The court established that an independent contractor does not possess the same rights as an employee under the Industrial Relations Act, affirming the necessity of proving employment status for claims of wrongful dismissal.

The Reference

[1] This is a reference dated 17 March 2021 by the Honourable Minister of Human Resources pursuant to s 20(3) of the Industrial Relations Act 1967 ("The Act") arising out of the alleged dismissal of Iskandar Bin Zainal ("Claimant") by Malaysia Airports Consultancy Services Sdn Bhd ("Company") on the 16 May 2020.

[2] Pursuant to the directions of this Court, the Company in this matter filed its written submissions dated 11 April 2023. The Claimant failed to attend the full trial of this matter and there is no written submission of the Claimant in this matter.

[3] This Court considered all the notes of proceedings in this matter, documents and the cause papers in handing down this Award namely:

(i) The Claimant's Statement of Case received by this Court on the 25 June 2021;

(ii) The Company's Statement in Reply dated 6 August 2021

(iii) The Claimant's Bundle of Documents - Unmarked;

(iv) Company's Bundles of Documents - COB1 and COB2;

(v) Company's Witness Statement - COW1-WS (Aidatul Hanim Abu);

(vi) Company's Witness Statement - COW2-WS(1)&(2) [Ahmad Tarmizi Mohd Hashim];

Introduction

[4] The dispute before this Court relates to the claim by Iskandar Bin Zainal ("Claimant") that he was dismissed from his employment without just cause or excuse by Malaysia Airports Consultancy Services Sdn Bhd ("the Company") on the 16 May 2020.

[5] The Company is a wholly owned subsidiary of Malaysia Airport Holdings Berhad (MAHB) which is the largest airport operator in Malaysia. The Company is the consultancy of MAHB which provides for technical & consultancy services, quality services, monitoring for airports and non-airports and trading of airport specialized equipment as well as providing technical assistance in managing the airports in Malaysia. On or about August 2019, owing to certain technical glitch, the Company was tasked to carry out IT Network Infrastructure, Housekeeping and Maintenance at KLIA in order to properly troubleshoot and to ensure smooth operations of the IT Network. The Company decided to engage the Claimant to manage KLIA IT project as a Project Manager and a letter of award dated 2 December 2019 was issued by the Company to record the Claimant's engagement with the Company as the KLIA IT Project Manager of the KLIA IT Project for the period from 11 September 2019 to 31 December 2019. The Claimant's engagement with the Company came to an end on 1 January 2020. As the Claimant's engagement with the Company had come to an end on 1 January 2020, the Claimant was then directly engaged by another entity known as Adecco Staffing & Outsourcing Sdn Bhd as a Project Manager from the period of 2 November 2020 to 31 March 2020. Pursuant to the employment contract between the Claimant and Adecco, the Claimant was assigned by Adecco to render his services at the Company. Upon the completion of the Claimant's engagement with Adecco, the Claimant was directly engaged by another entity known as Kelly Services (Malaysia) Sdn Bhd as a Project Manager from 1 April 2020 until 16 May 2020. Pursuant to the employment contract between the Claimant and Kelly Services (Malaysia) Sdn Bhd the Claimant was assigned by the said company to render his services at the Company. On 15 May 2020, the KLIA IT Project was concluded, and the Claimant's services were no longer needed.

[6] The Company had maintained at all times that the Claimant was not a workman of the Company pursuant the "The Act". Instead the Claimant was at all material times was an independent contractor engaged by the Company to provide his services for certain duration of time. The Company states that the Claimant was not a workman or employee of the Company and as such the Claimant was not dismissed by the Com