If you can't view the message, please click here.

IN THIS ISSUE BULLETIN 10/2020
www.cljlaw.com
www.mylawbox.com
www.labourlawbox.com
(Available with separate subscription plan)




LATEST HIGHLIGHTS
CASE HIGHLIGHTS

MUHAMMAD ZAILANI MAT ZIN v. NATIONAL UNION OF HOTEL, BAR AND RESTAURANT WORKERS, PENINSULAR MALAYSIA
INDUSTRIAL COURT, KUALA LUMPUR
AUGUSTINE ANTHONY
AWARD NO. 760 OF 2020 [CASE NO: 4/4-2857/18]
4 JUNE 2020

DISMISSAL: Misconduct – Whether the claimant had advised Rafidah, from the Holiday Inn Glenmarie, to inform the management that if they could not settle the Collective Agreement, the union would picket – Factors to consider – Evidence adduced – Evaluation of – Effect of – Union’s actions – What it had shown – Contents of the union’s show cause letter to the claimant – Whether it had been satisfactory – Purpose of show cause letters – Whether the union had followed the rules of natural justice in dealing with the matter – Whether the claimant’s dismissal had been carried out with just cause and excuse

DISMISSAL: Misconduct – Whether the claimant had misappropriated the union’s funds – Factors to consider – Evidence adduced – Effect of – Whether proven by the union on a balance of probabilities – Union’s actions in the matter – What it had shown – Effect of – Whether the claimant’s dismissal had been carried out with just cause and excuse

EVIDENCE: Documentary evidence – Whether the claimant had been a workman under the Industrial Relations Act 1967 – Factors to consider – Evidence adduced – Effect of – Perusal and evaluation of the union’s Constitution – What it had shown – Claimant no longer an employee in the Hotel, Bar and Restaurant industry – Effect of – Whether he could hold a position in the union – Whether he had obtained the necessary exemptions under the Trade Unions Act 1959 – Effect of – Union’s actions towards him – What it had shown – Industrial Relations Act 1967, s. 2 and Trade Unions Act 1959, ss. 29 & 30

INDUSTRIAL COURT: Jurisdiction – Whether the IC had been seized with jurisdiction to hear this matter – Factors to consider – Evidence adduced – Effect of


MIYAN UDIN & ANOR v. GOODYEAR MALAYSIA BERHAD
(Consolidated with Case No. 3/1-1120/19 - 3/1-1235/19, 3/1-1261/19 - 3/1-1262/19 and 3/1-1340/19 by Court Order vide Interim Award No. 2933 of 2019 dated 8 November 2019)
INDUSTRIAL COURT, KUALA LUMPUR
ANNA NG FUI CHOO
EMPLOYEES’ PANEL: NIZAH MAT JAIE
EMPLOYERS’ PANEL: ROHIZAT BAHARUM
AWARD NO. 944 OF 2020 [CASE NO: 3/1-1119/19]
8 JULY 2020

INDUSTRIAL COURT: Jurisdiction – Whether the Industrial Court has the jurisdiction to interpret the terms of the CA in non-compliance proceedings – Factors to consider – Statutory provisions – Evaluation of – Effect of – Industrial Relations Act 1967, s. 56(2A)

INDUSTRIAL COURT: Procedure – Action – Some complainants filing SDs seeking to withdraw this matter against the respondent – Implications of the SD – As at the date of the hearing the SDs not withdrawn – Effect of – Complainants subsequent actions of filing Form A and B in the Industrial Court – What it had shown – Whether the respondent’s actions of trying to secure a withdrawal of the matter, behind the complainants’ counsel’s back, whist the substantive issue of non-compliance had still been pending in court, had been an unfair labour practice – Effect of

INDUSTRIAL COURT: Procedure – Action – Witness for the respondent in court as an observer whilst complainants’ witnesses testifying – Whether encouraged and the right thing to do

NON-COMPLIANCE: Collective Agreement – Whether the foreign worker complainants had been workmen of the company and covered under the CA – Factors to consider – Evidence adduced – Evaluation of – Effect of – Whether art. 9(d)(ii) of the CA had been void and unenforceable – Perusal of that article and its implications – Whether the respondent’s financial incapacity had been a material factor to consider and been applicable in these proceedings – Industrial Relations Act 1967, ss. 17, 30(4) and 56(1) & Contracts Act 1950, s. 24

