Pindaan Akta Kerja 1955 harus ditarik balik
  • Petitioned Prime Minister of Malaysia

This petition was delivered to:

Prime Minister of Malaysia

Pindaan Akta Kerja 1955 harus ditarik balik

    1. Solidarity Solidarity
    2. Petition by

      Solidarity Solidarity

      penang, Malaysia

MENDESAK KERAJAAN MENARIK BALIK PINDAAN AKTA YANG MENINDAS PEKERJA.  ( DESCRIPTION IN ENGLISH AVAILABLE BELOW) 

Bantahan adalah berlandaskan kepada beberapa perkara yang melibatkan implikasi Undang-Undang, Perlindungan Jaminan Pekerjaan (Job Security), Kebajikan (Welfare) dan Organizing Kesatuan.

1. Implikasi Undang-Undang Hubungan antara majikan dan pekerja berstatus tetap diikat melalui Undang-Undang termasuk Akta Kerja, Akta Perhubungan Perusahaan, Akta Kesatuan Sekerja dan akta-akta lain yang relevan dengan sesuatu industry. Majikan perlu mematuhi undang-undang pekerjaan dalam menjalankan operasinya ketika mendapatkan khidmat seseorang pekerja berstatus tetap. Seseorang pekerja diambil secara kontak melalui khidmat Contractor For Labour tidak mempunyai ikatan undang-undang dengan majikan ditempat ianya bekerja. Kontrak perkhidmatan secara terus adalah antara Majikan dan Syarikat Contractor For Labour atau agentnya. Manakala pekerja tersebut pula hanya mempunyai kontrak pekerjaan dengan Syarikat Contractor For Labour yang amat rapuh. Keadaan ini akan melupuskan hak pekerja tersebut untuk membuat sebarang tuntutan dengan syarikat tempat ia bekerja. Pekerja juga boleh ditamatkan perkhidmatan pada bila-bila masa oleh pihak Contractor For Labour atas sebab-sebab perkhidmatannya tidak diperlukan lagi tanpa mendapat apa-apa faedah penamatan (seperti yang dimenterai dalam kontrak perkhidmatannya dengan syarikat Contractor For Labour). Hubungan antara Employer dan Employee hanyalah antara Contractor For Labour atau agentnya dengan pekerja sahaja.

2. Jaminan Pekerjaan (Job Security) Jaminan Pekerjaan Tetap (Permanent Job) – Majikan akan menggunakani pindaan akta ini untuk menjimatkan kos dalam meningkatkan profit syarikat. Pekerjaan berstatus tetap akan dihadkan dalam mana-mana syarikat dan pengambilan pekerja secara contract akan berleluasa. Majikan akan menggunakan perkhidmatan syarikat atau agent Contractor For Labour untuk membekalkan tenaga kerja bagi sesuatu industry atau pekerjaan. Malahan Contactor For Labour tersebut pula akan mendapatkan bekalan tenaga kerja dari sub contractor yang membekalkan pekerja. Dengan itu majikan tidak perlu bersusah payah menanggung kos staff seperti medical, EPF,SOCSO dan mengujudkan Perjanjian Kolektif kerana apa yang perlu dilakukan oleh majikan untuk penjimatan kos adalah membuat bayaran secara terus kepada pihak kontraktor yang membekalkan tenaga kerja. Hubungan antara majikan dan pekerja tidak ujud dalam konteks kontrak pekerjaan. Majikan hanya perlu ada kontrak dengan pihak Contractor For Labour sahaja dan membuat bayaran perkhidmatan berdasarkan caj yang dikenakan. Contractor For Labour pula akan mengagihkan bayaran tersebut kepada pekerja-pekerja contract selepas menolak kos operasi mereka dan meraih keuntungan secara mudah.

Sebagai contoh

Syarikat A hanya perlu membayar RM20,000 kepada satu syarikat Contractor For Labour (B) untuk membekalkan 15 pekerja production.Syarikat B pula akan membayar RM15,000 untuk syarikat C (agent Contractor For Labour) . Syarikat B akan membuat profit atas angin sebanyak RM5,000 kerana mendapatkan tender dari syarikat A. Syarikat C seterusnya akan membayar sebanyak RM700 kepada setiap pekerja yang bekerja di lokasi syarikat A. Keuntungan yang diperolehi secara atas angin oleh syarikat C ialah RM4,500, syarikat B ialah RM5,000 dan pekerja hanya layak dapat RM700 setiap seorang sebulan.

