CLJ Law MALAYSIA
http://www.cljlaw.com
ILR Bulletin, Issue 2010, Vol 06
August 2010
|
Print this page |
CLJ Law MALAYSIA |
Introduction:
To get the most out of this law bulletin join CLJ Law Online now - http://www.cljlaw.com/registration.asp
Feel free to forward this to your colleagues. Get this bulletin as email by going to http://www.cljlaw.com/ilrsubscribefrm.asp
| New This Week | 1. ILR Articles |
| 2. ILR Issue 6 of 2010 |
Contract Of Service Or Contract For Service: With Special Reference To The Status Of Graduate Research Assistants In Employment Law [2010] 2 ILR xxxv [Read excerpt]
By Ashgar Ali Ali Mohamed*
AWARDS REPORTED
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
SUBJECT INDEX
CONTRACT OF EMPLOYMENT
Terms and conditions - Employment contract - Power of the company to review the terms and conditions of the contract - Whether it had enabled the company to unilaterally vary the terms of the contract - Effect of - Whether dismissal without just cause or excuse - Industrial Relations Act 1967, ss. 20(3) & 30(5)
Dr Timothy James MC Avin v. Natural Components (M) Sdn Bhd
(Mary Shakila Azariah) [2010] 2 ILR 513
Terms and conditions - Unilateral variation of contract by the company - Claimant and company executing a 1-page contract for immigration purposes - Company subsequently giving the claimant a more elaborate contract with more terms and conditions - Claimant not agreeing to the terms and communicating the same to the company - Company terminating his services - Effect of - The claimant's expectations when he had executed the contract - Whether he had a right to expect to be employed for 24 months - Effect of - Whether the company's actions in terminating his services had been a repudiation of his contract of employment - Effect of - Whether the company's actions were bona fide - Effect of - Whether dismissal without just cause or excuse - Industrial Relations Act 1967, ss. 20(3) & 30(5)
Dr Timothy James MC Avin v. Natural Components (M) Sdn Bhd
(Mary Shakila Azariah) [2010] 2 ILR 513
Terms and conditions - Unilateral variation of contract by the company - Claimant refusing to accept variation of terms and subsequently terminated from service - Effect of - Whether the company's actions had constituted a dismissal - Effect of - Whether the company's actions were bona fide - Effect of - Whether dismissal without just cause or excuse - Industrial Relations Act 1967, ss. 20(3) & 30(5)
Dr Timothy James MC Avin v. Natural Components (M) Sdn Bhd
(Mary Shakila Azariah) [2010] 2 ILR 513
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
Appeal - Appeal against acquittal - Evidence - Issue overlooked by magistrate - Serious gap in prosecution's case - Whether prima facie case proven against respondent
PP v. Ally Azran Holding Sdn Bhd
(Azman Abdullah JC) [2010] 2 ILR 449
DISMISSAL
Absenteeism - Claimant absent from work - Claimant in KL to attend the domestic inquiry of her COO - Whether she had been formally requested to attend by the company - Evidence adduced by the claimant and company - Effect of - Whether the claimant had been aware of the COO's suspension officially or otherwise - The claimant's conduct - Effect of - Position held by the claimant in the company - Whether she ought to have known - Effect of - Whether the claimant had attended the COO's domestic inquiry in her personal capacity - Evidence adduced - Effect of - Whether clearance from the company had been obtained - Whether the claimant had been absent without leave - Whether the company had succeeded in proving the charges against her - Effect of - Whether dismissal without just cause or excuse - Industrial Relations Act 1967, s. 20(3)
TRI Telecommunication Tanzania Ltd & Anor v. Fathiyah Isa
(Soo Ai Lin) [2010] 2 ILR 553
Absenteeism - Claimant failing to sign the booklet confirming his whereabouts - Effect of - Whether the signing of the booklet had been a requirement of the company - Company deeming him absent on those days and occasions - Whether the company's actions had been reasonable - Effect of - Whether dismissal without just cause or excuse - Industrial Relations Act 1967, s. 20(3)
