MP KERAJAAN MUSNAHKAN HARAPAN PEKERJA - SOKONG PINDAAN AKTA KERJA!

6 Oktober 2011

Beberapa pemimpin utama MTUC telah hadir ke parlimen pada 6hb Oktober 2011 dalam usaha di saat-saat akhir untuk menghalang Pindaan Akta Kerja 1955 dibentangkan oleh Menteri Sumber Manusia-Dato S.Subramaniam.

Antara yang hadir pada hari tersebut adalah Presiden MTUC- Sdra. Khalid Atan, Pengerusi MTUC Selangor/Wilayah - Sdra. Gopalkrishnam, Sdra. Robert Vijandran (Pengerusi A/J IR), Sdra. Mohd Roszeli Majid dan Sdra. Balasubramaniam (Vice President-Private Sector), Sdra. Syed Shahir Syed Mohamud (Mantan Presiden MTUC), Sdra. Sivananthan (Textile Union), Sdra. J.

Solomon (NUBE), Sdra. Maniam(EIWU),Ganesan Murty(BAT), Sdra. Nadarajandan dan Sdra. Vincent(Drink union) Sdra.Niaz Ahmad dan Sdra.Awang, Setiausaha Kewangan MTUC.

Mereka juga telah berusaha melobi dengan tujuan memberi kefahaman khusus berkaitan pindaan Akta tersebut kepada beberapa ahli parlimen. Antara ahli-ahli parlimen yang telah memberikan komitmen untuk menolak pindaan akta tersebut selari dengan desakan MTUC adalah YB Tn Hj Mahfuz Omar,YB Charles Santiago,YB Kula Segaran, MP Lim Kit Siang, YB Dr Hatta Ramli,YB Nurul Izzah,MP Tonny Phua, YB Elizabeth Wong, YB Abdullah Sani serta beberapa ahli parlimen lain yang bersimpati dengan perjuangan kaum pekerja.

Sebelum perbahasan mengenai rang undang-undang pindaan akta tersebut dilakukan,Presiden MTUC juga telah mengadakan satu sidang akhbar di Parlimen. Sidang akhbar tersebut telah diusahakan atas inisiatif YB Charles Santiago (MP Klang). Turut hadir dalam sidang akhbar tersebut ialah MP Ipoh Barat – YB Kula Segaran serta semua pemimpin Kesatuan yang berada di parlimen pada hari tersebut. Presiden MTUC telah menjelaskan sebab-sebab MTUC menolak pindaan akta tersebut dari perspektif MTUC. Manakala kedua-dua MP telah memberikan penjelasan penolakan tersebut berdasarkan rujukan perundangan yang ada serta amalan-amalan perburuhan berdasarkan Contractor for Labour di Negara-negara lain spt Filipina, Indonesia dan Thailand.

Pindaan akta tersebut telah dibahaskan dengan hangat oleh ahli-ahli parlimen selama lebih dari 5 jam. Terdapat ahli parlimen yang melontarkan krirtikan terhadap peranan Kesatuan Sekerja dan mempersoalkan keperluan wujudnya Kesatuan Sekerja di negara ini. Pindaan Akta Kerja 1955 akhirnya telah diluluskan dengan sokongan majoriti oleh ahli-ahli parlimen parti pemerintah.

Akta Kerja: Bacaan kali kedua diteruskan, kata menteri

October 03, 2011

KUALA LUMPUR, 3 Okt — Bacaan kali kedua Rang Undang-undang Kerja (Pindaan) 2010 yang bertujuan melindungi hak pekerja tetap diteruskan pada sesi Dewan Rakyat kali ini walaupun ditentang Kongres Kesatuan Sekerja Malaysia (MTUC).

MTUC mengadakan piket di kawasan Parlimen bagi tadi membantah pindaan itu.

Menteri Sumber Manusia Datuk Dr S Subramaniam (gambar) berkata pindaan akta itu akan membolehkan pemantauan dan pengawalan agensi pembekal tenaga buruh yang lebih sistematik, terutama di kawasan terpencil.

Difahamkan rang undang-undang itu disenaraikan di tempat ke-10 dalam aturan mesyuarat dan tidak pasti bila ia akan dibacakan.

“Ada kejadian di ladang-ladang di mana ada yang didera, dianiaya dan pelbagai lagi, dan kerajaan susah mahu mengambil tindakan kerana tidak tahu siapa pembekal, siapa kontraktor,” katanya kepada pemberita di Lobi Parlimen hari ini.

Beliau mengulas mengenai tindakan sekumpulan anggota MTUC yang berpiket bagi mendesak kementeriannya menarik balik pindaan terhadap Akta Kerja 1955 itu yang didakwa mereka tidak membawa keuntungan selain menindas hak pekerja.

Rang Undang-Undang Kerja (Pindaan 2010) dibentangkan bagi bacaan kali pertama pada sesi Parlimen 8 Julai 2010, namun ditarik balik pada sesi Parlimen 12 Oktober 2010 bagi mengambil kira pandangan saat akhir daripada pelbagai pihak termasuk MTUC mengenai pentakrifan subkontraktor untuk tenaga kerja kepada kontraktor bagi tenaga kerja di bawah Seksyen 2 Akta Kerja 1955.

“Kita dah bincang perkara ini sudah 18 kali, bukan sekali dua dan pandangan mereka diterima, sekarang di saat-saat akhir mereka membuat demikian (piket).

