Back
2011 MarsdenLR 4786
INDUSTRIAL COURT KUALA LUMPUR
LIM YU CHEE – Appellant
Versus
STAEDTLER MARKETING SDN BHD – Respondent
Award No: 1638 of 2011 [Case No: 3/4-2029/07]
Employers must act bona fide when restructuring, ensuring retrenchment aligns with redundancy principles and does not violate workers' rights.
Headnote:(A) Industrial Relations Act 1967 - Dismissal and Retrenchment - The court addressed the principles regarding lawful retrenchment, emphasizing that employers may reorganize their businesses bona fide, but must not do so for collateral purposes, as seen in Harris Solid State (M) Sdn Bhd & Ors v. Bruno Gentil s/o Pereira & 2 Ors. (Paras 4, 6, 22)
(B) Redundancy - Defined as surplus labor resulting from business reorganization, where such redundancy must be established for lawful retrenchment as discussed in Dunston Ayadurai's book. (Paras 5, 23)
(C) Justification of Retrenchment - The court found that the claimant's position as sales manager had become redundant and the dismissal was for just cause, meeting the criteria outlined in the Code of Conduct for Industrial Harmony. (Paras 22-24)
Facts of the case:
The claimant was employed from 1983 and was retrenched on 23rd May 2006 due to the respondent's financial difficulties, including declining sales and losses. He alleged unfair dismissal as others junior to him were retained and claimed lack of offered alternative jobs or positions.
Findings of Court:
The court found sufficient evidence of financial difficulties and that the claimant’s position was redundant based on the operational needs of the respondent.
Issues: The main issues involved whether the retrenchment was bona fide and justified based on redundancy and proper adherence to industrial law.
Ratio Decidendi: The court concluded that retrenchment was justified as the claimant's role was redundant and there was no evidence of mala fide conduct by the employer in the retrenchment process.
Result: Claim dismissed.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. context of dismissal and employment history. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. principles of retrenchment and redundancy. (Para 3) |
[1] This ministerial reference pursuant to s 20 (3) of the Industrial Relations Act 1967 concerns the dismissal of the claimant by the respondent on 23rd May 2006.
[2] The claimant commenced employment with the respondent on 1st July 1983 as a marketing trainee and he worked his way up to the position of sales manager effective 1st March 1989 which was the position he held at the time of his dismissal. On 23rd May 2006 the respondent issued him with a retrenchment letter in the following terms:
[3] Since, by the termination letter, the statement in reply, and indeed, the case presented by the respondent at the hearing, the sole basis for the termination of the claimant's employment was the respondent's financial situation at the material time, I propose first to state the applicable law regarding retrenchment.