Rajinderjit Singh Tarlochan Singh v. Dhayu Maju Infrastructure Asia Sdn Bhd
(Ong Geok Lan) [2010] 2 ILR 496
Breach of company rules and policies - Claimant involved in a business in conflict of interest to his employer - Effect of - Whether the company had been aware of the claimant's business - Whether the relationship of trust and confidence had been broken - Effect of - Whether the claimant's terms and conditions of service had specifically prohibited him from carrying on a business in conflict with his employer - Terms and conditions of the claimant's service - Effect of - Whether the company's action of terminating him had been reasonable under the circumstances - Effect of - Whether dismissal without just cause or excuse - Industrial Relations Act 1967, s. 20(3)
Rajinderjit Singh Tarlochan Singh v. Dhayu Maju Infrastructure Asia Sdn Bhd
(Ong Geok Lan) [2010] 2 ILR 496
Constructive dismissal - Demotion - Claimant demoted and made to report to his subordinate - Claimant's salary remained the same - Effect of - Reasons adduced by the respondent company - Whether the company had committed a fundamental breach which had gone to the root of the employment contract between the parties - Effect of - The effect of the demotion on the claimant - Whether the claimant had delayed in walking out of his employment - Whether constructive dismissal had successfully been proven by the claimant - Whether dismissal without just cause or excuse - Industrial Relations Act 1967, ss. 20(3) & 30(5)
Power Kinetics Technology Sdn Bhd v. Lim Koon Keong
(Eddie Yeo Soon Chye) [2010] 2 ILR 637
Constructive dismissal - Demotion - Position held by the claimant - Whether he had been demoted - Evidence adduced by the claimant - Whether he had discharged his burden of proof - Effect of - Whether the claimant had been aware of his rights - Effect of - Whether dismissal without just cause or excuse - Industrial Relations Act 1967, s. 20(3)
YM Raja Mohamood Raja Hamid v. Rangkaian Pengangkutan Intergrasi Deras Sdn Bhd (Rapid KL)
(Ahmad Rosli Mohd Sham) [2010] 2 ILR 538
Constructive dismissal - Transfer - Claimant transferred due to formation of a new company - Whether the transfer had been a unilateral decision - Claimant protesting and making objections known to the company - The company's response - Whether it had been reasonable - Effect of - Whether the contract test had been satisfied - Whether the company by its conduct had evinced an intention to no longer be bound by the contract of employment - Effect of - Whether the claimant had successfully proven constructive dismissal - Whether dismissal without just cause or excuse - Industrial Relations Act 1967, ss. 13(3)(b), 20(3) & 30(5)
Power Kinetics Technology Sdn Bhd v. Lim Koon Keong
(Eddie Yeo Soon Chye) [2010] 2 ILR 637
Insubordination - Claimant confronting his General Manager for scolding the claimant's subordinate - Effect of - Whether his behaviour had undermined the accepted norms of the relationship between an employee and his superior officer - Position held by the claimant in the company - Terms and conditions of the claimant's letter of appointment - Effect of - Whether the claimant's behaviour had constituted insubordination - Effect of - Evidence adduced by the company - Whether it had discharged its burden of proving just dismissal - Effect of - Whether it had managed to prove the charge against the claimant - Effect of - Whether dismissal without just cause or excuse - Industrial Relations Act 1967, s. 20(3)
Rajinderjit Singh Tarlochan Singh v. Dhayu Maju Infrastructure Asia Sdn Bhd
(Ong Geok Lan) [2010] 2 ILR 496
Insubordination - Claimant confronting his General Manager - Company not taking action for nearly a month - Whether it had constituted condonation on the part of the company - Effect of - Conduct of the company after the incident had taken place - Whether the company by its actions had condoned the claimant's misconduct - Effect of - Whether the company's actions had been reasonable - Effect of - Whether dismissal without just cause or excuse - Industrial Relations Act 1967, s. 20(3)
Rajinderjit Singh Tarlochan Singh v. Dhayu Maju Infrastructure Asia Sdn Bhd
