The Malaysian Bar - Defer amendments to Employment Act or face ILO wrath (Update)

Home

News

Legal/General News

Defer amendments to Employment Act or face ILO wrath (Update)

Monday, 14 November 2011 09:15am

©The Sun Daily (Used by permission)
by Karen Arukesamy

PETALING JAYA (Nov 13, 2011): The government risks falling foul of the International Labour Organisation (ILO) if it continues to ignore objections to the amendments to Employment Act 1955.

In issuing the warning, the Transport Workers Union (TWU) said the country's image and reputation were at stake if the unions report the matter to the ILO and the organisation takes up the case.

"We urge the government to withdraw this bill. Provide the room for us to state our objections.

"The next ILO meeting in Geneva is in June next year. Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Abdul Razak should act before the matter is raised at the ILO," TWU secretary-general Datuk Zainal Rampak told a press conference today.

He said if the matter was brought up at the ILO, the international organisation can query the government based on the concerns raised, which could prove embarrassing for Malaysia.

Urging the PM to intervene and hear the trade union's plea, he said the government should put a hold the implementation of the Act until there was strong assurance that it protects the trade union workers.

"We appeal to PM to give us the opportunity to meet up with him and to give us a fair hearing," Zainal said, adding that there had not been any response from the PM’s office since the issue was raised early last month.

He said that the country could only become a high-income nation if workers' needs were given due recognition and support.

According to Zainal, it was the 11.5 million workers in Malaysia that formed the backbone of the national economy instead of employers.

The amendments, he added, did not take this into account and instead favours the employers.

"As partners of the Malaysian community, the government of the day should give workers enough space and opportunity to protect, promote and sustain their collective interests as dignified members of civil society," said Zainal, who is also the International Transport Workers Federation, Asia Pacific Regional Committee chairman.

Reiterating the Malaysian Trade Union Congress’ statements on the matter, he said the amendments further eroded the fundamental rights of workers enshrined in the ILO Conventions 87, Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise and Convention 98, Right to Collective Bargaining.

“What Malaysian workers need now, particularly during these difficult economic times, is an Employment Act that protects their basic rights as tripartite partners in civil society, not a Deployment Act that negates the very purpose and objectives of the Employment Act,” Zainal said.

Among the concerns raised about the amendments are Sections 31 and 33, which introduces a new entity called “Contractor of Labour”.

“This amendment is in total conflict with the purpose and spirit of the Employment Act, which emphasises the need to develop, sustain and protect ‘contract of service’ not ‘contract for service’.

“The amended Section 31 has now created two separate employer entities in the Act, when there should only be one,” Zainal said, adding that it allows the agents to supply workers without legal safeguards and frustrated the employer-employee relationship.

He said that by providing ‘Contractor for Labour’, the amendments conveniently permitted employment agents, in collaboration, with the employer, to bypass the legal obligations of the latter which were clearly defined in the Act.

“For instance, when an employment agent supplies workers to a company (employer), he conveniently escapes any legal liability to the workers, because the worksite is not that of the employment agent, but that of the company, which is supposed to the employer.

“On the same token, if the company (employer) were to commit any breaches of its contract for service with the employment agent, and if such breaches were to affect the workers, they will not be able to pursue any legal action against the company,” he said.

Zainal said the workers will not even be able to seek any compensation because in legal terms the “company is not the employer” but the employment agent is, hence there was no legal obligation towards the workers.

Set as favourite

Email This