Back
2000 MarsdenLR 1512
CHONG SIEW FAI SABAH, MOHAMED DZAIDDIN, ABDUL MALEK AHMAD, SARAWAK
NATIONAL UNION OF NEWSPAPER WORKERS – Appellant
Versus
KETUA PENGARAH KESATUAN SEKERJA – Respondent
The jurisdiction of the Director General of Trade Unions under the Trade Unions Act is affirmed, emphasizing proper adherence to statutory provisions regarding trade union membership eligibility.
Headnote:In this judgment, the Court reviewed the application of the National Union of Newspaper Workers for certiorari against the Director General of Trade Unions concerning membership eligibility under Rule 3.1 of the Union's Constitution. The DGTU ruled against the NUPW's representation following a query from employers about the union's legitimacy due to severed ties with the newspaper industry. The Court confirmed the DGTU's jurisdiction and indicated errors in the lower court's rulings regarding applicable provisions from the Trade Unions Act 1959 and the Industrial Relations Act 1967. The final outcome was to dismiss the appeals with costs, maintaining that the DGTU's conduct was lawful.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. context of the case and claims regarding union representation. (Para 1) |
Abdul Malek Ahmad FCJ:
The National Union of Newspaper Workers (hereinafter "the NUPW"), who is the appellant before us, had applied for certiorari against the Director General of Trade Unions (hereinafter "the DGTU"), who is the respondent in MPRS No. 01-8-98(W) (hereinafter "the first appeal") and against Federal Publications Sdn Bhd (hereinafter "FPSB") and the STP Distributors (M) Sdn Bhd (hereinafter "STPD") who are the first and second respondents in MPRS No. 02-18-98(W) (hereinafter "the second appeal") to quash the decision of the DGTU on 25 February 1992.
The facts of the matter before the High Court were as follows. NUPW was a trade union which was initialy recognised by FPSB and STPD as a trade union which represented their employees.
By similar letters dated 26 December 1990, FPSB and STPD had raised, to the DGTU, the fact that as their business activities had no longer any connection with the newspaper publishing industry, the eligibility of the NUPW to represent their employees was then the subject of dispute. Accordingly, they had asked the DGTU for a ruling on the matter.
It is relevant to reproduce the relevant portions of the contents of the letter from FPSB to the DTGU at this juncture:
Dear Sir
RE: Rule 3 of the Constitution of the National Union of Newspaper Workers
The National Union of Newspaper Workers had been representing our employees since 1971 by virtue of our Company being a wholly owned subsidiary of Times Publishing Ltd which until recently had links with the newspaper publishing industry.
Recent corporate events have brought about a change in the position of our Company which may affect the standing of the National Union of Newspaper Workers to represent our employees.
The purpose of this letter is to seek your ruling on the issue.
...
By reason of the matters set out above, we would be grateful if you could investigate into and make a ruling on whether or not the National Union of Newspaper Workers may continue to represent the employees of Federal Publications Sdn. Bhd.
On 12 November 1991, the DGTU carried out investigations and discovered that FPSB was involved with the publication of local text books whereas STPD was in the distribution and marketing of books, magazines and encyclopaedias with no involvement at all in the newspaper publishing industry.
Consequently, on 15 November 1991, the DGTU had invited the Secretary General of the NUPW to come to his office to discuss the matter which the latter did on 27 November 1991. The NUPW gave their views by letter to the DGTU on 11 December 1991 insisting that they still had a right to represent the employees of FPSB and STPD.
By letter dated 25 February 1992, the DGTU decided that the employees of FPSB and STPD cannot be accepted as, or continue to be, members of the NUPW considering the fact that they were no longer categorised as employees of the newspaper publishing and subsidiary industries as provided in r. 3.1 of the NUPW's rules and constitution.
Thus the application for certiorari. The said r. 3.1 states:
RULE 3. MEMBERSHIP
1. Membership of the Union shall be open to all employees in the newspaper publishing and subsidiary industries excluding those who are employed in the managerial, executive capacity, confidential capacity and security capacity
who are above the age of sixteen and whose place of work is in Peninsular Malaysia provided that no person for whom education is provided under the Education Act shall join or be a member of the Union, unless he is:
(a) bone fide employed as a workman as defined in the Trade Unions Ordinance, 1959, and
(b) over the age of eighteen years.
One of the issues raised at first instance was the competency of the DGTU to entertain and consequently to decide on NUPW's eligibility to represent the employees of FPSB and STPD in accordance with s. 26(1A) of the Trade Unions Act 1959 (her
