2006 MarsdenLR 3508
INDUSTRIAL COURT (KUALA LUMPUR)
RAJENDRAN NAYAGAM
TNB DISTRIBUTION SDN BHD
versus
YAHAYA JUSOH
AWARD NO: 1202 OF 2006, CASE NO: 26(15)/4-2524/04
Decided On : 07-06-06
For the Claimant - Ahmad Fariz Mohamed,; M/s Ali & Fariz
For the Company - Jayasingam and P Thavaselvi,;M/s Zul Rafique & Partners
AWARD
(1) The Facts
The Claimant commenced employment with the Company (formerly known as Lembaga Letrik Negara) as "Kerani Tingkatan Biasa" on 8th January 1990. The Claimant was an ambitious man, who though had started as a clerk, wanted to pursue higher education. He studied privately and obtained a diploma and subsequently applied to University Putra Malaysia to do a degree in Human Resource Development in 1997. On 25th May 1997, the Claimant was given unpaid study leave to pursue his degree and in May 1998 the Company offered the Claimant a full sponsorship for a period of 2 years and 11 months to complete the first degree. In consideration of this sponsorship, the Claimant was to serve the Company for 2 times the total number of years of his approved study leave.
Upon his successful completion of the degree, the Claimant reported for work on 27th April 2001 at the Pejabat Bisnes Daerah, Jalan Klang Lama, Kuala Lumpur and assumed his old post.
After reporting for work, the Claimant now desired to pursue a master's degree, which was to commence in May 2001. The Claimant's ambition now clashed with his obligations to the Company. By virtue of his earlier sponsorship agreement, the Claimant was required to serve the Company at least 5 years 8 months before he could be released. However, without obtaining the blessings of the Company, the Claimant enrolled for the masters program in May 2001. On 1st October 2001 the Claimant made a written application for unpaid study leave for another period of 2 years effective 1st November 2001 to COW3, who was then the General Manager (Planning & Development) Human Resource Department. The application was submitted through the Claimant's Head of Department (COW7). On 1st November 2001, the Claimant without waiting for approval of his application, left his place of work, to pursue his masters. On 13th November 2001 the Claimant's Head of Department received a verbal report that the Claimant had been continuously absent from work without leave with effect from 1st November 2001. On 13th November 2001, the Claimant's Head of Department issued a show cause letter for his absence and further directed him to report for work on 15th November 2001. At the same time, the Claimant's Head of Department had also issued a warning letter to the Claimant for taking leave without prior approval for the periods 12th October 2001 to 15th October 2001 and from 18th October 2001 to 23rd October 2001.
In spite of the specific directive to report back to work on 15th November 2001, the Claimant failed to do so. However, he replied the show cause by letter dated 16th November 2001 (COE 42 at p. 16 in Bundle A) stating that he assumed that he had obtained approval for the study leave application merely on the basis that his Head of Department had supported the application for study leave.
On 20th November 2001 the Claimant then applied to his Head of Department (COW7) for unpaid leave for a period of (1) month commencing from 1st November 2001 to 30th November 2001. However, on 3rd December 2001, the Company through the Vice President of Human Resource informed the Claimant by a formal letter that his appeal for unpaid study leave was not approved and that the decision was final. The Claimant was also advised to fulfill his contractual obligations to the Company first before he could be considered for the masters program (CEO 17 at p. 87 in Bundle A). By letter dated 8th December 2001, the Claimant agreed to report for duty at TNB so long as he was not placed at Zon 4 Jalan Klang Lama. On 8th January 2002 COW3 (the Vice President of Human Resource) replied advising the Claimant to make an official application to the General Manager (Administration & Management Human Resource) to consider him for placement at any other suitable station of the Company. The Claimant did not make any application and continued to remain absent from work. On 23rd January the General Manager (Consumer Services) informed the Claimant's H