“Tapi niat kita ialah untuk memberi perlindungan kepada pekerja bukan untuk buka ruang ‘outsourcing’ seperti yang dituduh mereka,” katanya.

Subramaniam berkata dengan pindaan itu, kementeriannya akan mempunyai rekod komprehensif pekerja bagi memudahkan urusan pemantauan.

“Kalau mereka didaftar kita boleh berikan perlindungan yang lebih baik, iaitu kita tahu bilangan mereka dan di mana kes aniaya berlaku,” katanya dipetik Bernama Online.

Dr Subramaniam berkata langkah itu juga dilihat jalan yang terbaik memandangkan kerajaan tidak boleh memansuhkan agensi pembekal tenaga buruh yang sudah wujud sekian lama.

“Untuk mengharamkan kegiatan ini sepenuhnya adalah mustahil, kerana amalan perniagaan seperti ini bukan saja berlaku di Malaysia tetapi di seluruh dunia,” katanya.

“Kami berkongsi sentimen MTUC yang mahu memastikan agensi pembekal tenaga dikawal dan mengurangkan tempoh kontrak,” katanya.

MTUC mahu membawa isu itu ke perhatian Perdana Menteri Datuk Seri Najib Razak selepas Kementerian Sumber Manusia bertegas meneruskan bacaan kali kedua.

http://www.themalaysianinsider.com/bahasa/article/akta-kerja-bacaan-kali-kedua-diteruskan-kata-menteri/

WHY MTUC DECLARED A NATIONWIDE PICKETS?

Malaysian Trade Union Congress Proposal on the Employment Act BILL 2011

Short title and commencement

Section

Amendment on BILL

MTUC Proposal

Reason/Comment

Section 1 (1) & (2)



(1) This Act may be cited as the Employment (Amendment) Act 2011.

(2) This Act comes into operation on a date to be appointed by the Minister by notification in the Gazette, and the Minister may appoint different dates for the coming into operation of different provisions of this Act.

MTUC is of the view that the current title should be maintained with the year 1955.

We ought to take pride in the fact that more than 55 years ago, Government of the day look the initiative to set minimum standards and provide legal safeguards for working people. Furthermore by renaming the Act as 2011, without significant changes to the minimum standards, would not have much meaning.

Amendment of Section 2

Section

Amendment on BILL

MTUC Proposal

Reason/Comment

(a)

in the definition of “confinement”, by substituting for the word “twenty-eight” the word “twenty-two”;

MTUC Accepts

(b)

in the definition of “constructional contractor”, by substituting for the word “assigns” the word “assignees”;

MTUC Accepts


(c )

by inserting after the definition of “contractor” the following definition:

‘ “contractor for labour” means a person who contracts with a principal, contractor or sub-contractor to supply the labour required for the execution of the whole or any part of any work which a contractor or sub-contractor has contracted to carry out for a principal or contractor, as the case may be;’;

MTUC strongly reject this amendment

MTUC concedes that the current definition provided for sub-contractor for labour. Although labour supplier system has been in existence for more than 60 years, this unacceptable and exploitative system became more widespread in the last 10 years and the Home Ministry’s decision to issue more than 200 licenses to bring in foreign workers and lease them out to employers further worsened the situation. MTUC has repeatedly highlighted the abuses of this so called outsourcing agents and the HR Ministry also expressed strong reservation against the Labour Supplier system. Furthermore trafficking clearly in violation of Anti-Trafficking in Persons Act.

Labour Supplier system denies trade union and collective bargaining rights to workers engaged under this system. Kindly note that Government has ratified convention 98 on Collective Bargaining Rights.


(d)

by inserting after the definition of “employee” the following definition:

‘ “foreign domestic servant” means a domestic servant who is not a citizen or a permanent resident;’;

MTUC propose for all Domestic Servants

“remove the word “foreign”

Remain status quo

Reason why only foreign domestic servant and what will happen to local domestic servants?

Why should there be discrimination between foreign and local?

(e)

by inserting after the definition of “medical officer” the following definition:

‘ “Minister” means the Minister charged with the responsibility for human resources;’;

MTUC Accepts

(f)

by substituting for the definition of “part-time employee” the following definition:

‘ “part-time employee” means a person included in the First Schedule whose average hours of work per week as agreed between him and his employer are more than thirty per centum but do not exceed seventy per centum of the normal hours of work per week of a full-time employee employed in a similar capacity in the same enterprise;’;

MTUC Rejects the amendment and maintain the current clause

MTUC proposed for 50% or more BUT not less than 70% and to delete “per week” and replace with “per day”.



Government’s proposal will encourage employers to terminate most of the full time employees.

(g)

by inserting after the definition of “registered medical practitioner” the following definition:

‘ “sexual harassment” means any unwanted conduct of a sexual nature, whether verbal, non-verbal, visual, gestural or physical, directed at a person which is offensive or humiliating or is a threat to his well-being, arising out of and in the course of his employment;’;

MTUC Rejects

The definition is redundant due to MTUC has rejected the Section 81A –81G

(h)

by deleting the definition of “sub-contractor for labour”.

MTUC strongly reject this amendment

Reason

Same as stated hereabove.

