SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2011 MarsdenLR 30

INDUSTRIAL COURT KUALA LUMPUR
KESATUAN KEBANGSAAN WARTAWAN MALAYSIA – Appellant
Versus
UTUSAN MELAYU (MALAYSIA) BERHAD – Respondent


Table of Content
1. collective agreement and payment obligations (Para 1 , 2 , 3)
2. arguments regarding company profits and bonuses (Para 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 11 , 13)
3. court's interpretation of profits in context (Para 8 , 9 , 10 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17)
Susila Sithamparam:

[1] This is an application for an order of non-compliance of art. 44 of the collective agreement dated 5 September 2006 between Kesatuan Kebangsaan Wartawan Malaysia (hereinafter referred to as "the union") and Utusan Melayu (M) Bhd (hereinafter referred to as "the respondent"), cognizance number 281/2006 (hereinafter referred to as "the said collective agreement"). The application was made by the union.

[2] The respondent did not pay its employees a bonus of two months wages for 2009. The respondent had given its employees an ex gratia payment of one month wages each for 2009.

[3] Article 44 in its original language read:

Bayaran bonus dua (2) bulan hendaklah merupakan satu ikatan bagi syarikat mengeluarkannya untuk para pekerja tiap-tiap tahun, jika syarikat mendapat keuntungan dalam tahun yang berkenaan.

Submissions By Counsel For The Union

[4] Counsel for the union contended that the respondent had made profits in the fina

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top