Two ‘slave workers’ paid RM36,000 by factory

http://www.thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?f...4979&sec=nation

KUCHING: Two brothers, who were virtually slaves at a factory in Puchong in Selangor for 15 years, have been compensated.

Simon, 30, and Radin Bangan, 31, accepted RM36,000 in total compensation from their former employer after mediation by officers of the Labour Office in Subang Jaya last month.

“An amicable settlement was reached whereby the two brothers who were represented by a legal counsel, agreed to accept the offer of RM36,000 in total from their employer, a ‘pau’-making factory.

“The money was paid to them through their counsel and the case is closed,” said State Labour Department assistant director August Buma in a press statement yesterday.

He said the case was dealt with under the provisions of the Employment Act 1955 by the Selangor Labour Department.

Arising from this case, the State Labour Department advises locals working outside the state to first contact and consult officers of the department before accepting any job offers.

This is to enable the department to verify the authenticity of the job offer to prevent job seekers from being cheated by unscrupulous employment agents and recruiters.

The two brothers from Kampung Antayan, Kropok, an Iban village in Serian, had claimed they had laboured 12 hours daily, seven days a week without pay for 15 years.

They were promised a salary of RM2,000 each by an agent in Kuching but never got a single sen.

They were allowed to return home last February when they threatened to quit.

Aside from them, the brothers claimed there were also five other workers comprising two Bidayuhs from Sarawak and three Chinese from Perak, who were allegedly forced to work at the factory.

This post has been edited by aurora97: Aug 25 2010, 08:57 AM

I am not to sure of Malaysia's plan on wealth distribution or every race having a fair share of the wealth pie, but indigeoneous people have a very high tendency of being exploited regardless whom the employers racial creed or colour is.

In any case, the purpose of the article, is to make every forumer realize their rights and possible relief if they were faced with employers whom are absolute ... . Unless they want to end up like the persons in this article.

Both are rumours, so naturally untrue.

Depends on your letter of offer, if your letter of offer says 3months notice or 3 months salary in lieu of notice, than that would mean if you tender 24 hours notice, you will have to pay 3 months equivalent of salary.

IF your looking only for experience, make sure you also read your letter of offer before you pen down your name. I believe this will also serve as a lesson for you, read and understand the terms contained in your letter of offer.

its only probationary, all you need to do is tender 1 month's notice.

if you should leave prematurely say 24 hours notice, depending on ur contract you will probably end up paying your employer 3 months salary in lieu of your leave.

in any case, you are protected under the Employment Act 1955, i will have to check and see whether there are any legitimate arguments you can raise against your employer.

Furthermore, is your employer paying your EPF and SOCSO?

I think it is more likely they are paying you with an allowance of sorts rather than a fixed salary, by the way whats the name of the law firm, if you dont mind sharing?

http://www.thenutgraph.com/talking-about-retrenchment/

S K WIGNESWARY was an executive at an established media organisation for more than nine years. One Monday, she went to work as usual. By that evening, she was out of a job.

“The department head made an announcement at about 4pm that a list of names would be called out and our services would be terminated,” Wigneswary tells The Nut Graph in an interview. Wigneswary, along with half her department, were paid a month’s salary in lieu of notice, and retrenchment benefits, and terminated with immediate effect. They were told their department would be closed and their remaining colleagues moved to a different department. They were asked to immediately pack their things and leave by the end of the day. Some of her colleagues had worked in the company for more than 10 years.

Was their retrenchment illegal? Can companies terminate long-standing employees within a day? And doesn’t a company have to follow the “Last In, First Out” (Lifo) principle?

What is binding?

Wigneswary says she and her colleagues were angered by the manner in which the termination was carried out. “I felt they should have given us more notice,” says Wigneswary. “I felt it was cruel of them to terminate us within a day. The management also watched us when we were packing, observing what we were taking with us. There was no need to stand guard and treat people like they were going to steal from the company.”

She also says the company did not follow the Lifo principle. Some junior colleagues of similar rank were retained, while senior staff were dismissed.

Furthermore, there had been no inkling that the company was unhappy with her performance. “There was no letter or memo sent for us to buck up. Appraisal was generally good; we were given increment and bonus. So on what basis did they keep the newer staff and let the older staff go?”

While Wigneswary’s questions are legitimate, the fact is, it’s not that straightforward. When retrenching employees, employers are bound by the Employment Act 1955 and the Employment (Termination and Layoff Benefits) Regulations. The Act and Regulations stipulate the amount of compensation retrenched employees should receive, as well as the notice they should be given. The law, however, allows for employees to be paid an amount in lieu of notice.