Amendment of Section 4

Section

Amendment in BILL

MTUC Proposal

Reason / Comment

Section 4

(3) Section 4 of the principal Act is amended by substituting for the words “under section 69 or section 73” the words “or decision under section 69, 69B, 69c, 73 or subsection 81D (4)

Refer to the respective individual Section and sub-section on MTUC comments

Substitution of section 19

4. The principal Act is amended by substituting for section 19 the following section:

(19)

“Time of payment of wages”

19. (1) Subject to subsection (2), every employer shall pay to each of his employees not later than the seventh day after the last day of any wage period the wages, less lawful deductions earned by such employee during such wage period.

(2) Wages for work done on a rest day, gazetted public holiday referred to in paragraphs 60d(1)(a) and (b) and overtime referred to in section 60a shall be paid not later than the last day of the next wage period.

(3) Notwithstanding subsections (1) and (2), if the Director General is satisfied that payment within such time is not reasonably practicable, he may, on the application of the employer, extend the time of payment by such number of days as he thinks fit.”.

MTUC rejects the whole Section 19

MTUC propose to maintain the current provision as it has worked well. The developments in accounting and maintenance of attendance and overtime work records companies are able to compute all necessary data instantly. Government’s proposal is retrogressive.

Amendment of section 22

Section22

5. Section 22 of the principal Act is amended—

(a) by numbering the existing section as subsection (1);

(b) by deleting paragraph (c);

(c) by inserting after paragraph (da) the following paragraphs:

“(db) to enable him to purchase a computer;

(dc) to enable him to pay for medical expenses for himself or his immediate family members;

4 (dd) to enable him to pay for daily expenses pending receipt of any periodical payments for temporary disablement under the Employees’ Social Security Act 1969 [Act 4];

(de) to enable him to pay for educational expenses for himself or his immediate family members;”; and

(d) by inserting after paragraph

(f) the following subsection:

(2) For the purposes of this section, “immediate family members” means the employees’ parents, children, siblings or any other person under the employee’s guardianship.”.

MTUC reject this amendment and maintain the current provision.

Amendment of Part V

6. Part V of the principal Act is amended by substituting for the heading “RELATING TO THE TRUCK SYSTEM” the heading “SYSTEM OF PAYMENT OF WAGES”.

Part V

Part V of the principal Act is amended by substituting for the heading “RELATING TO THE TRUCK SYSTEM” the heading “SYSTEM OF PAYMENT OF WAGES”.

MTUC Accepts

Substitution of section 25

7. The principal Act is amended by substituting for section 25 the following section:

(25)

“Wages to be paid through bank”

(1) The entire amount of wages earned by, or payable to, any employee in respect of any work done by him less any lawful deductions, shall be actually paid to him through payment into an account at a bank, finance company, financial institution or other institutions licensed or established under the Banking and Financial Institutions Act 1989 [Act 372] or any other written law, in any part of Malaysia being an account in the name of the employee or an account in the name of the employee jointly with one or more other persons as stipulated by the employee.

(2) Every employee shall be entitled to recover in the courts so much of his wages, exclusive of sums lawfully deducted under Part IV, as shall not have been actually paid to him in accordance with subsection (1).”.

MTUC accepts the amendment BUT need to amend the Social Security Act so as to recognize the employee trips to the bank to withdraw as traveling in the course of employment.

MTUC propose to add in new clause

1(a)

Notwithstanding clause 1, hereinabove, the employee shall have the right to choose the bank of his choice.

MTUC comment, currently provision allowing the employees either go to the court or to Director of Labour acting under this section

Amendment of Section 25A

8. The principal Act is amended by substituting for the section 25A the following section:

“Payment of wages other than through bank”

(1) Notwithstanding subsection 25(1), an employer may, upon a written request of the employee, other than a domestic servant, make payment of his employee’s wages—

(a) in legal tender; or

(b) by cheque made payable to or to the order of the employee.

(2) In the case of a domestic servant, the employer shall, upon the request of his domestic servant, obtain approval from the Director General for the payment of wages of the domestic servant to be paid in legal tender or by cheque.

(3) The request by the employee under subsections (1) and (2) may be withdrawn by the employee at any time, by notice in writing, to the employer.

(4) The notice referred to in subsection (3) shall take effect at, but not before, the end of the period of four weeks beginning with the day on which the notice is given.

(5) The request of the employee to the mode of payment of wages under subsections (1) and (2) shall not be unreasonably withheld by the employer.

(6) Any dispute arising out of the request by the employee under subsections (1) and (2) shall be referred to the Director General whose decision on the matter shall be final.

(7) Section 69 shall not apply in respect of any dispute under subsection (6).”.

25A . MTUC accepts from 1 – 7.

Amendment of Section 31, Amendment of Part VII and New section 33A

Section 31

Amendment of Part VII

New Section 33A

Section 31 of the principal Act is amended by substituting for the words “sub-contractor for labour”, wherever they may appear, the words “contractor for labour”.

MTUC rejects the amendment in line with the rejection of the contractor for labour and proposed to remove the whole clause.

