As mentioned in the title, please enlighten me. Thanks.

The company I am currently with is unwilling to confirm me, and hence they offered me a 1 month contract job.

Most of the things is same, just no EPF and SOCSO.

I has a feeling of either one of us will sack each other anytime.

In general, all payments which are meant to be salary or wage are accountable in your monthly contribution amount calculation. These include:

*
Salary/Wage;
* Payment to replace service termination notice;
* Payment for unutilised leaves;
* Bonuses;
* Allowances;
* Commision;
* Accrued salary/wage;
* Salary/wage for maternity leaves;
* Salary/wage for study leaves;
* Salary/wage for half-pay leaves;
* Directors salary/wage; and
* Other payments stipulated under contracts of services/employment or vice versa.

sos - http://www.kwsp.gov.my/index.php?ch=p2memb...&ac=274&lang=en

shud have EPF for contract worker..socso also have for me..bcoz i am contract worker..

however some co try cheat on it...

u should ask EPF to confirm.

unless u r being paid as a contractor/vendor... is that the case or are you on their payroll?

Just appreciate if anyone can share if they took/encountered any EPFless and SOCSOless contract offer.

Thanks for your golden advice. It is very helpful of you and you pwned every one else here.

I receive payslip monthly. But now they decided to end my probation, and start with a service of contract thingy.

No, I am not a 3rd party contractor or vendor, I sit in their office and I punch in every morning.

Thanks rognales for the accurate reference.

This post has been edited by rexis: Apr 8 2009, 10:39 AM

i think they are treating u as a freelancer and u are being paid not as employee but as a vendor... that why no epf and sosco

I just wan u to get the fact straight rather than asking for opinion.... u can call up EPF or send them an email...i know ppl like to speak based on opinion coz its easy... but only facts that matters. EPF can clear all ur doubt fast!

Does a freelancer has job title?

Thanks for your opinion. I just like to find out if this is a common practice.

Its sort of a new thing to me that a contractor do not hv EPF. So I am just trying to find out if they are making me a space goat or I am just not well informed about Malaysia Law

Called EPF anyway.

last time my ex company also got contractor, he is work in the company, but end month he get a cheque from finance straght. he not in our payroll.

maybe ur case is something *not so right* done by the company HR, unless the company HR totally not involve in this process, then i suppose u can be classify as a non-staff

there are many kinds of contract workers. I was in one which didn't give me any EPF, SOCSO, etc. 0 benefit.

And some don even allow you to resign (but they can sack u immediately). Some pay u for the number of days u work - daily rate.

And there are also some which have the exact benefits with the permanent (except for stuff like dental and optical).

So it really depends on the company.

But yeah, if you are asking if it is legal to have zero SOCSO and EPF for contract - then yes, there are such contracts.

I believe the labor law states that companies MUST give EPF contributions to their employee, contract or otherwise.

A contractor doesn't always mean contract employee. It can be contract service provider or supplier as well.

I can contract someone to come mop the floor and wash the toilet everyday. That doesn't make that person my 'employee'. Its makes them a service provider like DHL or the auditors or my regular taxi driver. Contractors can technically be self-employed.

This is stated in the KWSP website:
* Other payments stipulated under contracts of services/employment or vice versa.

And the officer I talked to in KWSP say that any contract that against Malaysia Law is not legal, even if you signed it and it say no EPF.

What does this mean?

Well, I can tell you in my first contract job (2000-2001) I did not get EPF - rather I got EPF factored into my package.

However, in my second contract job (2002-2006) I got EPF.

As for your question, any contract that breaks any law is automatically invalid....that's all it means.

In your situation, the floor mopper is NOT your employee. He/she is basically task based. In other words, the contractor is not tied to your company policies or resources nor report to a superior in that company, and is NOT a member of the organization. However, if you are employed by the company, even if it means it is a contracted employment, you are entitled to all benefits accorded to you by labor law (except things like gazetted holidays, termination or job security.

---

Added on April 8, 2009, 2:01 pmIf you have EPF "packaged" into your salary, that means the employer did its part of fulfilling the EPF contribution (that 12%). It will then be your choice to put that contribution into your EPF account or not.

This post has been edited by spanker: Apr 8 2009, 02:01 PM

on my 1st job as a contract worker, i don't get any EPF or SOCSO and only after 1 year they gave me.