3. Kebajikan Pekerja (Welfare) Kebajikan pekerja yang diambil bekerja secara kontrak oleh agent Contractor For Labour akan terabai kerana majikan, Syarikat atau kilang tidak mempunyai ikatan kontrak pekerjaan yang sah disisi undang-undang secara terus dengan pekerja yang berstatus kontrak. Pekerja hanya terikat dengan kontrak perkhidmatan antara dirinya dan majikan yang bergelar Contractor For Labour.

4. Organizing Kesatuan Pergerakan Kesatuan Sekerja samada In House Union atau National Union akan lumpuh dan pupus. Pekerja-pekerja berstatus kontrak tersebut akan hadapi kesukaran untuk di organize dan menubuhkan union kerana telah terbukti dalam situasi pekerja berstatus tetap, banyak Kesatuan cuba ditubuhkan tetapi mendapat kekangan dari majikan. Mereka yang berstatus kontrak akan mudah ditamatkan perkhidmatannya kerana Syarikat Contractor For Labour akan mengenakan peraturan yang ketat bagi menghalang penubuhan Kesatuan Sekerja. Kos menamatkan perkhidmatan pekerja berstatus kontrak juga akan menjadi murah kerana majikan yang menggaji mereka tidak terikat dengan Perjanjian Bersama. Kegagalan menubuhkan Kesatuan akan menyebabkan Perjanjian Bersama tidak boleh diujudkan. Hak-hak dan faedah Perjanjian Bersama seperti kenaikan gaji, faedah perubatan, allowance dan lain-lain lagi dengan sendirinya tidak akan dirasai oleh pekerja yang diambil secara kontrak melalui Contractor For Labour atau agentnya. Bila keadaan ini berlaku, lama kelamaan pergerakan Kesatuan Sekerja akan terhapus peringkat demi peringkat dan ini amat menguntungkan golongan kapitalis untuk memerah tenaga pekerja disamping hanya perlu menyediakan faedah asas (jika ada).

 

 

LATEST AMENDMENT TO THE EMPLOYMENT ACT 1955

What is so bad about the new amendment?

One of several aspects of  Bill that is the main bone of contention, i.e. the introduction of the new provision for the definition of “contractor” for “contractor for labour”.    The “contractor” is fortified as labour supplier for part or whole to the  “principal” in the application of the definition. 

 

Why is the introduction of the “contractor of labour” bad?

With the amendment, the contractor for labour will be the third party or outsourced company (or the middleman) who will come in between the now direct relationship between the owner-operator of his trade or business (defined as the “principal”) and the worker. 

 