Amendment of Section 37

(37)

12. Section 37 of the principal Act is amended—

(a) by substituting for paragraph (1)(a) the following paragraph:

“(1)(a) Every female employee shall be entitled—

(i) to maternity leave for an eligible period in respect of each confinement; and

(ii) subject to this Part, to receive from her employer a maternity allowance to be calculated or prescribed as provided in subsection (2) in respect of the eligible period.”;

(b) in paragraph (1)(aa), by substituting for the words “paragraph (a)” the words “subparagraph (a)(i)”;

(c) in paragraph (1)(c), by substituting for the words “paragraph (a)” the words “subparagraph (a)(ii)”;

(d) by substituting for paragraph (1)(d) the following paragraph:

“(d) For the purposes of this Part—

(i) “children” means all natural children, irrespective of age; and

(ii) “eligible period” means a period of maternity leave of not less than sixty consecutive days.”;

(e) by substituting for paragraph (2)(a) the following paragraph:

“(2)(a) A female employee shall be entitled to receive maternity allowance for the eligible period from her employer if—

(i) she has been employed by the employer for a period of, or periods amounting in the aggregate to, not less than ninety days during the nine months immediately before her confinement; and 8

(ii) she has been employed by the employer at any time in the four months immediately before her confinement;”; and

(f) by inserting after subsection (3) the following subsection:

“(4) Any employer who terminates the service of a female employee during the period in which she is entitled to maternity leave commits an offence:

Provided that for the purpose of this section, such termination shall not include termination on the ground of closure of the employer’s business.”.

MTUC accepts the amendment and MTUC is expecting the Government to keep in line with the Government workers 90 days to the private sectors.

Government should take steps to increase the duration of maternity leave to 90 days. The current discriminatory practice should be ended.

Amendment of Section 40 –

Section 40

Section 40 of the principal Act is amended by deleting subsection (3).

MTUC Accepts

Amendment of Section 42 –

Section 42

Subsection 42(2) of the principal Act is amended by substituting for the words “a female employee is dismissed from her employment” the words “the service of a female employee is terminated”.

MTUC Accepts

New Section 44A

New Section 44A

The principal Act is amended by inserting after section 44 the following section:

“Application of this Part irrespective of wages of female employee

44a. Notwithstanding paragraph 1 of the First Schedule, thisPart extends to every female employee who is employed under a contract of service irrespective of her wages.”.

MTUC Accepts

New Section 57A and 57B

“Employment of foreign domestic servant

57a. (1) An employer who employs a foreign domestic servant shall, within thirty days of the employment, inform the Director General of such employment in a manner as may be determined by the Director General.

(2) An employer who contravenes subsection (1) commits an offence and shall, on conviction, be liable to a fine not exceeding ten thousand ringgit.

Duty to inform Director General of termination of service of foreign domestic servant

57b. (1) If the service of a foreign domestic servant is terminated—

(a) by the employer;

(b) by the foreign domestic servant;

(c) upon the expiry of the employment pass issued by the Immigration Department of Malaysia to the foreign domestic servant; or

(d) by the repatriation or deportation of the foreign domestic servant,

the employer shall, within thirty days of the termination of service, inform the Director General of the termination in a manner as may be determined by the Director General.

(2) For the purpose of paragraph (1)(b), the termination of service by a foreign domestic servant includes the act of the foreign domestic servant absconding from his place of employment.

(3) An employer who contravenes subsection (1) commits an offence and shall, on conviction, be liable to a fine not exceeding ten thousand ringgit.”.

MTUC Accepts

As for the 57B. (2) MTUC comment, in the event the employees not able to report to work should give reasonable excuse for his absents.

Amendment of Section 59 –

Section 59

Subsection 59(1) of the principal Act is amended in the proviso by substituting for the words “Employees Social Security Act 1969 [Act 4]” the words “Employees’ Social Security Act 1969”.

MTUC Accepts

Amendments of Section 60 (3) (b)

Section 60 (3) (b)

Paragraph 60(3)(b) of the principal Act is amended by inserting after the word “monthly” the words “or weekly”.

MTUC Rejects to this clause

Current provision and practice do not prevent employers from adopting weekly pay system. The proposed amendment can create new problems with attempt by employers to change the formula for computing daily and hourly rates.

MTUC Propose that all gazette Public Holidays by State Government or Federal Government should be given to the employees.

Amendments of Section 60D –

Section 60 D

Section 60d of the principal Act is amended—

(a) in subsection (1)—

(i) by substituting for the words “a this” the words “at his”;

(ii) in paragraph (a)—

(A) by substituting for the word “ten” the word “eleven”;

(B) by substituting for the word “four” the word “five”;

(C) in subparagraph (iii), by deleting the word “and” appearing at the end of the subparagraph; and

(D) by inserting after subparagraph (iv) the following subparagraph:

“(v) Malaysia Day; and”;

(iii) by substituting for paragraph (b) the following paragraph:

“(b) on any day appointed as a public holiday for that particular year under section 8 of the Holidays Act 1951 [Act 369]”; andEmployment (Amendment) 11

(iv) by substituting for the proviso to subsection (1) the following proviso:

“Provided that if any of the public holidays referred to in paragraphs (a) and (b) falls on—

(i) a rest day; or

(ii) any other public holiday referred to in paragraphs (a) and (b),

the working day following immediately the rest day or the other public holiday shall be a paid holiday in substitution of the first mentioned public holiday.”; and

(b) in paragraph (3)(aaa), by deleting the word “in” appearing after the word “referred”.

MTUC Accepts

MTUC would like to highlight that any holiday falls on off-days should be given an addition one (1) day off.

Any working hours a week with two rest day, holiday falls on the day with one of the day will be counted.

Amendment of Section 60I –

Section 60I

Section 60i of the principal Act is amended—

(a) in subsection (1c), by inserting after the words “on a daily” the words “or an hourly”; and

(b) in subsection (1d), by inserting after the words “on a daily” the words “or an hourly”.

