The employer must prove genuine redundancy in a retrenchment case; failure to do so renders the dismissal without just cause or excuse.

AWARD

Augustine Anthony:

[1] The parties in this matter filed their Written Submissions dated 25 May 2021 (Company's Written Submissions), 4 June 2021 (Claimant's Written Submissions) and 11 June 2021 (Company's Submissions in Reply).

[2] 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 dated 30 December 2020;

(ii) The Company's Statement in Reply dated 23 February 2021 and all the enclosures therein;

(iii) The Claimant's Rejoinder dated 3 March 2021 and the enclosures therein.

(iv) Company's Bundle of Documents marked as COB1 and COB2

(v) Company's Witness Statement (Choo Seng Fei) marked as "COW1-WS";

(vi) Company's Witness Statement (Tey Huey Leh) marked as "COW2-WS";

(vii) Claimant's Witness Statement marked as "CLW-WS".

Introduction

[3] The dispute before this court is the claim by Sree Chandran Ayavoo ("claimant") that he had been dismissed from his employment by way of retrenchment without just cause or excuse by Malaysian Harvest Sdn Bhd ("company") on 27 May 2020.

[4] The company is in the business of providing cleaning services to major malls and other complexes. The claimant was appointed as the company's operations manager effective 2 April 2014. The claimant was confirmed in his employment as Operations Manager on 29 September 2014. The claimant performed his duties well with no known disciplinary issues or poor performance throughout his employment with the company. It is common knowledge that on 18 March 2020, the government of Malaysia imposed a Movement Control Order (MCO) due to the COVID19 pandemic that became a worldwide health crisis. It is the company's contention that due the MCO, the company had significant reduction in its business and income and as a result the claimant's position in the company became redundant. Due to the redundancy of the claimant in the company, the company in its reorganisation exercise had to retrench the claimant effective 27 May 2020. The claimant however states that there was no general downturn in the business conditions of the company and there was also no genuine reorganisation exercise carried out by the company which led to his retrenchment due to the alleged redundancy. The claimant claims that although his job still exists, nevertheless the claimant was however retrenched without proper reasons or excuse by the company. The claimant states that the company in retrenching the claimant did not act in a bona fide manner and that the company's decision to retrench the claimant was actuated by malice. In the circumstances the claimant now claims that his dismissal by way of retrenchment was a dismissal without just cause or excuse and prays that he be reinstated to his former position without any loss of wages and other benefits. The company contends that the claimant's dismissal arising from his position being redundant in the company due to a genuine reorganisation of the company's business was a dismissal with just cause and excuse and prays that the claimant's case be dismissed.

[5] The claimant gave evidence under oath in support of his case and remained the sole witness for his case. The company's evidence was led by COW1 (Choo Seng Fei who is the senior operations manager whose responsibilities were to oversee the whole operations, costing, sales, tender participation and meeting clients. The claimant also reported to COW1 on all operations issues) and COW2 (Tey Huey Leh who is the senior head of department under the Finance Department of the company who gave evidence on the financial position of the company on or about the time of the claimant's retrenchment).

The Company's Case

[6] The company's case can be summarised as follows:

(i) The company confirms and admits that the claimant was retrenched from his employment with the company with the last day of the claimant's service with the company being 27 May 2020.

(ii) The company states that the claimant had accept