The best practices for carrying out retrenchments can be found in the Code of Conduct for Industrial Harmony, an agreement made between the Human Resources Ministry and employers. Under the code, employers are required to give workers as early a warning as practisable that retrenchment is imminent.

Employers should also try other cost-cutting measures such as limiting recruitment and restricting overtime work before resorting to retrenchment. They are also required to consider the length of service of employees when deciding whom to terminate.

However, the code itself states: “There is no legal obligation on the part of the employer to adhere to the contents of the Code.” That said, the Industrial Court may and does take the code into consideration when considering employees’ complaints.

Bona fide

The Industrial Court does not always apply the code rigidly. It is bound to make decisions according to rules of equity and good conscience. The Industrial Court therefore often looks at the circumstances as a whole in retrenchment cases to determine whether the terminations were done in good faith.

Labour lawyer and former Industrial Court chairperson Lim Heng Seng illustrates factors the court would consider, giving the example of when staff are terminated because their jobs have been outsourced.

“Outsourcing raises its own issues – for instance, whether consultation with the employees might have led to a situation where the employer could reduce costs in a way that the employees themselves agreed to and [hence] avoid outsourcing,” Lim tells The Nut Graph in a phone interview.

“There have been shocking cases where employees are retrenched on the pretext of outsourcing. However, when the terminations are challenged, it is found they were not genuine as the savings involved were so minimal, they could have been achieved with simple reorganisation within the company,” Lim says.

So how far should the law go in protecting employees? Is it sufficient that retrenchment best practices are found in a non-binding code and not in legally enforceable statutes? Can the courts be entrusted with balancing employers’ rights to reorganise its business and employees’ security of tenure and livelihood?


Pereira
Electronic Industry Employees Union general secretary Bruno Pereira is doubtful. “The code is not binding and many companies do not follow it,” he tells The Nut Graph in an e-mail interview. This is even though the code recognises that ensuring employment security upholds good industrial relations because insecurity and fear have a major influence on attitudes to work.

Even then, despite the importance of employees’ emotional well-being, Pereira says the court does not take into account a retrenched employee’s emotional distress when considering if a retrenchment was done in good faith.

Labour law amendments

Meanwhile, the government has announced its intention to make amendments to Malaysia’s labour laws. Pereira, the Malaysian Trades Union Congress (MTUC) and the Bar Council have spoken out against the amendments, saying employees’ security of tenure would be jeopardised.

The proposed amendments would reportedly make it easier for employers to hire workers on fixed-term contracts, even for long durations. MTUC secretary-general G Rajasekaran said in a press statement that if the proposed amendments were passed, even workers who had worked for 10 years on a contract basis would have no recourse if terminated.

A balancing act

It’s a tough job for the government. On one hand, it does not want to stifle companies, and wants to ensure that they have enough flexibility to restructure their businesses and remain profitable. On the other, it is also in the national interests to ensure that employees are not arbitrarily terminated. Without a social safety net in Malaysia, those who are retrenched and unable to find new jobs end up being unable to contribute to economic activity and growth.

As it is, employees like Wigneswary would have to convince the court that her termination was done in bad faith before she would be entitled to reinstatement or further compensation. What would the effects be if labour laws were amended to make it easier for employers to terminate their employees?

if you are concern that it will have an impact on your career just don't do it, simple and straightforward. Leave the company quietly as you came in and shut the door gently on your way out.

On face value, your questions sounds so simple and straightforward, anyway i won't go into detail and legality of it but rather the solutions.

Solution:
1. rather than directly joining the competitor company and risk legal action from your ex-employer, if your competitor has other companies say a holding or a subsidiary company perhaps it would be a temporary alternative. After say one year, you may want to elect to be transferred back to the intended company.

how binding this term is, normally depends on the courts to decide. Referring to s.28 Contracts Act 1950, which says

"provides that every agreement by which anyone is restrained from exercising a lawful profession, trade or business of any kind is to that extent void unless the restraint falls within one of three stipulated exceptions."

Your type of clause is a type of restriction of trade, worse of all it will continue to bind you even after your employment (otherwise called a negative covenant).

Don't be too happy yet, although most cases have generally sided with the employee, it seems that there are courts nowadays inclined to forgo s.28. In any case, before you decide to terminate your employment, try seeking professional advice, i think the matter has exceeded the helpfulness of this forum.

tell the truth, i guess. Your question is more like a career call for you yourself to answer.