MTUC Accepts

Amendment of Section 60K –

Section 60K

(a) in subsection (1), by substituting for the words “the nearest office of the Director General with the particulars of the foreign employee” the words “the Director General with the particulars of the foreign employee by forwarding the particulars to the nearest office of the Director General”; and

(b) by inserting after subsection (2) the following subsections:

(5) An employer who contravenes subsection (1) commits an offence and shall, on conviction, be liable to a fine not exceeding ten thousand ringgit.”

MTUC Accepts on (1), (2) & (5)

(3) & (4)

“(3) If the service of a foreign employee is terminated—

(a) by the employer;

(b) by the foreign employee;

(c) upon the expiry of the employment pass issued by the Immigration Department of Malaysia to the foreign employee; or

(d) by the repatriation or deportation of the foreign employee,

the employer shall, within thirty days of the termination of service, inform the Director General of the termination in a manner as may be determined by the Director General.

(4) For the purpose of paragraph (3)(b), the termination of service by a foreign employee includes the act of the foreign employee absconding from his place of employment.

But as for the (3) & (4) as follows:-

(3) (c ) should be “upon expiry of employment contract”

(4) Absent of work should with reasonable excuse shall not be deemed as abscond - Refer to 15 (2).

Amendment of Section 69

Section 69

Section 69 of the principal Act is amended in paragraph (2)(ii)—

(a) by substituting for the words “sub-contractor for labour”, wherever they may appear, the words “contractor for labour”; and

(b) by substituting for the word “subcontractor” the word “sub-contractor”.

MTUC rejects this amendment in consistent with our proposal to abolish the contractor in clause to be deleted.

Amendment to Section 69B

Section 69B

Subsection 69b(1) of the principal Act is amended by substituting for the words “one thousand five hundred” the words “two thousand”.

MTUC proposed to five thousand (RM 5,000.00) and does not exceed ten thousand (RM 10,000.00).

This is in line with Government policy to move high income and also to reflect current situation and progressive in nature.

Amendment to Section 73 – to be deleted

Section 73

Subsection 73(1) of the principal Act is amended by substituting for the words “sub-contractor for labour” and “subcontractor for labour” the words “contractor for labour”.

MTUC proposed the whole Section should be deleted

Amendment to Section 77 –

Section 77

Subsection 77(1) of the principal Act is amended by substituting for the words “or 73” the words “,73 or subsection 81d(4)”.

MTUC Accepts

Amendment to Section 79 –

Section 79

Subsection 79(1) of the principal Act is amended by substituting for the words “Electricity Act 1949 [Act 116]” the words “Electricity Supply Act 1990 [Act 447]”.

MTUC Accepts

New Part XV A – SEXUAL HARASSMENT -

New Part XVa

81A – 81 G

MTUC rejects the whole clause Section 81A – 81G

MTUC is of the views that there should be separate stand alone act. JTK do not have sufficient manpower to take the additional load of conducting inquiry.

Amendment of Section 82

Section 82

Subsection 82(1) of the principal Act is amended in paragraph (b) of the proviso by deleting the word “male”.

MTUC Accepts

Amendment of Section 86

Section 86

Section 86 of the principal Act is amended by substituting for the words “section 69” the words “section 69, 69b, 69c or subsection 81d(4)”.

Refer to the respective individual Section and sub-section on MTUC comments

New Section 90A

New Section 90A

The principal Act is amended by inserting after section 90 the following section:

“Protection of officers

90a. No action shall lie or be brought, instituted or maintained in any court against—

(a) the Director General, Deputy Director General or any other officer duly appointed under this Act for Bill 18

or on account of or in respect of any act ordered or done for the purpose of carrying this Act into effect; and

(b) any other person for or on account of or in respect of any act done or purported to be done by him under the order, direction or instruction of the Director General, Deputy Director General or any other officer duly appointed under this Act,

if the act was done in good faith and in a reasonable belief that it was necessary for the purpose intended to be served by it.”.

MTUC Rejects this new section

Government general orders and civil laws are currently adequate.

Amendments of Section 101A

Section 101A

Section 101a of the principal Act is amended—

(a) in subsection (1), by substituting for the words “or a Deputy Director General appointed under paragraph 3(2)(a)” the words “, Deputy Director General or any officer authorized in writing by the Director General”;

(b) in subsection (2), by substituting for the words “or the Deputy Director General”, wherever they may appear, the words “, Deputy Director General or any officer authorized in writing by the Director General”;

(c) in subsection (3), by substituting for the words “or the Deputy Director General” the words “, Deputy Director General or any officer authorized in writing by the Director General”; and

(d) in subsection (5), by substituting for the words “or a Deputy Director General” the words “, Deputy Director General or any officer authorized in writing by the Director General”.

MTUC Accepts

New Section 101B – Offence by body corporate, etc.

New Section 101B

“Offence by body corporate, etc.

101b. Where an offence under this Act has been committed by a body corporate, partnership, society or trade union—

(a) in the case of a body corporate, any person who is a director, manager, or other similar officer of the body corporate at the time of the commission of the offence;

(b) in the case of a partnership, every partner in the partnership at the time of the commission of the offence; and

(c) in the case of a society or trade union, every office-bearer of the society or trade union at the time of the commission of the offence,

shall be deemed to have committed the offence and may be charged jointly or severally in the same proceedings as the body corporate, partnership, society or trade union.”.

MTUC Rejects this new section

Current Civil laws are adequate. MTUC rejects this clause.