But now on my 2nd job as a contract worker, all my benefits are the same as permenant staff but only tied down by the contract.

heard it is illegal not to contribute to EPF and SOCSO.

So, in your opinion, anyone whose work:

(a) is not task based (what does this mean? At the end of the day, work is simply a series of tasks, no?)
(b) is tied to company policies or resources
© reports to a superior in the company
(d) is somehow a 'member' of the organisation (what does this mean anyway?)

- is defined as an employee?

what I mean from your definition of "contractor" is that i just do what I am hired to do. If your company has the office hours of 8 a.m. - 5 p.m. I am not obliged to follow that, as long is I cleaned your toilet.

Basically, when you are employed by the organization, means you are a member of the organization. If your contract is a business contract (e.g. freelancing situation), and not and employment contract, that means you are not entitled to those benefits.

Perhaps this is what I should have said in the first place instead of complicating the situation

Not quite - the employer compensated me for not getting EPF by adding to my basic salary. The only thing is....I got taxed for that . Doesn't matter what the intention is, lawfully I was only getting a basic salary.

This post has been edited by cwtien: Apr 8 2009, 03:07 PM

Thats the thing, if say only employee can deserve it, the next thing I will see is the employer digging into the legal dictionary to define what is employee. I have in no position to deal with that kind of legal knowledge or argument.

All I know, I work for you, and you pay me salary and EPF. It is not up to what the contract say it if it is about the law, nor the contract can state that you can burn down your clients' houses if they make late payment and you can go and burn people's house.

This post has been edited by rexis: Apr 8 2009, 03:22 PM

it is depend to the contract term and condition. In my company, all contract staff must register their own self proprietary company. In this case, my company is dealing with registered self propreitary companies instead of individual contract staff and we are paying the consultancy fee instead of salary to contract staff. In this case, we do not pay for EPF, SOCSO, no MC, no AL.....

rexis, there really is a definition of what constitutes an employer and employee in the labor law. I suggest you look it up as well. I used to have a copy of it on my other laptop. Sorry, you'll just have to dig it out somewhere on the internet

I think malaysianbabes.net (or some lame site like that) has it.

And I found this:



In this case, the proprietary company need to bear the EPF, etc cost.

This post has been edited by rexis: Apr 9 2009, 09:52 AM

If i am not mistaken, a company has the right not to contribute to EPF if they have less than 5 staffs working with them.

And why want SOCSO ? That is one really BS insurance scheme that dont really benefit us.

Because it only covers ' working hour '... all those non working hour, for example while travelling to work, or maybe you worked late one night and boss ask you to go buy something and accidents happens. You don't get the socso coverage at all.
( thats what happens to my bro. )

I would be glad if there's no SOCSO deducted from my pay. Its much better to put the money in personal life insurance.

Reducing basic benefit is certainly not something encouraging, sometimes, it can be translated into tactic to cut staff.

I was on probation, and due to the reason I mentioned on another thread, I am demoted to contract staff.

Why not? And it is not because of the "BSness" or how cheap of it, it is our right. Its like I say, "Why we need IC? I dont use it most of the time and I rarely use Touch n' Go anyway!"

Not everybody sit inside a comfortable office block, I have 5 tons metal plate hanging up and down beside me, you will be looking at a spagetti paste if any of these fallen off the magnetic hook.

And do you think work place is safe? I had an ex-colleague slipped and hurt her neck in the office, she has been fully covered by SOCSO for all her medical needs plus one year of paid sick leave so she can focus on her treatment.

This post has been edited by rexis: Apr 9 2009, 01:32 PM

Probably i should have mentioned, 'except those high risk workers'.
You see, throughout my years of employments in many different companies, there weren't any single SOCSO claims. Even through friends of friends.
Yeah, most of the environment are rather safe, which is why i felt SOCSO never really play any part.

In one of my ex company, in fact my admin manager took PA Insurance scheme for us. It was much cheaper and not deducted from our salary.

So, i felt a lot of our SOCSO deductions are really like charity.
Why i think Personal Insurance are much better ?

Because certain policy gives full coverage and hospitalization benefits, and some even investment opportunities.
I just felt that those who took personal insurance should be given option to be exempted from these SOCSO contributions.