Sunday, April 7, 2013
Thursday, March 14, 2013
Cuti Bersalin Berbayar
Wednesday, April 11, 2012
Illegal contract of service.
C143 Migrant Workers (Supplementary Provisions) Convention, 1975
Article 91. Without prejudice to measures designed to control movements of migrants for employment by ensuring that migrant workers enter national territory and are admitted to employment in conformity with the relevant laws and regulations, the migrant worker shall, in cases in which these laws and regulations have not been respected and in which his position cannot be regularised, enjoy equality of treatment for himself and his family in respect of rights arising out of past employment as regards remuneration, social security and other benefits.
2. In case of dispute about the rights referred to in the preceding paragraph, the worker shall have the possibility of presenting his case to a competent body, either himself or through a representative.
3. In case of expulsion of the worker or his family, the cost shall not be borne by them.
4. Nothing in this Convention shall prevent Members from giving persons who are illegally residing or working within the country the right to stay and to take up legal employment.
Somebody quote an ILO convention, particularly the 9th article and give decision to an application, Malaysia has not rectify this one, so it has no effect to the general rule of an illegal contract is VOID.
Monday, March 19, 2012
Pertindihan Prosiding/ Duplicity of Proceeding
Jabatan Tenaga Kerja di bawah Akta Kerja 1955 dan Jabatan Perhubungan Perusahaan/ Mahkamah Perusahaan di bawah Akta Perhubungan Perusahaan 1967, mempunyai bidangkuasanya berbeza tetapi mengadili isu yang sama iaitu pertikaian antara majikan dan pekerja, kedua-duanya mempunyai sebuah Tribunal Pentadbiran berfungsi khusus (Administrative Tribunal with special function) iaitu Mahkamah Buroh dan Mahkamah Perusahaan yang akan meneliti set fakta yang akan dikemukakan oleh pihak-pihak terbabit seterusnya memutuskan pertikaian.
Jila salah-satu bidangkuasa mempunyai halangan melalui undang-undang bertulis, maka bidangkuasa berkenaan harus menarik-diri dari mendengar seterusnya memutuskan set fakta berkaitan, terutama jika dipohon oleh salah satu pihak yang terbabit.
Pertindihan prosiding pula boleh mengakibatkan salahguna proses kehakiman @ abuse of judiaciary function/ court process.
Tuesday, November 22, 2011
Pindaan Akta Kerja 1955
Tuesday, September 27, 2011
Tuntutan Majikan di Mahkamah Buruh
Undang-undang
Seksyen 69 (2)
The powers of the Director General under subsection (1) shall include the power to hear and decide, in accordance with the procedure laid down in this Part, any claim by— ... (iii) an employer against his employee in respect of indemnity due to such employer under subsection 13(1),...
Seksyen 69C 69C.
(1) In the exercise of his powers under subsection 69B(1),the Director General may inquire into and decide any claim concerning any indemnity due to the employer or employee where the contract of service is terminated by either party without notice, or if notice was given, without waiting for the expiry of that notice.
(2) The indemnity due to the employer or employee under subsection (1) shall be a sum equal to the amount of wages which would have accrued to the employee during the term of the notice or during the unexpired term of the notice.
Pemakaian
Satu-satu tuntutan oleh majikan ke atas pekerja yang boleh didengar oleh Mahkamah Buruh ialah tuntutan gaji ganti notis. Memakai pendekatan terhad, apa jua tuntutan lain hendaklah ditolak pada peringkat pemfailan lagi. Walaupun terbit isu-isu berkaitan Seksyen 24 mengenai potongan sah ke atas upah, untuk maksud kuasa-kuasa Ketua Pengarah dalam kes buruh, tiada tuntutan lain boleh disahkan oleh pegawai pendengar dan mengarah pekerja untuk membayar kepada majikan.
Ulasan
Mengambil kira prinsip 'unequal bargaining power' mana mungkin seorang pekerja berhutang apa-apa bayaran kepada majikannya. Kedudukannya sentiasa di aturgerak oleh majikan. Maka jika ada majikan berusaha menuntut selain gaji ganti notis, kewajaran menolak tuntutan majikan ini adalah tinggi.
Thursday, September 15, 2011
16 September (Hari Malaysia)
Berdasarkan pemakaian undang-undang semasa berkaitan hak pekerja untuk Hari Kelepasan khususnya yang dilindungi Akta Kerja 1955(Akta 256) Hari Malaysia adalah tambahan kepada 10 hari minima yang wajib diberi kepada pekerja. Secara mudah sehingga undang-undang dipinda bagi mentafsirkan seksyen berkaitan Hari Kelepasan di bawah Akta Kerja 1955 ialah SEPULUH TAMBAH SATU. Mengambilkira tiada cuti bola, perlantikan sebagai ahli Majils Keselamatan Pertubuhan Bangsa-bangsa Bersatu (PBB), Sukan Komanwel dan peristiwa seumpamanya di peringkat kerajaan persekutuan.
Walaubagaimana pun secara peribadi saya beranggapan Hari Malaysia sepatutnya sebahagian 6 (enam) hari yang boleh dipilih majikan kerana sebaik Menteri bertanggungjawab umumkan ia untuk setiap tahun mulai tahun diumumkan, ia sudah terkeluar dari maksud undang-undang dipinda bagi cuti seperti "cuti bola, perlantikan sebagai ahli Majils Keselamatan Pertubuhan Bangsa-bangsa Bersatu (PBB), Sukan Komanwel dan peristiwa seumpamanya di peringkat kerajaan persekutuan" yang berlaku sekali-sekali atau atas dasar istimewa sekali sahaja dan bukan berulangan.(ini pendapat peribadi)
Secara rasminya tentulah masih SEPULUH TAMBAH SATU....