Amendments of Section 102

Section 102

Subsection 102(2) of the principal Act is amended—

(a) by substituting for paragraph (i) the following paragraph:

“(i) prescribing fees to be paid for filing of claims under section 69, 69b or 69c and for copies of notes of evidence recorded under Parts XV and XVa;”;

(b) in paragraph (j), by substituting for the full stop a semicolon; and

(c) by inserting after paragraph (j) the following paragraphs:

“(k) prescribing the forms of notice and returns of particulars used under section 60k;

(l) prescribing the procedure to inquire into complaints of sexual harassment under Part XVa;

(m) prescribing the terms and conditions of service of a domestic servant.”.

MTUC Rejects

Akta Kerja: Gabungan MTUC dakwa pindaan langgar Perlembagaan, ILO

Oleh G Manimaran
September 30, 2011

KUALA LUMPUR, 30 Sept — Kerajaan perlu segera menarik balik rancangan pihaknya mahu membawa Rang Undang-undang Kerja (Pindaan) 2010 ke Parlimen bulan depan kerana beberapa peruntukan baru bercanggah dengan Perlembagaan Persekutuan dan konvensyen Pertubuhan Buruh Sedunia (ILO), tegas kesatuan gabungan Kongres Kesatuan Sekerja Malaysia (MTUC).

Pendirian ini dikeluarkan sehari sebelum forum khas MTUC mengenai isu itu dan tiga hari menjelang piket yang dirancang untuk diadakan di hadapan Parlimen.

Sesi Parlimen Oktober-Disember bermula Isnin ini.

“Kami mengulangi desakan kami agar kerajaan Malaysia dengan segera menarik balik Rang Undang-undang Kerja (Pindaan) 2010 dan kemudian adakan perbincangan dan perundingan terbuka yang diperlukan dengan pekerja, kesatuan dan pihak-pihak lain yang berkepentingan sebelum membentangkan semula mana-mana pindaan yang disyorkan ke atas undang-undang buruh,” kata Setiausaha Eksekutif Kesatuan Kebangsaan Pekerja-pekerja Perusahaan Alat-alat Pengangkutan dan Sekutu, Syed Shahir Syed Mohamud dalam satu kenyataan hari ini.

Antara pindaan yang menjadi kebimbangan dan keprihatinan MTUC sekarang ialah pengenalan peruntukan berkaitan dengan sistem kontraktor tenaga kerja.

Bekas presiden MTUC ini berkata, badan induk kesatuan sekerja itu berpendirian bahawa kesemua pekerja di tempat kerja seharusnya digaji terus oleh pemilik-operator di sesebuah tempat kerja, yang menyediakan pekerjaan dan yang ada kawalan dan penyeliaan penuh ke atas tempat kerja dan pekerja masing-masing serta boleh dengan berkesan berurusan dengan pemilik-operator-majikan.

“Kewujudan tenaga kerja majikan lain yang pelbagai di satu tempat kerja yang sama sudah pasti akan melemahkan kesatuan dan kuasa dalam soal berkaitan dengan perjanjian bersama.

“Sehubungan itu, hari-hari penggajian tetap dengan majikan utama kemungkinan akan berakhir dan kita akan balik kepada era hitam (penggajian pekerja), yang pernah dilalui sebelum kemerdekaan. Justeru, sekuriti pekerjaan adalah sangat penting,” katanya lagi.

Syed Shahir juga berkata, persekitaran menggaji pekerja dari pelbagai majikan kontraktor di satu tempat kerja yang sama juga akan membawa kepada layanan yang berbeza kepada pekerja yang digunakan.

“Ini adalah diskriminasi dan akan bertentangan dengan Artikel 8 Perlembagaan Persekutuan yang menjamin kesamarataan,” kata beliau lagi.

Menurut beliau, pendekatan itu juga bertentangan dengan pendirian ILO yang menentang trend semasa beberapa majikan cuba mengelak hubungan langsung antara pekerja dan majikan.

“Malah ILO juga telah tampil dengan garis panduan untuk mengatasi usaha-usaha seperti ini.

“Sesuatu yang menyedihkan kerana Malaysia bertindak bercanggah dengan semangat ini dan sedang cuba untuk menjadikan amalan-amalan ini satu tindakan yang sahih,” katanya lagi.

Tambah beliau, negara ini ada Akta Agensi Pekerjaan Swasta 1981 dan oleh itu, bisnes mendapatkan pekerja dan membekalkan mereka seharusnya tertakluk di bawah undang-undang itu.

Susulan perkembangan awal minggu ini, semalam The Malaysian Insider membawa laporan bahawa MTUC, yang telah mengadakan pertemuan khas dua jam dengan Kementerian Sumber Manusia pagi semalam, tetapi kekal dengan pendiriannya mahu mengadakan piket berhubung pindaan Akta Kerja, Isnin ini.

Bagaimanapun sama ada pendirian MTUC akan berubah ataupun sebaliknya akan diketahui esok selepas forum mengenai rang undang-undang kerja itu di Petaling Jaya.

The Malaysian Insider difahamkan susulan pertemuan dua jam dengan kepimpinan MTUC hari ini, Kementerian Sumber Manusia turut memutuskan untuk menghantar satu pasukan ke forum itu bagi menjelaskan pindaan yang hendak dibawa ke Parlimen pada sesi yang bermula minggu depan.

Forum itu akan dihadiri oleh wakil kesatuan sekerja sektor swasta dan pertubuhan bukan kerajaan.