(Ong Geok Lan) [2010] 2 ILR 496
Insubordination - Claimant failing to submit his time sheets on time - Effect of - When time sheets finally submitted the contents were incomplete or not done properly - Claimant failing to initial it properly - Effect of - Whether the claimant's conduct had been insubordinate - Position held by the claimant in the company - Whether he should have set an example for his subordinates - Effect of - Whether he had undermined the authority of his employer - Evidence adduced by the company - Whether the company had managed to establish the misconduct against the claimant - Effect of - Whether dismissal without just cause or excuse - Industrial Relations Act 1967, s. 20(3)
Rajinderjit Singh Tarlochan Singh v. Dhayu Maju Infrastructure Asia Sdn Bhd
(Ong Geok Lan) [2010] 2 ILR 496
Insubordination - Claimant failing to report for duty at the company as instructed - Defences put forward by the claimant - Whether they had been sustainable - Effect of - Whether the claimant had shown a lackadaisical attitude towards her job - Whether the company had succeeded in proving the charges against her - Effect of - Whether dismissal had been without just cause and excuse - Industrial Relations Act 1967
TRI Telecommunication Tanzania Ltd & Anor v. Fathiyah Isa
(Soo Ai Lin) [2010] 2 ILR 553
Insubordination - Claimant "offered" a temporary transfer to Namibia - Claimant declining and giving his reasons for the same - Company not accepting his explanations and insisting he go on transfer - Whether the claimant's transfer had been necessary for the exigencies of his employer and its business - Effect of - Whether the "offer" to be transferred had been a superior order - Whether the claimant's refusal to abide by the same had amounted to willful disobedience and insubordination - Effect of - Whether there had been any mala fide intent on the part of the company in transferring the claimant - Evidence adduced by the company - Whether it had discharged its burden of proving just dismissal - Effect of - Whether it had managed to prove the charge against the claimant - Effect of - Whether dismissal without just cause or excuse - Industrial Relations Act 1967, s. 20(3)
Mohd Khidzin Sallehudin v. Ramatex Textiles Industrial Sdn Bhd
(Mariah Ahmad) [2010] 2 ILR 579
Insubordination - Claimant "offered" a temporary transfer to Namibia - Whether it had been detrimental to him - Evidence adduced by the claimant - Whether sufficient to prove detriment to him - Effect of - Whether the transfer had been on short notice - Evidence adduced by the claimant - Effect of - Whether the company's actions had been reasonable - Effect of - Whether dismissal without just cause or excuse - Industrial Relations Act 1967, s. 20(3)
Mohd Khidzin Sallehudin v. Ramatex Textiles Industrial Sdn Bhd
(Mariah Ahmad) [2010] 2 ILR 579
Notice of termination - Forced resignation - Claimant applying for, negotiating settlement sum and accepting VSS payments - Effect of - Whether there had been any evidence of harassment, compulsion, undue advantage, oppression or unfair labour practice on him to accept the VSS - Whether his acceptance of the VSS had been voluntary - Evidence adduced by the parties - Whether it had been sufficient to discharge their burden of proof - Effect of - Whether dismissal without just cause or excuse - Industrial Relations Act 1967, s. 20(3)
YM Raja Mohamood Raja Hamid v. Rangkaian Pengangkutan Intergrasi Deras Sdn Bhd (Rapid KL)
(Ahmad Rosli Mohd Sham) [2010] 2 ILR 538
Retrenchment - Claimants accepting VSS - What VSS is - Implications of VSS - Effect of - Terms of VSS offered to the claimants more favourable than the termination benefits provided under the 2003-2006 Collective Agreement - Effect of - Claimants accepting the VSS whilst the 2003-2006 Collective Agreement still pending in the Industrial Court - What the claimants should have done to safeguard their positions - Effect of - Whether the claimants allegations had been bare allegations unsupported by documentary proof - Effect of - Industrial Relations Act 1967, ss. 26(2) & 30(4)