Are there other amendments that are detrimental to the workers?
Yes. Other amendments related to the contractor of labour are: (a) Payment of overtime wages for work done by contract workers. The bill seeks to amend the Act for such wages to be deferred by one month. This is to facilitate the principal employer time to pay the contractor for labour that in turn pays the contract workers.  (b) Inclusion of “weekly rate of pay” in the amendment will enable the contractor of labour to collect agreed payments from the principal but pay the worker at the ordinary rate of pay (lower rate) for overtime work.  (c) Setting lower limit for hours of work for part-time work. This would enable  contractor for labour to engage workers on casual basis for as low as 14.4 hours per week or 2.4 hours per day, without breaking the law. 5. But these contractor for labour or outsourcer companies have been in existance in the country since the mid 1990s? (a) The employment scenario in the country began to change in the early 1990s. In 1992 the government allowed migrant workers for the construction and plantation sector only. In 2000, it was extended to manufacturing and service (hotel and restaurants) sectors. In 2002, it was extented to all sectors.The migrant workers were generally employed by the principal employer but this changed in 2005, when the Cabinet Committee on Foreign Workers in its meeting on 5 July 2005 agreed to the recruitment of foreign workers through outsource companies. The issuance of the outsource licences came under the Foreign Workers Management Division of the Ministry of Home Affairs (Bahagian Pengurusan Pekerja Asing, Kementerian Hal Ehwal Dalam Negeri). There are about 277 registered outsource companies in the country. (The Star, 23-Feb 2010). Among the conditions set were that accommodation, transportation, payment of wages of RM400, medical examination including insurance coverage shall be under the outsourcing company. (b) Now the outsource companies are employing local workers as well.  The outsource companies later began to recruit local workers, some on fix term contract, with terms and conditions of service found to be less favourable than that of migrant workers. Some of them being employed under ‘contract for service’ instead of ‘contract of service’ effectively depriving the local workers the benefits under the Employment Act. Why are outsource companies popular with principal companies?
Outsource companies are in popular demand. The company pays the outsource company an agreed sum of money for the number of workers supplied. It saves on indirect cost such as medical cost, insurance, transportation, accommodation, expenses for company events such as family day, service awards, and several other benefits. The company is not responsible for hiring or firing of the outsource workers thus do not have to accrue money for retirement benefit or for retrenchment. If it wants less workers it merely informs the outsource company. The company need not be burdened with multi-skilling, it merely request workers to perform multi-task at will. In accounting term, the company transfers the labour cost paid to outsource companies to overhead/operation cost improving net asset value of the company (low liability), making the company’s stock price looking good to shareholders. In attempting to convert permanent workers in the company to outsource workers, most company either retrench their workers, offer “voluntary separation scheme” or simply terminate the employees substituting them with contract labour. Are outsource companies legal?
These outsource companies were allowed to operate freely without any law to regulate them.  They are under the Ministry of Home Affairs under the patronage  (policy) of the government, not sanctioned by law. The current amendment to the Employment Act is to subject them under the Employment Act and at the same time institutionalizing or promoting employment through contractor for labour. Outsourcing is exploitative and touted as the way forward by the employers. The government should stop these unprotected contractor labour employment. Instead of overcoming the evils of the contract system, the government seem to want to perpetuate the evil by legislating it. What is the impact for workers with the introduction of the new term “contractor of labour”?
The Employment Act 1955 was introduced before Merdeka by the British Administration effectively abolishing indenture labour, bonded labour and the “kanggani” system in Malaya. (collective known as the contract system). The Act also established two very important principles of law which are considered sacrosanct to this day. They are, security of tenure – ensuring  permanence of job and proprietary right to the job – where termination of worker, shall be with  just cause and excuse and by due process. The cabinet by allowing the establishment of the  outsource companies in 2005 and thence the contract system, undermined the above two principles, opened the doors of hell that facilitated a direct assault on the basic foundation of labour rights and the enslavement of the dignity of labour, perpetuating the establishment and operation of dehumanising labour.  Does the amendment violate ILO Fundamaental Principles of Right at Work?
In 1998, Government ratified the ILO Declarations on Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work, but its action seems to be in direct contradiction and subscribing to  deny decent work.  Does the amendment affect union membership?
In an interview with Datuk Ishak Mohamed, (New Straits Time, July 20, 2008). The Enforcement Director Immigration Department has this to say: Q: Should foreign labour outsourcing be banned? A: Outsourcing is the best solution for the government to manage foreign workers. Q: Why? A: There are two scenarios one is that as companies get bigger, they will need more manpower and with outsourcing they can get workers in a more organized way. Two, outsourcing is good as it will attract foreign direct investment. Investors will not want unions to be formed in their establishments. Through outsourcing, it would be difficult for unions to be formed as outsourcing company, and not the factory, would be the employer. We will use all avenues available till the amendments mentioned above are withdrawn completely. We opposes the legalisation of “modern-day slavery”, that the contractor of labour entails. If the amendemnts are enforced, We  will be the last generation of permanent employees under the principal employer. The next intake of workers will be contract workers and for generations of workers to come will suffer  without protection.

 

Recent signatures

    News

    1. Reached 100 signatures
    2. .

      Solidarity Solidarity
      Petition Organizer

      .

    3. Reached 25 signatures

    Supporters

    Reasons for signing

    • Nor Azlan Yaacob SELAYANG, MALAYSIA
      • over 2 years ago

      Kembalikan hak pekerja

      REPORT THIS COMMENT:
    • NAS harun PMTG PAUH, MA
      • over 2 years ago

      PM dah mengarut..

      REPORT THIS COMMENT:
    • jamaludin ab rahim SUBANG FAYA, MALAYSIA
      • over 2 years ago

      tidak setuju akta ini di kuatkuasakan.

      REPORT THIS COMMENT:
    • Hada Syahme SELANGOR, MALAYSIA
      • over 2 years ago

      Kononnya rakyat Malaysia dipelihara.. Kini kehidupan di Malaysia hanya untuk orang kaya, golongan pekerja digunakan untuk kepentingan orang Kaya jer.. hidup kami pekerja ibarat kais pagi makan pagi.. kais petang makan petang!!!

      REPORT THIS COMMENT:
    • Ganesan Ramiah PORT KLANG, MALAYSIA
      • over 2 years ago

      When the Umno/BN Govt are in support of crony capitalism then workers welfare is thrown out the doors,The Govt. instate of protecting workers rights seems more interested in protecting the company's income....

      REPORT THIS COMMENT:

    Develop your own tools to win.

    Use the Change.org API to develop your own organizing tools. Find out how to get started.