Empat hari lalu, Kementerian Sumber Manusia mengingatkan MTUC yang bercadang mengadakan tindakan berpiket tidak wajar membangkitkan bantahan mereka di “saat pembentangan di Parlimen.”

“Kementerian ingin menegaskan bahawa sebelum pindaan ini dibawa ke Parlimen untuk dibentangkan, semua cadangan pindaan ini telah melalui proses konsultasi bersama wakil-wakil pertubuhan majikan dan kesatuan sekerja.

“Sebanyak 18 kali sejak awal 2010. Selain itu, draf cadangan pindaan turut telah dipanjangkan untuk pandangan dan maklum balas daripada wakil majikan dan pekerja. Justeru, pindaan ini tidak dibuat secara tergesa-gesa kerana telah melalui proses konsultasi yang komprehensif bersama pihak-pihak yang berkepentingan,” kata Kementerian Sumber Manusia.

Kelmarin, Menteri Sumber Manusia Datuk Dr S Subramaniam berkata, usaha meminda Akta Kerja tidak harus dipandang serong atau disalah faham kerana ia dilakukan untuk kepentingan bekerja.

Pendirian untuk berpiket diputuskan pada mesyuarat majlis am MTUC Ahad lalu.

Bacaan kali kedua Rang Undang-undang Kerja (Pindaan) 2010 telah ditangguhkan dua kali sebelum ini.

Antara lain Rang Undang-undang Kerja didakwa merugikan kaum pekerja kerana jika diluluskan akan membolehkan sistem kontraktor pekerja, yang pernah digunakan sebelum negara merdeka, diamalkan kembali. MTUC mendakwa ia akan merugikan pekerja dari segi kebajikan mereka dan menjejaskan masa depan pergerakan kesatuan sekerja di negara ini.

Selain peruntukan berkenaan sistem kontraktor sosial, MTUC mahu kerajaan memasukkan cuti bersalin 90 hari dan menaikkan had kerja lebih masa sehingga 130 jam sebulan.

http://www.themalaysianinsider.com/bahasa/article/akta-kerja-gabungan-mtuc-dakwa-pindaan-langgar-perlembagaan-ilo/

Labour law changes ‘illegal’, says Klang MP
By Yow Hong Chieh
October 01, 2011

PETALING JAYA, Oct 1 — The proposed changes to labour laws, which trade unions say would promote outsourcing, are “illegal” as middlemen who subcontract work cannot be considered employers, Klang MP Charles Santiago has said.

He said that an employer must be, by definition, the owner and operator of a factory and that an employment contract is only valid if entered into with someone who wields control over tools and the workplace.

“Outsourcing companies are not owner-operators of factories so they cannot become employers,” he told Malaysian Trade Unions Congress (MTUC) members at Wisma TWU here today.

Charles Santiago also said today the amendments would encourage recruitment through outsourcing, which he deemed a “ very dangerous trend”. — file pic
Santiago pointed out that if outsourcing companies were allowed to be employers, workers would not be able to claim benefits from the principal company and would have to pay out of their own pockets for medical care and other benefits.

“So you could be working for Company A but that Company A is no longer your employer because your employer, if this Bill goes through, will be Company S, which is the outsourcing company.

“So if you are hurt at the workplace, who will be responsible?” he said to raucous cries of approval from the 300-odd MTUC members in attendance.

He cited an example of a contract worker injured by a forklift at his place of work who paid RM4,000 to RM5,000 for treatment as the principal company had refused to acknowledge him as an employee.

The amendments would also encourage recruitment through outsourcing, a “very dangerous trend” that would have huge implications for workers’ rights, Santiago also stressed.

He said that, contrary to the Human Resources Ministry’s assurance that the amendments would bolster workers’ rights, such changes would only erode existing rights and jeopardise their welfare.

Santiago added that if the government was concerned over abuse by subcontractors, it should have mooted amendments to the Private Employment Agencies Act 1981, not the Employment Act 1955.

MTUC decided today to proceed with its plans to picket Parliament on Monday over proposed amendments to labour laws, despite an 11th-hour meeting with the Human Resources Ministry.

The decision was made by MTUC council members after representatives from the umbrella body’s 250 trade unions and the ministry failed to break the impasse over Putrajaya’s plans to revise labour laws after the four-hour long forum.

MTUC president Mohd Khalid Atan said he would mobilise at least 1,000 members to stage a protest against the proposed amendments, which are expected to be tabled when Parliament is in session beginning Monday.

He added that MTUC had also agreed to write to the ministry soon asking for the Bill to be withdrawn completely.

The Human Resources Ministry, led by Datuk Dr S. Subramaniam, previously said it had consulted workers’ unions and employers’ associations 18 times since early 2010 before coming up with the amendments.

The ministry is set to present the Bill to amend the Employment Act 1955 for a second reading in the Dewan Rakyat.

The second reading of the Employment (Amendment) Bill 2010 has been postponed twice previously.

Last October, the ministry withdrew the Bill from the second reading to incorporate several changes and add further amendments but has refused to divulge further details.

The Bill was first tabled on July 8 last year and touched on provisions involving sexual harassment in the workplace and the welfare of housekeepers.