CBT and theft charge shock for clerk

KUALA LUMPUR: A 28-year-old accounts clerk returned to her work place about three weeks after resigning to collect her salary, but a shock awaited her.

Policemen were waiting in the room of her manager, who accused her of swindling the company of RM400,000 and stealing two Rolex watches from him.

Simply put it, one cannot eat both ends of the pie at the same time.

Contacts are made free, willingly, voluntarily and with the consent of both parties, the exception to the case would be if someone who cannot read or write is made to enter into a contract than perhaps there are other elements that might void the agreement.

Secondly, when entering into a contract, everyone is expected to honour their end of the bargain, say for example employer pays employee his salary and the employee comes on time to work subject to the terms and conditions of the contract. What if the employer doesn't pay the employee salary, more likely than not the employee will start reminding the employer of his contract obligations to him.

Hence, from the very beginning of the thread itself, I have already mentioned read and take your time to understand each single word/fine print the letter of offer/employment before you pen down your name. Weight your options, if the risk can be managed or if the benefits out-weight the risk invloved, by all means go ahead. No one can decide your career choice except you yourself.

This post has been edited by aurora97: Sep 24 2010, 10:02 AM

Anytime before the confirmation, the terms in the letter of offer continues to be effective until such time a new offer supersedes the existing letter of offer. Naturally this is the case when a person is duly accepted by the Company.

To put it simply, if you don’t confirm me after the 3 months, the existing terms will continue to apply.

Say for example, if the Company does not confirm you for a period of 7 years, which terms continue to apply? Logically it is the existing terms contained in the letter of offer will still continue to apply. Since, there are no other offers that supersede the existing letter of offer,

Next question, once your friend tenders her resignation, suddenly management decides to pop out with a confirmation letter.

Regardless, whether it is dated the same day, back dated or whatever date for that matter, the pertinent question is still the following:

1. when did you have knowledge of the confirmation; and

2. when did you receive the confirmation (as in actual receipt).

So long as your friend does not sign or do anything to verify the contents of the confirmation, the existing letter of offer (signed during the probation period will continue to be effective).

My advise if they do date the LO after your probation period or back dated the letter, just write back and inform they that you will consider their offer and also informing them the date you "ACTUALLY" received the confirmation.

Errm... normally 24 hours notice is served by the Employer on you rather than the other way round. Perhaps you should re-check your Letter of Offer and see what it actually say.

In any case, i am assuming your notice is 24 hours.

All you need to do is to tender resignation notice according to your letter of offer.

You have done nothing wrong and you should observe the terms of your letter of offer rather than destroying your own rice bowl by quitting the company without notice or breach the letter of offer. The tables will be turned against you, further you may not be able to get employment elsewhere if they were to contact the same company that you left for reference purposes.

tender notice today, gone tomorrow regardless what your boss say.

i see no issues really, if it say what it say in your contract.

6 months probation but worked for one year without confirmation, that's called <insert word>, i would have tendered resignation if i wasn't confirmed after the 6 months probation.

That's PURE abuse by the employer to get rid of staff as and when they like especially not confirming staff, but when you want to tender 24 hours they say, hey you can't do that, you need to wait until the end of the month! WTF logic is that?

My 2 cents worth of opinion is that the issue isn't so much about the law, you enter into a contract because you want the other to perform (fulfill) a promise.

Say... you ask for bread and i gave you rocks instead, how would you feel?

The purpose of a contract is that to ensure that if you ask for bread, bread will be given accordingly in fulfillment of that promise to you.

Although occasionally the bread may either be mouldy or coated in chocolate (as the case may be).

From what i gather, i think to resign or otherwise is a career choice left best for your to decide.

i think a,b,c is irrelevant, the only way is talk to your boss "nicely", if need be try an "beg" to get you released early.

a. - u can only use it to persuade your boss, it not a MATERIAL factor for your boss to release you from your employment.

What is material? X mother is dying of cancer, there is a family business, X's father left X's mother. On top of that X has five siblings at home whom are still studying.

did i also mention people actually use the execuse above to get themselves released early? (for the wrong reasons)

b. - ur employer is merely observing the terms of your contract. KPI's and disciplinary actions are just additional assessment tools to evaluate your performance to reward or punish you accordingly. That said, if 4/10 people in the company have good KPI's and no disciplinary action taken, does it entitle them to leave the company early?

c. - try going for waiver before you even touch on reduction. Cause if you ask for reduction first, you might not be able to get full waiver later.

Finally and again- pls talk to your boss first.