Kesatuan Pekerja-Pekerja Perusahaan Simen (SM) v. Associated Pan Malaysia Cement Sdn Bhd
(Ong Geok Lan) [2010] 2 ILR 621
DOMESTIC INQUIRY
Procedural impropriety - Whether it had been carried out properly and in compliance with the rules of natural justice - Factors to consider - Effect of - Industrial Relations Act 1967
TRI Telecommunication Tanzania Ltd & Anor v. Fathiyah Isa
(Soo Ai Lin) [2010] 2 ILR 553
EVIDENCE
Witness - Conflicting evidence - Claimant's version and firm's version in direct contradiction to one another - What the court would have to do - Factors to consider - Where the burden of proof had lain - Whether it had been discharged accordingly - Effect of - Whether the original reference should be enlarged - In what circumstances could it be enlarged - Effect of - Industrial Relations Act 1967, s. 20(3)
Premela Balakrishnan v. Chop Swee Hin Chan
(Fredrick Indran X A Nicholas) [2010] 2 ILR 485
INDUSTRIAL COURT
Procedure - Pleadings - Claimant's defence of the tender meeting directive not pleaded - Effect of - Whether it had been a mere afterthought - Claimant raising it for the first time in the hearing before the Court - Effect of - Industrial Relations Act 1967
TRI Telecommunication Tanzania Ltd & Anor v. Fathiyah Isa
(Soo Ai Lin) [2010] 2 ILR 553
Procedure - Pleadings - Filing of Supplementary Statement in Reply - No provision for such filing in the rules - Effect of - Respondent applying to amend Statement in Reply - Reasons adduced for the same - Whether the amendments should be allowed - Factors to consider - Whether the interests of justice would be served by such amendments - Effect of - Powers of the court - Industrial Relations Act 1967, ss. 29(g) & 30(5)
Kesatuan Eksekutif Airod Sdn Bhd v. Airod Sdn Bhd
(Franklin Goonting) [2010] 2 ILR 571
LABOUR LAW
Employment - Definition of wages - Whether includes commission - Employees Provident Fund Act 1951, s. 2
PP v. Ally Azran Holding Sdn Bhd
(Azman Abdullah JC) [2010] 2 ILR 449
Provident Fund - Failure to contribute - Whether respondent was employer - Whether Edaran Otomobil Nasional (EON) Sdn Bhd had caused respondent to default in payment of contribution
PP v. Ally Azran Holding Sdn Bhd
(Azman Abdullah JC) [2010] 2 ILR 449
TRADE DISPUTE
Collective Agreement - Parties to the agreement - Whether should include the words "and its successors, assignees or transferees" - Factors to consider - Effect of - Industrial Relations Act 1967, ss. 17(1) & 32
Kesatuan Kebangsaan Pekerja-Pekerja Hotel, Bar Dan Restoran Semenanjung Malaysia v. Hotel Equatorial (M) Sdn Bhd
(Ahmad Terrirudin Mohd Salleh) [2010] 2 ILR 463
Collective Agreement - Terms and conditions - Annual leave - Union seeking provision that approval of annual leave should be notified to the applicant within 3 days failing which such leave will be deemed approved - Hotel contending that they have prerogative whether or not to grant annual leave and that should not be taken away from them - Factors to consider - Whether union's proposal had been reasonable - Effect of - Industrial Relations Act 1967, s. 26(2)
Kesatuan Kebangsaan Pekerja-pekerja Hotel, Bar Dan Restoran Semenanjung Malaysia v. Hotel Equatorial (M) Sdn Bhd
(Ahmad Terrirudin Mohd Salleh) [2010] 2 ILR 463
Collective Agreement - Terms and conditions - Claimants accepting VSS on the assurance that they would be able to claim backwages and outstanding allowances - Claimant's accepting VSS on those assurances - Claimants subsequently claiming backwages and allowances - Company refusing to pay - Effect of - Whether the persons who had given the said assurances had the authority to do so - Effect of - Industrial Relations Act 1967, ss. 26(2) & 30(5)
Kesatuan Pekerja-Pekerja Perusahaan Simen (SM) v. Associated Pan Malaysia Cement Sdn Bhd
(Ong Geok Lan) [2010] 2 ILR 621
Collective Agreement - Terms and conditions - Claimants accepting VSS from the company - Subsequently the 2003-2006 Collective Agreement concluded and executed between the company and the union - Whether the claimants had come within the scope of the 2003-2006 Collective Agreement - Wordings of the 2003-2006 Collective Agreement - No express terms that they would be included - Whether such a term could be implied - Whether the claimants had been entitled to claim for backwages and outstanding allowances thereunder - Effect of -Industrial Relations Act 1967, ss. 26(2) & 30(5)
Kesatuan Pekerja-Pekerja Perusahaan Simen (SM) v. Associated Pan Malaysia Cement Sdn Bhd
(Ong Geok Lan) [2010] 2 ILR 621
Collective Agreement - Terms and conditions - Public holiday - Whether unions proposal for an additional public holiday had been reasonable - Hotel contending that an additional public holiday would raise the hotel's costs - Factors to consider - The current practice of other hotels - Effect of - Industrial Relations Act 1967, ss. 26(2) & 30(5)
Kesatuan Kebangsaan Pekerja-pekerja Hotel, Bar Dan Restoran Semenanjung Malaysia v. Hotel Equatorial (M) Sdn Bhd
(Ahmad Terrirudin Mohd Salleh) [2010] 2 ILR 463
Collective Agreement - Terms and conditions - Proposals put forward by the company - Rationale behind it - Whether the proposed terms had been reasonable - Factors to consider - Effect of - Surrounding considerations to consider in making the award - Effect of - Industrial Relations Act 1967, ss. 26(2) & 30(5)
Kesatuan Kebangsaan Pekerja-Pekerja Akhbar v. Sun Media Corporation Sdn Bhd
(Susila Sithamparam) [2010] 2 ILR 591
Collective Agreement - Terms and conditions - Retrenchment and redundancy benefits - Union seeking an additional 20 days wages and 30 days wages for employees who have completed their service for less than 3 years and more than 3 years respectively - Hotel objecting to the use of the word "wages" as it included elements of service charges - Hotel seeking to maintain the use of the word "basic wages" - Difference between the two words - Effect of - Factors to consider - Industrial Relations Act 1967, ss. 26(2) & 30(5)
Kesatuan Kebangsaan Pekerja-pekerja Hotel, Bar Dan Restoran Semenanjung Malaysia v. Hotel Equatorial (M) Sdn Bhd
(Ahmad Terrirudin Mohd Salleh) [2010] 2 ILR 463
Collective Agreement - Terms and conditions - Salary structure - Whether the hotel would suffer any financial incapacity if it had to pay the increment proposed - Hotel not pleading financial incapacity - Effect of - Whether the CPI formula had to be followed strictly - Factors to consider - Effect of - Industrial Relations Act 1967, ss. 26(2) & 30(5)
Kesatuan Kebangsaan Pekerja-pekerja Hotel, Bar Dan Restoran Semenanjung Malaysia v. Hotel Equatorial (M) Sdn Bhd
(Ahmad Terrirudin Mohd Salleh) [2010] 2 ILR 463
Collective Agreement - Terms and conditions - Sick leave and hospitalization - Union seeking an additional 30 days if hospitalization is necessary - Whether the union's proposal had been reasonable - Factors to consider - A comparison with other hotels - Effect of - Industrial Relations Act 1967, s. 26(2)
Kesatuan Kebangsaan Pekerja-pekerja Hotel, Bar Dan Restoran Semenanjung Malaysia v. Hotel Equatorial (M) Sdn Bhd
(Ahmad Terrirudin Mohd Salleh) [2010] 2 ILR 463
Collective Agreement - Terms and conditions - Special paid leave - Proposed new article - Whether it had been offered by other hotels - Whether it would go a long way towards goodwill - Hotel seeking to limit it to RM100 - Reasons for the same - Effect of - Factors to consider - Industrial Relations Act 1967, ss. 26(2) & 30(5)
Kesatuan Kebangsaan Pekerja-pekerja Hotel, Bar Dan Restoran Semenanjung Malaysia v. Hotel Equatorial (M) Sdn Bhd
(Ahmad Terrirudin Mohd Salleh) [2010] 2 ILR 463
INDEKS PERKARA
KETIDAKPATUHAN
Perjanjian Bersama - Syarikat gagal untuk mematuhi peruntukan dalam Perjanjian Bersama - Sama ada ianya menunjukkan bahawa syarikat tidak bertindak adil dan tidak menghormati hak pekerja - Kesannya - Apa yang seharusnya dilakukan oleh syarikat - Kesannya - Akta Mahkamah Perhubungan 1967, ss. 20(3) dan 30(5)
Soosai Raja Savarmuthu lwn. Tamil Nesan (M) Sdn Bhd
(Hamdan Indah) [2010] 2 ILR 525
PEMBUANGAN KERJA
Kehadiran - Kelewatan - YM didakwa hadir lewat ke pejabat - Keterangan yang dikemukakan oleh syarikat - Sama ada mencukupi untuk membuktikan salahlaku YM - Kesannya - YM pernah merayu terhadap salahlaku tersebut kepada syarikat dan dimaafkan - Sama ada tindakan syarikat tersebut merupakan suatu condonation ke atas salahlaku YM - Kesannya - Sama ada pembuangan kerja YM telah dilakukan atas alasan yang adil dan bersebab - Akta Mahkamah Perhubungan 1967, ss. 20(3) dan 30(5)
Soosai Raja Savarmuthu lwn. Tamil Nesan (M) Sdn Bhd
(Hamdan Indah) [2010] 2 ILR 525
Ketidakpatuhan terhadap polisi syarikat - Kelewatan - YM didakwa menghasut pekerja untuk mogok - Keterangan yang dikemukakan oleh syarikat - Sama ada mencukupi untuk membuktikan salahlaku YM - Kesannya - Sama ada pembuangan kerja YM telah dilakukan atas alasan yang adil dan bersebab - Akta Mahkamah Perhubungan 1967, ss. 20(3) dan 30(5)
Soosai Raja Savarmuthu lwn. Tamil Nesan (M) Sdn Bhd
(Hamdan Indah) [2010] 2 ILR 525
Ketidakturutan - YM didakwa enggan membaca proof sebuah artikel - Keterangan yang dikemukakan oleh syarikat - Sama ada keterangan syarikat merupakan kata dengar - Sama ada keterangan kata dengar boleh diterima sebagai bukti - Kesannya - Sama ada mencukupi untuk membuktikan salahlaku YM - Kesannya - Sama ada pembuangan kerja YM telah dilakukan atas alasan yang adil dan bersebab - Akta Mahkamah Perhubungan 1967, ss. 20(3) dan 30(5)
Soosai Raja Savarmuthu lwn. Tamil Nesan (M) Sdn Bhd
(Hamdan Indah) [2010] 2 ILR 525
Pekerja percubaan - Tempoh percubaan YM dilanjutkan - Sebabnya - Sama ada YM ditegur kerana salahlaku menghantar e-mel yang memburukkan dan merendahkan kuasa CEO - Kesannya - Bukti yang dikemukakan oleh syarikat - YM diberhentikan secara tiba-tiba - Sebab pemberhentian YM - Kesannya - Sama ada pembuangan kerja YM adalah tanpa alasan atau sebab yang adil - Akta Perhubungan Perusahaan 1967, s. 20(3)
Ahmad Shukri Abdul Hamid lwn. THT Integrated Solutions Sdn Bhd
(Hamdan Indah) [2010] 2 ILR 653
Salahlaku - Sama ada YM telah melakukan salahlaku kerana menggunakan kata-kata kesat dan menghina - Kesannya - Bukti yang dikemukakan oleh syarikat - Sama ada perbalahan yang wujud antara YM dan COW1 merupakan "personal grudge" - Sama ada salahlaku YM dibuktikan - Apa yang seharusnya dilakukan oleh YM - Sama ada tindakan syarikat memberhentikan perkhidmatan YM merupakan perlanggaran syarat perlantikan - Kesannya - Sama ada pembuangan kerja YM adalah tanpa alasan atau sebab yang adil - Akta Perhubungan Perusahaan 1967, s. 20(3)
Ahmad Shukri Abdul Hamid lwn. THT Integrated Solutions Sdn Bhd
(Hamdan Indah) [2010] 2 ILR 653
CASE OF THE WEEK
AZIM ABU BAKAR lwn. PELEPAS LOGISTICS SERVICES SDN BHD
PEMBUANGAN KERJA: Pemecatan secara konstruktif - Pertukaran dalam fungsi pekerjaan YM - Pencapaian kerja YM tidak memuaskan - Surat amaran dikeluarkan - Sama ada syarikat berhak mengeluarkan surat amaran - Kesannya - Syarikat menyenaraikan dan mengatur semula skop pekerjaan YM - Sama ada dilakukan secara bona fide - Kesannya - Hanya "reporting line" YM diubah - Kesannya - Sama ada perubahan dalam "reporting line" YM merupakan suatu "demotion" - Faktor-faktor yang harus diambil kira - Kesannya - Sama ada tindakan syarikat merupakan perlanggaran yang melibatkan asas kontrak antara mereka - Kesannya - Sama ada pembuangan kerja adalah tanpa alasan atau sebab yang adil - Akta Perhubungan Perusahaan 1967, s. 20(3)
PEMBUANGAN KERJA: Pemecatan secara konstruktif - Gaji - YM tidak menerima kenaikan gaji - Sama ada kontrak perkhidmatan beliau mewajibkan syarikat memberikannya kenaikan gaji setiap tahun - Kesannya - Sebabnya kenaikan gaji tidak diberikan kepada YM - Sama ada tindakan syarikat tersebut menunjukkan niatnya untuk tidak lagi meneruskan dengan kontrak perkhidmatan YM - Sama ada dibuktikan oleh YM - Kesannya - Sama ada pembuangan kerja adalah tanpa alasan atau sebab yang adil - Akta Perhubungan Perusahaan 1967, s. 20(3)
PEMBUANGAN KERJA: Pemecatan secara konstruktif - Pertukaran dalam fungsi pekerjaan YM - Bila dibangkitkan oleh YM - Sama ada masa yang diambil oleh YM untuk membangkitkannya merupakan "condonation" - Kesannya - Akta Perhubungan Perusahaan 1967
ILR Bulletin
To Subscribe/Unsubscribe go to http://www.cljlaw.com/ilrsubscribefrm.asp
Copyright ©1997 - 2010 CLJ Legal Network Sdn
Bhd (192353 V)
Email: enquiries@cljlaw.com
Phone: 603-42705421(DL) 603-42705400(GL) Fax No : 603-42705402