NON-COMPLIANCE: Collective Agreement – Whether the foreign worker complainants had had the locus standi to bring this action against the respondent – Factors to consider – Evidence adduced – Effect of – Whether they had been covered under the scope of the CA – Effect of – Industrial Relations Act 1967, s. 56(1)

LATEST CASES (ILR Issue 9 of 2020)
Award Parties Citation Links
  Ang Ek Koon v. Director, Public Works Department Sarawak & Ors
[Civil Appeal No: Q-01(NCVC)(W)-347-05-2018]
[2020] 3 ILR 425 cljlaw
labourlaw
  Fice Fransina Nenobais v. Lee Hee Chooi
[Civil Appeal No: BA-16-34-08-2018]
[2020] 3 ILR 440 cljlaw
labourlaw
760/2020 Muhammad Zailani Mat Zin v. National Union Of Hotel, Bar And Restaurant Workers, Peninsular Malaysia
[Case No: 4/4-2857/18]
[2020] 3 ILR 447 cljlaw
labourlaw
766/2020 Ong Shy Boon v. Sarawak Shell Berhad
[Case No: 8/4-1075/16]
[2020] 3 ILR 467 cljlaw
labourlaw
879/2020 Kesatuan Kebangsaan Pekerja-pekerja Perusahaan Alat-alat Pengangkutan Dan Sekutu v. Hicom Automotive Manufacturers (Malaysia) Sdn Bhd
[Case No: 22(21)/3-851/16]
[2020] 3 ILR 498 cljlaw
labourlaw
944/2020 Miyan Udin & Anor v. Goodyear Malaysia Berhad
[Case No: 3/1-1119/19]
[2020] 3 ILR 520 cljlaw
labourlaw
1048/2020 Tang Kheng Siong v. Sarawak Shell Berhad
[Case No: 8/4-442/17]
[2020] 3 ILR 544 cljlaw
labourlaw
1143/2020 Rozainah Awang v. MISC Berhad
[Case No: 14/4-1898/19]
[2020] 3 ILR 605 cljlaw
labourlaw
To Subject Index
ARTICLE HIGHLIGHT

QANTAS WINS COURT CASE OVER AIRCRAFT ENGINEERS STOOD DOWN DUE TO CORONAVIRUS PANDEMIC
Qantas' decision to stand down hundreds of engineers without pay during pandemic vindicated
A decision by Qantas to stand down hundreds of aircraft engineers without pay during the COVID-19 pandemic has been vindicated by the Federal Court. About 450 Qantas and Jetstar maintenance engineers were among two-thirds of the workforce benched for a month from late March as passenger numbers declined. In a case being closely watched for its likely ramifications outside aviation, Qantas sought a declaration from the court that the stoppage of work was for reasons it could not be held reasonably responsible for. But the Australian Licenced Aircraft Engineers Association argued a lack of customers, no matter how stark, should not be considered a stoppage of work under the workers' agreement.

Read More

COURT AFFIRMS RM2.45 MIL AWARD TO EX-COO FOR CONSTRUCTIVE DISMISSAL
RM2.45 million in compensation to former COO of Konsortium Transnasional was correct
A public bus company today failed in its judicial review to set aside an Industrial Court award that ordered RM2.45 million in compensation to be paid to its former chief operating officer for constructive dismissal. High Court judge Mariana Yahya said the Industrial Court did not commit any error in making the award for Tengku Mohd Hasmadi Tengku Hashim.

Read More

UBER AND LYFT COULD GAIN FROM U.S. RULE DEFINING EMPLOYMENT
Proposed interpretive rule could have significant influence if finalised
The Labor Department on Tuesday announced a proposal that could deem millions of janitors, construction workers and gig workers to be contractors rather than employees, its most ambitious step toward blessing the business practices of companies like Uber and Lyft. Unlike employers, companies that rely on contractors don’t have to pay a minimum wage, overtime or a share of Social Security taxes, or contribute to unemployment insurance and provide workers' compensation insurance.

Read More

Copyright Mylawbox Sdn Bhd Unsubscribe