This post has been edited by aurora97: Oct 18 2010, 01:31 PM

look at ur letter of offer and see what it say not what your boss say.

Whether you have a case or not is arguable, but get your house in order first is the most important step in building the foundations to your case.

Steps
(a) tender your resignation first (have you done this? If you have yet to do this go ahead and tender, they can say all the rubbish they want to say), this is the most important step.

(b) at stage (b), they should be making some noise, saying that you are already a confirmed staff etc..., in any case, write to them formally and enquire as to when you were ACTUALLY confirmed and to produce a Confirmation Letter.

© now the crux of the matter in (b) is actually the confirmation letter, regardless when the Company date it (backdate/forward dating), i think you have a fair chance of arguing you weren't informed or you didn't sign off on such letter. In any case you resignation letter had come before your confirmation letter (thats why step (a) is also important).

(d) finally you should ask why the company is withholding your money since you were rightfully entitled to leave. You will need justification to back yourself up, it is no use relying on verbal advise given by the company. So what do you do?

(i) ask the company to write to your formally, why did they withheld your salary (although verbal reasoning would have stated the obvious, this is to prevent the company from changing their story later on)

(e) once you have all your documents, proceed to lodge your complaint with labour dept.

Why step (a) to (e), many a times Complainants would proceed to lodge report with labour dept without having proper documentation. Your relationship with your company would probably be SO BAD and knowing that you had lodge a complaint against them in labour dept, documents requested by you would either be "missing" or the respective officer won't even entertain any of your request.

Do it rght the 1st time.

i don't really agree with your statement, normally companies will issue a confirmation letter to state a staff is confirmed. Besides the only other reasons why a company would not confirm a staff for an extended period (i.e. in excess of the 3 months probation) is probably because:-

a) oversight by staff (unlikely since its 9 mths already, more likely to be deliberate);
b) cost factor, generally speaking probationary staff are cheaper than confirmed staff (insurance/bonus/claims/privileges); or
c) doubts over the persons performance and may require a longer duration of observation; or
d) company is taking advantage.

It works both ways, really when a staff want to resign, the company will say hey look your a confirmed staff without a hint of being informed he/she was one in the first place. Also note, a company could easily turn around a say your fired, please don't come to work tomorrow.

I would say its more arguable than a death sentence or a one way trip to hell.

---

Added on April 15, 2011, 4:02 pmPut it like this, this is the internet right, i don't know who you are and i don't even know what you are saying to me is actually true/false.

Get the point?

Your friend is literally fighting the system, which is practically pointless and to offend HR folks is practically hell on earth. Be it claims, annual leave or even a simple request would be quite an effort.

The one easiest way is to be able to trigger him to say the same threats that he made and to capture it on voice recording (or video even better).

If you can do this, i believe your friend will be home free.

This post has been edited by aurora97: Apr 15 2011, 04:04 PM

agreed with your quote. more likely to be a guinea pig or a lab rat if you ask me.

Anyway Jeff, do let us know the outcome.

Unfortunately, we don't have too many members who have actually posted the outcome of their dispute in labour courts. It would be great reference and precedence for everyone to proceed with.

for avoidance of any doubt, formal letter is the best.

Dam*mit! have to re-tyE, accidentally closed thread without saving!

Disclaimer: NOT a HR person, all this is base on my experience.

Anyway i gist:-

1. Salary is paid in calander days.
2. Normally short notice, set-off of leave against notice period not allowed. Unless of course you have good r/ship with your management. Basically a management would want a proper handover of work.

3. Assumptions.
Normal termination:-
Tender - 1 January 2012
Notice Period (normaly) - 1 January 2012 to 31 Janaury 2012 (last day)
effective date - 1 Feb 2012.

4. Assumptions.
Short Notice Termination:-
Tender - 1 Jan
Last day - 7 Jan
Effective date - 8 Jan
Number of Days served - 7 days
Number of days not served - 24 days

RM (current salary) x 12 (number of months in a year) x (balance remaining notice period not served) / 365 = amount payable.

5. Things you need, when you leave:-
(a) a release letter would be prudent, in my case it was given to me without demand.
(b) EPF & Income Tax, normally your new company (w/o bothering your old company) will handle for you EXCEPT for EA form, you will need to bug your Ex-employer if they don't send it to you. This is to enable you to lapor your income to the TAX MAN. Of course you will need to provide them with details with respect to your EPF and Income Tax.

Hope the above explains.










Attached File(s)
 Early_Notice_Letter.doc ( 20.5k ) Number of downloads: 80