The court affirmed lawful termination of employment based on economic necessity and adherence to statutory evidence relating to contract terms.

Learned counsel for the claimant however submits that while it is the right of the employer to close down the whole or any part of his business such closure must be real and bona fide. Referring to the case of Palace Garment Manufacturing Sdn Bhd Penang v. Prai Textile & Garment Industry Employees Union (Award 132 of 1983), he contends that where there is no real closure but a mere pretence of a closure, or it is mala fide, then the court ought to intervene. Learned counsel for the claimant contends that in the instant case there was in the eyes of the law no real closure of the WBP corporate business development division because the functions of the division are being carried out in the company by COW1 and other officers in the respective companies in the group. He also cites the case of Aluminium Co. Bhd. v. Mustapha Talip (Award 171/87) wherein the court held that if an employee's position is made redundant but his duties and functions remained and were carried out by others in the company, the inevitable conclusion is that the employee's job was still in existence after his retrenchment. His termination was held to be without just cause or excuse.

In this case, though the division was closed down the functions of the division were still required and they were carried out by others. Furthermore, the claimant's duties and responsibilities were at two levels, i.e. at the group and the company level. At the group level, the claimant was required to undertake research, planning and disseminate information to the operational staff of the group. At the company level, cl. 3 of ABD167 required the claimant to identify the weaknesses and to strengthen the operations and improve the overall performance of the company. The claimant was still carrying on these functions at the time of his dismissal. In addition to his duties pursuant to cl. 3 of ABD167, he was also responsible for recommending new business opportunities to the group as well as to act as the liaison officer of the group in dealing with the state and federal agencies. This responsibility is an on-going function of the division and the closure of the division for economic reasons therefore is not justifiable.

Learned counsel for the claimant further contends that the claimant's services were still useful at the group level as the various companies carried out such functions on their own. COW1 had also agreed that the functions of the division were even more important under conditions of the economic crisis and that these functions were carried out by the respective companies. He therefore submits that as there was still a need for the claimant's services the closure of the division and the termination of the claimant's services was mala fide.

It is further submitted on behalf of the claimant that as no profit targets were set for the claimant to achieve and as he was engaged as a supportive staff rather than an operational staff, his termination on the basis of the company's or the group's profit level is without merit. His contribution, it is submitted cannot be quantified in monetary terms. Learned counsel also submits that as one of the reasons for the engagement of the claimant is that he is a Bumiputra there appears to be no reason on the part of the company to ignore this reason at the time of his dismissal.

On the issue of due compliance with accepted principles and standards of good industrial relations practice, learned counsel for the claimant contends that he was neither offered an alternative job or an alternative job with a lower pay nor a reduction in pay in the same post in lieu of termination. On this matter, the claimant submits that the company's reason why the claimant could not be engaged in one of the other companies in the group is that he had no logging background and therefore could not be placed in Bornion Timber Sdn. Bhd. which is the logging arm of the group was unacceptable. The claimant had worked in the state government's trading company, Sabah M

Click Here to Read the rest of this document