It is believed the laws scheduled to be amended include the Employment Act 1955, the Industrial Relations Act 1967 and the Trade Union Act 1959.

http://www.themalaysianinsider.com/malaysia/article/labour-law-changes-illegal-says-klang-mp/

MTUC kekal pendirian, Putrajaya berusaha elak piket

Oleh G Manimaran
September 29, 2011

KUALA LUMPUR, 29 Sept — Kongres Kesatuan Sekerja Malaysia (MTUC) mengadakan

pertemuan khas dua jam dengan Kementerian Sumber Manusia pagi tadi tetapi kekal dengan pendiriannya mahu mengadakan piket berhubung pindaan Akta Kerja Isnin ini.

http://www.themalaysianinsider.com/bahasa/article/mtuc-kekal-pendirian-putrajaya-berusaha-elak-piket/

Kementerian Sumber Manusia mahu meneruskan jadual bacaan kali kedua Rang Undang-undang Kerja (Pindaan) 2010.

Bagaimanapun sama ada pendirian MTUC akan berubah ataupun sebaliknya akan diketahui Sabtu ini selepas forum mengenai rang undang-undang kerja itu di Petaling Jaya.

The Malaysian Insider difahamkan susulan pertemuan dua jam dengan kepimpinan MTUC hari ini, Kementerian Sumber Manusia turut memutuskan untuk menghantar satu pasukan ke forum itu bagi menjelaskan pindaan yang hendak dibawa ke Parlimen pada sesi yang bermula minggu depan.

Forum itu akan dihadiri oleh wakil kesatuan sekerja sektor swasta dan pertubuhan bukan kerajaan.

“Hasil pertemuan hari ini, kementerian berkata mahu menghantar pasukan mereka untuk memberikan penjelasan mereka kepada peserta forum,” kata Timbalan Presiden MTUC Jaafar Majid kepada The Malaysian Insider hari ini.

Menurut Jaafar, meskipun adanya penjelasan kementerian hari ini, pendirian MTUC untuk mengadakan piket pada Isnin ini masih kekal dan tidak berubah.

“Setakat hari ini, setakat sekarang piket diteruskan, pendirian kami tidak berubah. Bagaimanapun selepas forum Sabtu ini, susulan penjelasan kementerian yang akan menghantar satu pasukan pegawai mereka, exco MTUC akan mengadakan mesyuarat dan membuat keputusan... sama ada meneruskan piket atau sebaliknya,” kata beliau.

Mesyuarat pagi tadi dengan MTUC, yang diwakili seramai 10 pemimpin, dipengerusikan oleh Ketua Setiausaha kementerian Datuk Seri Zainal Rahim Seman.

Kelmarin, Kementerian Sumber Manusia mengingatkan MTUC yang bercadang mengadakan tindakan berpiket Isnin ini iaitu hari pertama sesi Parlimen Oktober-Disember — tidak wajar membangkitkan bantahan mereka di “saat pembentangan di Parlimen.”

“Kementerian ingin menegaskan bahawa sebelum pindaan ini dibawa ke Parlimen untuk dibentangkan, semua cadangan pindaan ini telah melalui proses konsultasi bersama wakil-wakil pertubuhan majikan dan kesatuan sekerja.

“Sebanyak 18 kali sejak awal tahun 2010. Selain itu, draf cadangan pindaan turut telah dipanjangkan untuk pandangan dan maklum balas daripada wakil majikan dan pekerja. Justeru, pindaan ini tidak dibuat secara tergesa-gesa kerana telah melalui proses konsultasi yang komprehensif bersama pihak-pihak yang berkepentingan,” kata Kementerian Sumber Manusia.

Semalam, Menteri Sumber Manusia Datuk Dr S Subramaniam berkata, usaha meminda Akta Kerja 1955 tidak harus dipandang serong atau disalah faham kerana ia dilakukan untuk kepentingan bekerja.

Dalam kenyataan kelmarin, Kementerian Sumber Manusia berkata, adalah diharapkan cadangan pindaan ini akan mendapat sokongan daripada semua pihak demi memelihara kebajikan pekerja dan menjamin keharmonian perhubungan perusahaan.

Kenyataan itu dikeluarkan mengulas laporan The Malaysian Insider awal minggu ini memetik Setiausaha Agung MTUC Abdul Halim Mansor berkata mereka akan berpiket pada hari pertama sidang Parlimen bulan depan jika Putrajaya meneruskan perbahasan rang undang-undang buruh tanpa perbincangan di majlis melibatkan tiga pihak.

Pendirian untuk berpiket diputuskan pada mesyuarat majlis am MTUC Ahad lalu.

“Jika benar kerajaan meneruskan perbahasan mana-mana rang undang-undang buruh, khususnya Rang Undang-undang Kerja (Pindaan) 2010, MTUC akan mengadakan piket di kawasan Parlimen pada hari pertama persidangan,” kata Halim.

Bacaan kali kedua Rang Undang-undang Kerja (PIndaan) 2010 telah ditangguhkan dua kali sebelum ini.

Antara lain Rang Undang-undang Kerja didakwa merugikan kaum pekerja kerana jika diluluskan akan membolehkan sistem kontraktor pekerja, yang pernah digunakan sebelum negara merdeka, diamalkan kembali. MTUC mendakwa ia akan merugikan pekerja dari segi kebajikan mereka dan menjejaskan masa depan pergerakan kesatuan sekerja di negara ini.

Selain peruntukan berkenaan sistem kontraktor sosial, MTUC mahu kerajaan memasukkan cuti bersalin 90 hari dan menaikkan had kerja lebih masa sehingga 130 jam sebulan.

http://www.themalaysianinsider.com/bahasa/article/mtuc-kekal-pendirian-putrajaya-berusaha-elak-piket/