taken as the situation as was before the alleged wrongful dismissal, and it is maintained UNTIL the COURT decides whether it was WRONGFUL dismissal or NOT.
SECOND SCHEDULE of INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT 1967 must be REPEALED
a) Back wages should be from the date of WRONGFUL dismissal until the date of COURT Judgment - it should not be JUSTLY limited to 24 Months but should be until the COURT Judgment even if it may be 9 years after the dismissal.
b) Back wages should NOT be calculated on the basis of the 'last drawn salary' BUT must justly include all increments/bonues/promotions that the worker would have enjoyed if not 'wrongfully dismissed'. If not REINSTATED, the compensation should also consider all other losses like the LOSS of Seniority - noting that worker rights increase with the number of years employed by the SAME employer. If not REINSTATED, the wrongfully dismissed worker starts from square one - there is a loss of legally provided benefits, etc. Thus claims of loss of future earnings must NOT be excluded but taken into account ... unless there is NO real LOSS of Future Earnings.
c) If he/she is determined by COURT to be wrongfully dismissed, in determining the COMPENSATION, post-dismissal earnings should not be even considered, and so too 'contributory misconduct'. EMPLOYER Guilty - FULL STOP
SECOND SCHEDULE of INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT 1967FACTORS FOR CONSIDERATION IN MAKING AN AWARD IN RELATION TO A REFERENCE UNDER SUBSECTION 20(3) 1. In the event that backwages are to be given, such backwages shall not exceed twenty-four months' backwages from the date of dismissal based on the last-drawn salary of the person who has been dismissed without just cause or excuse;
2. In the case of a probationer who has been dismissed without just cause or excuse, any backwages given shall not exceed twelve months' backwages from the date of dismissal based on his last-drawn salary;
3. Where there is post-dismissal earnings, a percentage of such earnings, to be decided by the Court, shall be deducted from the backwages given;
4. Any relief given shall not include any compensation for loss of future earnings; and
5. Any relief given shall take into account contributory misconduct of the workman.
# Why limit to 24 months > if the case last longer, the back wages should be from date of wrongful dismissal until the date of the COURT judgment, and should include interest.
# Post-dismissal earnings should NEVER be deducted - it is so UNFAIR. Does the government expect the worker to LANGUISH in poverty with no income or no work? So, most WRONGFULLY DISMISSED worker are forced to work and earn somehow - the employer broke the Law by wrongfully dismissing worker - he should pay the FULL Back wages - there should be NO deduction if worker earns after wrongful dismissal.. BEST to adopt in LAW the Indonesian Practice - where worker will continue to EARN until the COURT decides. In Malaysia, sometimes it takes up to 9-10 years before a decision is made (this must CHANGE - trials should be speedily done in 3 months or LESS and so it makes REINSTATEMENT possible...
FOR Malaysian workers - the other thing to be considered is UNIVERSAL PENSION - A universal pension is a non-contributory or public retirement payment given to older adults, often funded through general government taxation rather than individual earnings histories.
Section 100 EMPLOYMENT ACT 1955 - Penalties for failure or non-compliance in relation to rest days, overtime, holidays, annual leave, and sick leave(1) Any employer who fails to pay any of his employees wages for work done by his employee on a rest day or pays wages less than the rate provided under section 60 commits an offence, and shall also, on conviction, be ordered by the court before which he is convicted to pay to the employee concerned the wages due for work done on every rest day at the rate provided under section 60, and the amount of such wages shall be recoverable as if it were a fine imposed by such court.
(2) Any employer who fails to pay to any of his employees any overtime wages as provided under this Act or any subsidiary legislation made thereunder commits an offence, and shall also, on conviction, be ordered by the court before which he is convicted to pay to the employee concerned the overtime wages due, and the amount of overtime wages so ordered by the court to be paid shall be recoverable as if it were a fine imposed by such court....
What happens when the EMPLOYER or Employer COMPANY goes Bankrupt? Who pays the workers unpaid wages, etc?
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment