Wednesday, August 5, 2015

Repeal MAS Law That Suspends Or Deny Existing Worker And Trade Union Rights And Access To Justice - 64 kumpulan



Kenyataan bersama yang dikeluarkan 64 organisasi termasuk 23 Kesatuan Sekerja Malaysia
 
Media Statement-    4 August 2015

Repeal MAS Law That Suspends Or Deny Existing Worker And Trade Union Rights And Access To Justice – Laws that deny worker rights to assist businesses should never be enacted
We, the undersigned 64 civil society organizations, trade unions and concerned groups, are disturbed by the Malaysian government’s unjust use of an Act of Parliament to suspend and/or deny existing worker rights in law, including also access to justice mechanisms, for the benefit of a private business and employer, being the Malaysian Airlines System Berhad(MAS Bhd), now wholly owned private company by Malaysia’s sovereign wealth fund, Khazanah Nasional Berhad, a company.
Malaysia tabled and passed speedily the Malaysian Airline System Berhad (Administration) Act 2015 [Act 765], which came into force on 20/2/2015. This Act is most unjust to workers and trade unions of employees of the airline.

The Act, in section 11, states that “…on the appointment of the Administrator, a moratorium shall take effect during which… (e) no proceedings and no execution or other legal process in any court or tribunal may be commenced or continued with, and no distress may be levied, against the Administered Companies or their property except with the prior written consent of the Administrator;” – whereby the Administered company includes MAS Bhd, its wholly owned subsidiaries and some partially owned subsidiaries. The Administrator was appointed on or about 25/5/2015, and the period of administration could last for a maximum period of 2 years commencing from the date of the appointment of the Administrator.

What is disturbing is that when administration and moratorium ends, all monies, assets and business of MAS Bhd would most likely be transferred to a new legal entity Malaysian Airline Berhad(MAB). MAS Bhd would most likely be left an empty shell.

Worker Claiming Rights Cases Against MAS Bhd – Stopped and May Not Proceed

There are currently many cases initiated and filed, now pending before access to justice mechanisms, including tribunals and courts between workers and MAS Bhd, the employer,   claiming wrongful dismissal and/or other worker rights, or between trade unions and MAS Bhd. The effect of the moratorium is that all these actions and cases will stop, and not proceed further until administration of MAS Bhd ends.

At the end, when moratorium is lifted, MAS Bhd would most likely be an empty shell – with no work and no money. Hence, it will be workers and trade unions that will suffer. Workers and Trade Unions do not just lose their right to justice, but also will have to shoulder additional loses, including all the monies utilized for lawyer and court fees,  time and others. For many workers, it may also mean loss of wages for the days they could not work because they had to attend at relevant departments, tribunal or court in their pursuit for justice. Hence, not only will workers and trade unions be denied justice, but will suffer even more injustice by reason of this anti-worker legislation.

Right To Join Parties To Satisfy Worker Claims Against MAS Bhd Denied

Normally, when the employer has lost the ability to provide remedies, damages or compensation to satisfy the claims of the worker, to ensure justice, the worker can proceed with an application to join third parties to the suit, possibly the owners (Khazanah Nasional) or others.

This MAS Act now unjustly prevents this ability to join parties, in amongst others, in section 25(2), which states that “ The Malaysia Airlines Berhad, the appointer and the Administrator shall not be named as a party in any claim or application made or joined as a party in any proceeding commenced or continued by or on behalf of any employees or former employees of the Administered Companies pursuant to the Industrial Relations Act 1967 [Act 177], Employment Act 1955 [Act 265], Sabah Labour Ordinance 1950 [Sabah Cap. 67], Sarawak Labour Ordinance 1952 [Sarawak Cap. 76] or the Trade Unions Act 1959 [Act 262].’
In fact, section 25(1) says clearly, amongst others, that ‘…the Administered Companies, the Administrator, appointer or the Malaysia Airlines Berhad shall not—(a) be regarded as the successor, assignee or transferee or a successor employer to the Administered Companies; (b) be liable for any obligation relating to any retirement plan or other post-employment benefit plans in respect of the employees or former employees of the Administered Companies or any predecessor of the Administered Companies that exists prior to the assumption of control or appointment; or (c) be liable for any sum which is calculated by reference to a period of time prior to the Malaysia Airlines Berhad becoming the employer of the person in question…’

Same Owner of both MAS Bhd and new Malaysian Airline Berhad(MAB)

Considering that the it is Khazanah Nasional that is the sole owner of MAS Bhd, and also the new company MAB, clearly all that is happening is really nothing other than the ‘same person changing shirts’ – and justice would demand that the new entity MAB or the owner, Khazanah, should be justly taking over the obligation and responsibility of MAS Bhd especially for cases involving worker and trade union rights.

The new MAB and MAS Bhd, both owned by Khazanah, really is nothing other that the same owner forming a new company to escape responsibility and liability to workers, is also supported by the following:-

a.      Christoph Mueller, the new chief executive of MAS Bhd was appointed on 1/5/2015, would later assume the same position with MAB. Same CEO for MAS Bhd, and new MAB?

b.      When the employees of MAS Bhd received their termination letters in early June 2015, those that were offered employment by the new MAB, were offered a different termination package from those not offered employment in MAB. Those offered employment in MAB, which was to take effect from 1/9/2015, were asked to continue coming in to work in MAS Bhd, while the others, about 6,000, were asked to stop coming in to work with the assurance they will continue to receive normal salary but could not commence employment with another employer before 31/8/2015 unless they first get approval of MAS Bhd’s Human Resource Department. For many airline employees, other than basic wages, income from allowances and such if they are working makes up sometimes 50% or more of their monthly take home income. Rightly, all employees of MAS Bhd, irrespective of whether they will be later employed in MAB, should have received the same benefits and ex-gratia on termination by MAS Bhd.
In the name of justice, MAB or Khazanah or the Malaysian government should really take over the obligation of any or all claims of employees and trade unions against MAS Bhd.

Avoiding Just Principles of Lay-Off and Termination

When an employer wants to reduce staff, they would justly retrench the number of workers they no longer need – and there are just  requirements that need to be complied in any retrenchment exercise like the ‘Last In First Out’(LIFO) principle. Here, this is avoided by MAS Bhd simply terminating all employees on 31/8/2015. Justly, the about 6,000 who were no longer required to come into work since June, should have been laid off then and there and paid all their entitlements.

Union Busting?

With the termination of all employees of Malaysia Airlines Systems Bhd (MAS Bhd), it would also mean the demise of about 7 in-house trade unions.

The only national trade union, the National Union of Flight Attendants Malaysia, managed to  show support of 62.73% of the qualified employees, and obtain the Minister’s order that made it  a recognized union in MAS Bhd. Rather than accept this, MAS Bhd  went  for judicial review challenging the Minister’s decision. NUFAM alleges that only 2 out 10 executive committee members of the Union, who are employees in MAS Bhd have been offered employment in the new MAB.

As such, this ‘restructuring exercise of the airline’ and this new law can also be considered a means of union busting.

Loss of Regular Employment Until Retirement

Many workers who are regular employees until retirement in MAS Bhd, who have been offered employment in the new MAB find that they will now become precarious employees on short-term contracts, some even on 3 or 6 months employment contracts. There is no law in Malaysia that stipulates that short-term contract employees will continue as employees if the work they were hired to do still exist. Short-term and other precarious forms of employment also would likely deter union formation or involvement, deter workers from claiming rights and facilitate easier exploitation of workers.

Ignoring Worker and Families Financial Security and Wellbeing

Workers in Malaysia have families and dependents, and also many now have monthly loan-repayment obligations, and justly they should be provided secure regular employment until retirement, whereby they still could be terminated for misconducts, or laid off where the employers has to reduce jobs.

Whilst Malaysia says that it is concerned about the airline business, it has demonstrated a serious lack of concern for the welfare and wellbeing of workers.

We therefore urge:-

That the said Malaysian Airline System Berhad(Administration) Act 2015 be repealed, and the effect this Act has had on workers and trade unions be reversed. No law should be enacted to suspend/deny worker rights for selected employers;

That all pending cases with regard to labour matters, be it with workers or unions, shall be justly resolved or settled forthwith by MAS Bhd, and its owners Khazanah Nasional;

That for all worker and trade union cases against MAS Bhd,  MAB and Khazanah Nasional shall agree to be joined in as parties and assume obligations of MAS Bhd to workers;

That if the Malaysian Airlines is desirous of reducing the number of employees, it be done by letting go employees in compliance with the Last In First Out(LIFO) principle and other established just legal principles;

That if the Malaysian Airlines is to be taken over by another entity, like the Malaysian Airlines Berhad(MAB), workers should be employed by MAB as secure regular employees and not by means of precarious forms of employment like short-term contracts;

That Malaysia considers the rights, welfare and wellbeing of workers and their families are just as important, if not more, than the wellbeing and profits of government-owned or linked businesses.  
Charles Hector
Syed Shahir bin Syed Mohamud
Mohd Roszeli bin Majid
Pranom Somwong

For and on behalf the 64 organisations, trade unions and groups listed below

ALIRAN
Airlines Workers' Union Sarawak
Alternative ASEAN Network on Burma (Altsean-Burma)
Asia Monitor Resource Centre(AMRC), Hong Kong
Centro de Reflexión y Acción Laboral, CEREAL (Labour Studies and Action Centre), México
Center for Orang  Asli Concerns (COAC), Malaysia
Clean Clothes Campaign
Club Employees Union Peninsular Malaysia
Committee for Asian Women
CWI Malaysia (Committee For Workers’ International, Malaysia)

Daeduck Employees Union-Ind., CEPZ, Rosario, Cavite, Philippines
Eagle Ridge Golf Course and Residential Estate Employees Union, Cavite, Philippines
Electronic Industry Employees Union (EIEU) Southern Region, Peninsular Malaysia
Electronic Industry Employees Union(EIEU) Northern Region, Peninsular Malaysia
Garment and Allied Workers Union, Haryana, India
Globalization Monitor
Hye Sung Workers Union, CEPZ, Rosario, Cavite, Philippines
Institut PEREMPUAN (Indonesia)
Jaringan Kampung Orang Asli Semenanjung Malaysia(JKOASM)
Kesatuan Pekerja-Pekerja Perodua

Kesatuan Pekerja-Pekerja Mitsui Copper Foil(MCFEU)
Kesatuan Pekerja-Pekerja MHS Aviation Berhad(MHSEU)
Kesatuan Eksekutif AIROD
Kesatuan Pekerja-pekerja Perodua Engine Manufacturing Sdn. Bhd
Kesatuan Pekerja-Pekerja Perusahaan Otomobil Nasional Sdn Bhd (KPP Proton)
Knights For Peace, International
MADPET (Malaysians Against Death Penalty and Torture)
Network of Action for Migrants in Malaysia(NAMM)
Nagkakaisang Manggagawa ng Keyrin(trade union), CEPZ, Rosario, Cavite, Philippines
North South Initiative

Malaysian Humanist and Rationalist Movement ("myHARAM")
Malaysian Trade Union Congress(MTUC)
Metal Industry Employees' Union(MIEU), Malaysia
MAP Foundation, Chiangmai, Thailand
Masyarakat Akar Rumput (MAKAR Indonesia)
Migrante International
Myanmar Ethnic Rohingya Human Rights Organization Malaysia (MERHROM)
National Union of Transport Equipment & Allied Industries Workers (NUTEAIW)
National Union of Flight Attendants Malaysia (NUFAM)
National Union of Hotel, Bar and Restaurant Workers (NUHBRW)

National Union of Journalist (NUJ) Cawangan Utusan Melayu
National Union of Tobacco Industry Workers(NUTIW)
National Union Employees in Companies Manufacturing Rubber Products(NUECMRP)
Non-Metallic Mineral Products Manufacturing Employees Union (NMMPMEU)
NUBE (National Union of Banking Employees)
Paper Products Manufacturing Employees’ Union of Malaysia (PPMEU)
Parti Rakyat Malaysia (PRM)
Peoples Service Organization (PSO)
Perak Women for Women Society (PWW)
PERMAS (Persatuan Masyarakat Selangor & Wilayah Persekutuan)

Persatuan Sahabat Wanita Selangor
Persatuan Kesedaran Komuniti Selangor
Persatuan Komuniti Prihatin Selangor dan Kuala Lumpur
PINAY (Filipino Women's Organization in Quebec), Canada
Pusat KOMAS
Railwaymen's Union of Malaysia (RUM)
Sahabat Rakyat (人民之友)
School of Acting Justly, Loving Tenderly and Treading humbly (SALT)
Solidarity of Cavite Workers, Cavite, Philippines
Tenaga National  Berhad Junior Officers Union (TNBJOU)

Tenaganita
Workers Assistance Center, Inc (WAC),
WH4C (Workers Hub For Change)
Yayasan LINTAS NUSA Batam – Indonesia

Friday, July 24, 2015

Union Malaysia 'takut' berjuang dengan majikan? - asyik buat aduan harapkan kerajaan menyelesaikan?

Bagaimana UNION berjuang dengan majikan menuntut hak, menentang ketidakadilan, dll...?

Masalah kini, cara perjuangan nampaknya hanya dengan 'memfailkan aduan' kepada Jabatan Kementerian Sumber Manusia/Ministry of Human Resources(MOHR) -  di mana akibat ini 'kerajaan' akan masuk cuba mengatasi masalah di antara pekerja/UNION dan majikan - di mana proses ini biasanya adalah panjang 

- bermula mungkin dengan usaha(conciliation) > usaha mendapatkan kedua-dua pihak 'settle';

-   jika tak dapat, ianya mengkin akan dirujuk kepada Mahkamah Buruh(kini Mahkamah Sumber Manusia) atau Mahkamah Perusahaan(Industrial Court)...keputusan kini di tangan pihak ketiga, iaitu Mahkamah > kalau pihak tak setuju, boleh pula buat Judicial Review(Semakan Kehakiman) atau Rayuan(Appeal) kepada Mahkamah Tinggi...Mahkamah Rayuan/Persekutuan...>> semua ini memakan masa lama - bertahun-tahun lamanya...dan ini bukan 'medan perjuangan' yang adil? Sumber dan dana lebih berpihak majikan - bukan pekerja. Kerajaan Malaysia kini pun boleh dilihat lebih berpihak majikan. Undang-undang pun nampaknya pro-majikan [jika dilihat sejarah pindaan undang-undang, adakah terdapat berapa peratus pindaan berpihak pekerja? 0?]

Tapi, jika tak ada UNION pun, pekerja sendiri boleh melakukan ini >>> buat aduan kepada pihak kerajaan berkenaan.

Perjuangan bererti 'LAWAN' - di mana perjuangan diantara UNION dan Majikan harus dilakukan dalam semua arena mengunakan beranika jenis strategi dan cara... [tapi kini hanya SATU arena perjuangan digunakan > proses undang-undang - buat aduan dan biarkan proses undang-undang menyelesaikan pertikaian?]

Membuat Aduan adalah 'strategi terakhir' yang digunakan > Ini pendirian banyak UNION diluar negara...perjuangan/lawan akan dengan majikan mengunakan beranika cara dan gaya... bila semua tak berjaya, dan tak ada opsyen lain, baru akan pergi buat aduan kepada kerajaan...

Kuasa UNION adalah kuasa 'pekerja bersatu' - dan ini adalah kuasa besar yang majikan tidak boleh memandang ringan.

Majikan TAKUT apa yang akan berlaku jika 'pekerja bersatu' dan bertindak > jadi apakah tindakan yang ditakuti...

Majikan TAKUT bahawa reputasi syarikat dan jenama mereka akan tercemar -  semua syarikat mahu dilihat sebagai syarikat baik...adil(dan berlaku adil kepada pekerja dan union)...tidak eksploitasi pekerja...tidak mencemarkan alam sekitar...

Mengapa takut?

Kerana nanti orang ramai dan penguna mungkin akan memberi tekanan kepada majikan untuk lakukan apa yang adil dan wajar - kalau penguna mungkin akan gunakan kuasa penguna untuk 'boikot' barangan/perkhidmatan yang dibekalkan syarikat berkenaan.

Kerana nanti 'supplier' atau syarikat yang membeli barangan syarikat majikan, atau juga Brand besar yang ada kaitan dan hubungan perniagaan akan menilai semula perhubungan mereka > serta juga memberi tekanan kepada majikan menghormati hak asasi dan hak pekerja. Contoh, jika syarikat majikan 'assemble' kereta Volkswagen - ingin diketahui banyak Brand besar saperti Volkswagen juga ada pendirian menghormati hak asasi, hak pekerja dan lain-lain - justeru mereka akan memastikan bahawa semua syarikat yang membekal barangan kepada mereka, atau assembly kereta mereka juga adalah syarikat baik yang berlaku adil dan tidak eksploitasi pekerja... Justeru, jika diketahui ada berlaku pencabulan hak atau kelakuan tidak adil, pasti syarikat dan Brand besar akan juga memberi tekanan kepada syarikat Majikan..

Kerana takut negara lain yang adalah pemilik, pelabur atau merupakan syarikat berurusan dengan syarikat majikan yang ada warganegara negara mereka - negara lain juga akan memberikan tekanan untuk berlaku adil...

Kerana takut kepada kerajaan (kerajaan persekutuan, kerajaan negeri dan kerajaan tempatan) yang memberi keupayaan beroperasi dan permit menjalankan perniagaan disesuatu lokaliti > jika tahu, tekanan juga akan diberikan kepada syarikat majikan untuk berlaku adil...

Kerana takut bahawa pemilik saham dan pelabur akan juga bertindak - Tiada siapa yang baik mahu melabur atau terus menjadi pemegang saham dalam syarikat yang tidak menghormati hak pekerja dan union.

Jadi, apa yang majikan lakukan untuk cuba mengatasi kuasa dan upaya pekerja untuk dedahkan/hebohkan ketidakadilan, sikap tidak adil majikan, pencabulan hak....satu perkara baru adalah dengan menjadikan apa-apa tindakan pekerja di dalam dan di luar masa kerja yang menjejaskan imej syarikat satu 'kesalahan kerja'(Employment Misconduct) - di mana secara wajar, ini tidak boleh dijadikan satu 'kesalahan kerja' atau 'pengingkaran kontrak kerja' khususnya apabila ianya adalah berkenaan isu perjuangan dapatkan hak, mendedahkan pencabulan hak atau ketidakadilan... Malangnya, banyak Union kata OK secara sengaja atau lalai apabila tandatangani CBA {Collective Bargaining Agreement/Perjanjian Bersama}. Begitu juga ramai pekerja tanda tangan kontrak perkhidmatan/kerja yang kata OK ...  Kalau pekerja buat silap, boleh dimaafkan kerana tak tahu...tetapi jika UNION yang buat silap ini, bagaimana... mungkin kena tukar kepimpinan? Mungkin kena betulkan kesilapan ini...

Dalam banyak CBA/CA, ada juga klausa menyatakan bahawa jika ada masalah/runggutan/dispute dengan syarikat majikan, pekerja kena bawa kepada line leader...selepas beberapa hari jika tak ada tindakan...bawa pula kepada Supervisor...selepas itu bawa pula kepada majikan...dsb > Objektif bagus untuk cuba selesaikan masalah...tetapi objektif sampingan adalah untuk memperlambatkan tindakan pekerja/union menghebohkan salah laku syarikat majikan [Soalan: Jika sudah ada Union - bukankah harus pekerja ahli union terus membawa isunya kepada Union, yang akan berurusan terus dengan syarikat majikan untuk menyelesaikan isu berkenaan...apa guna Union kerana pekerja seorang (tanpa penglibatan Union) kena buat semua?]

Yang anihnya, dalam CBA tak ada pula prosidur jika majikan ada 'masalah' dengan pekerja - secara adil, prosidur sama harus terpakai untuk syarikat majikan dan Union? Untuk pekerja, terus sahaja 'show cause'...dan tindakan disiplin... wajarkah?
 
UNION atau pekerja bersatu adalah sangat berkuasa > dan seharus tidak saja terus lari buat aduan >>> kerana bila sudah buat aduan, majikan senang kata bahawa pertikaian sudahpun dirujuk kepada pihak berkuasa > kita tunggu saha proses itu....dan biasa bertahun-tahun masa diambil...

Jika tidak terus lari buat aduan tetapi BERJUANG dengan majikan menuntut keadilan - pasti kemungkinan kejayaan atau penyelesaian akan lebih cepat sampai...

BERJUANG - mesti bersatu dan berjuang, mesti berjuang dengan mendapatkan sokongan luas... dari orang ramai, pengguna, union lain, NGO, kumpulan lain, MP, Senator, ....

PIKET adalah satu yang dibenarkan undang-undang > pekerja bersatu berhimpun dekat premis tempat kerja dan 'hebohkan' ketidakadilan dan merayu sokongan orang ramai...media...dll > di mana tindakan sedemikian akan menjejaskan imej MAJIKAN

Justeru - tak wajar pula dijadikan salahlaku kerja untuk melakukan sesuatu yang menjejaskan imej syarikat...khususnya bila adalah berkenaan perjuangan untuk hak dan keadilan...

BERJUANG --- cara perjuangan penting >>> sekali buat piket lepas itu...tak ada apa-apa...

Perjuangan mesti berterusan ...di mana objektif harus memberikan tekanan berterusan ...dan yang bertambah parah kepada majikan sehingga keadilan dicapai...pasti penyelesaian atau keadilan akan tercapai...

Tindakan UNION yang sangat berkesan ...adalah bila semua pekerja (atau majoriti besar) tidak mahu masuk kerja - ini dipanggil STRIKE atau MOGOK, di mana ini juga dibenarkan undang-undang di Malaysia...tindakan sedemikian akan menjejaskan perniagaan dan keuntungan majikan, dan majikan akan tidak berkemungkinan tidak bertindak melakukan apa yang betul...





Tuesday, July 21, 2015

Should Khalid Atan and the MTUC reps in National Wages Consultative Council resign in protest over Minimum Wages?

Should Khalid Atan and the MTUC reps in National Wages Consultative Council resign in protest over Minimum Wages?

It is sad that the workers' representative are still sitting in the NATIONAL WAGES CONSULTATIVE COUNCIL - their doing so, silently, legitimizes the injustice to workers and their families who really should have started earning higher minimum wages latest since 1/1/2015...Being Union leaders, this may be considered 'betrayal' of workers...

Or maybe, they have been compromised - or maybe they want to be 'good friends' with the government...or maybe the 'allowances' they pocket is something they wish not to lose.
Khalid Atan, being the President of the Malaysian Trade Union Congress(MTUC) should, in my opinion, resign in protest of the failure of the Malaysian government to increase Minimum Wages. 


Who are the members of the NATIONAL WAGES CONSULTATIVE COUNCIL? Why is it that this information is not provided for in the relevant Ministry, being the Ministry of Human Resources Website?

In fact, best if there is a dedicated website for the National Wages Consultative Council? There should be information about the role of this council - as well as reports, including also a place where people could forward information of employers not complying with the Minimum Wages Orders...[It is true that all the Orders and Amendment Orders are on the MOHR Website - but this is not enough]

Section 4 provides:- 

The functions of the Council shall be-
(a) to advise the Government on all matters relating to minimum wages, including its development at the international level;
(b) to make recommendations to the Government on the minimum wages rates and coverage according to sectors, types of employment and regional areas, and other matters relating to minimum wages and wages;
(c) to consult the public on the minimum wages rates and coverage;
(d) to collect and analyse data and information and to conduct research on wages and the socioeconomic indicators;
(e) to coordinate and supervise, and to evaluate the impact of, the implementation of minimum wages;
(f) to review the minimum wages order;
(g) to deliberate on all matters relating to minimum wages;
(h) to disseminate information and analysis on wages; and
(i) to carry out any other functions as it deems fit to enable it to perform its functions effectively or which are incidental to the performance of its functions.
(2) The Council shall have the power to do all things expedient or reasonably necessary for or incidental to the performance of its functions.
Hence, public accessibility is essential - and members of the public should have direct access to this Council to provide the necessary feedback, etc..
 
A Bernama Report (carried by Borneo Post Online on 29/9/2011)
Following is the full list of the members of the council:   
Chairman: Tan Sri Datuk Amar Steve Shim Lip Kiong

Deputy Chairman:
Datuk Dr Syed Mohamad Syed Abdul Kadir (non-executive senior director, CIMB Bank Berhad and former secretary-general, Human Resource Ministry)

Government (Five members):
Dr Sundaran Annamalai (Finance Ministry);
Dr Mohd Gazali Abas (Economic Planning Unit);
Datuk Mat Aron Deraman (Public Service Department);
G Alagasan (International Trade and Industry Ministry)
Mohd Sahar Darusman (Human Resource Ministry)
Workers’ Representatives (Six members): 
Mohd Khalid  Atan (MTUC – Timber Employees Union);
Abdul Halim Mansor (MTUC secretary-general – National Union of Petroleum and Chemical Industry Workers);
G Rajasekaran (Metal Industries Employees Union);
Andrew Lo Kian Nyan (MTUC Sarawak secretary);
Catherine Jikunan (MTUC Sabah secretary)
A Navamukundan (National Union of Plantation Workers).

Employers’ representatives (six members):
Datuk  Azman   Shah   Datuk  Seri Haron  (Malaysian Employers Federation (MEF) president);
Tan Sri Dr Mohd Noor Ismail (Malayan  Agricultural Producers Association   president);
Shamsuddin  Bardan (MEF executive   director),
Dato Henry Lau  Lee  Kong (Sarawak Timber Association secretary-general),
Alan  Khoo  Choom  Kwong (Sabah Employers Consultative Association chairman);
sixth member yet to be named.

Other members:
Tan Sri Prof Emeritus Anuwar Ali  (president/vice-chancellor Open University of  Malaysia);
Tan Sri Datuk Mustafa Mansur  (board member, Malaysian Productivity Corporation);
Datuk Marimuthu Nadason (president Fomca/Malaysian Association   of   Standards  Users);
Dr Zakariah Abdul Rashid (executive director, Malaysian Institute   of   Economic   Research);
Chung Hon Cheong (Independent non-executive director, Tenaga Nasional Berhad/special advisor to Johor Corporation (JCorp).

Secretary: Kua Abun (Secretary, Policy Division, Human Resource Ministry). — Bernama
Now, section 8(1) of the National Wages Consultative Council Act 2011 states, "(1) The members of the Council shall hold office for a term not exceeding three years and may be reappointed."
The Minister, however, seems to have the power to revoke the appointment [sec.10(1) -  "The Minister may, at any time, revoke the appointment of a member of the Council."]
And members of the Council can resign...[Sec. 10(2) -  'A member of the Council may resign from office by giving thirty days' written notice to the Minister."]

3 years have certainly passed - so the question is as to who now sits in the National Wages Consultative Council.

Allegedly, the workers' representatives in the Council now are:- 


Mohd Khalid  Atan (MTUC President – Timber Employees Union, )
A. Balasubramaniam (MTUC  Deputy Secretary General, Union of Employees of Port Ancillary Services Suppliers (UNEPASS)) 

Andrew Lo Kian Nyan (MTUC Sarawak secretary); 
Catherine Jikunan (MTUC Sabah secretary) 
A Navamukundan (National Union of Plantation Workers).


Now, according to law, section 25,  


(1) The Council shall, at least once in every two years, review the minimum wages order.
(2) Notwithstanding subsection (1), the Council may, on its own accord or upon the direction of the Government, review the minimum wages order.
The Council has a mandatory duty to review the minimum wages order at least once every 2 years - note the last order was the Minimum Wages Order 2012 (P.U. (A) 214) was made on 16 July 2012
 
It is clear that the Council can conduct the review on their own accord - without waiting for any direction of the Government. So, did they do so - or are they just waiting for the government's direction?

For the purposes of conducting a review, section 21 says:- 

Before any recommendation is made under section 22, the Council shall take the following actions-

(a) have consultation with the public on the minimum wages rates and coverage in such manner as the Minister may determine; and
(b) collect and analyse data and information and conduct research on wages and the socioeconomic indicators.
Section 22(1) states:-

(1) Based on the actions taken under section 21, the Council shall, at such time as the Minister may determine, make a recommendation to the Government through the Minister on the following matters:

(a) the minimum wages rates;
(b) the coverage of the recommended minimum wages rates according to sectors, types of employment and regional areas;
(c) the non-application of the recommended minimum wages rates and coverage to any sectors, types of employment and regional areas or to any person or class of persons;
(d) the commencement of the minimum wages order and the different dates for the commencement of the minimum wages order to different sectors, types of employment and regional areas, or to different persons or class of persons; and
(e) other matters relating to the minimum wages, including the implementation of the recommended minimum wages rates and coverage.

Hence, did the Council conduct public consultations - were the workers and their families consulted? Was there an online avenue for consultation? Or is it only the employers that were consulted? It is certainly insufficient to consult just MTUC, some Unions, NGOs - we need public consultation.

Or have the Council just failed in their legal duty to do the review - well, nothing in the media or online on the MOHR website, and as such, could we say that the  NATIONAL WAGES CONSULTATIVE COUNCIL failed in its duties?

Well, the law says that the Government can 

22 (2) The Government may, after considering the recommendation-

(a) agree with the recommendation; or
(b) direct the Council to review the recommendation within the period as the Government may determine and make a fresh recommendation.
Hence, even if the Council had done its review and made its recommendation, the Government has the power to delay matters...

23  Minimum wages order

(1) Where the Government agrees with the recommendation of the Council under paragraph 22(2)(a) or 22(4)(a) or determines the matters under paragraph 22(4)(b), the Minister shall, by notification in the Gazette, make a minimum wages order on the matters specified in paragraphs 22(1)(a) to (e) as agreed to or determined by the Government.

(2) The Minister may, upon the direction of the Government, by notification in the Gazette, amend or revoke the minimum wages order.

Malaysia deserves to know what happened.... 

There is just too much power in the hands of the government, and we see that even the poorest of workers, the minimum-waged worker is not a priority - it is absurd that workers still have to continue earning the same minimum wage since 1/1/2013 (almost 2 years and 7 months ago)...

It is sad that the workers' representative are still sitting in the NATIONAL WAGES CONSULTATIVE COUNCIL - their doing so, silently, legitimizes the injustice to workers and their families who really should have started earning higher minimum wages latest since 1/1/2015...Being Union leaders, this may be considered 'betrayal' of workers...

Or maybe, they have been compromised - or maybe they want to be 'good friends' with the government...or maybe the 'allowances' they pocket is something they wish not to lose - how much is this allowance really? Do the workers' representatives keep it for themselves, or do they give it to their unions? or MTUC? - for after all, many of these persons are already full-timers being paid by their unions and/or MTUC...