INDUSTRIAL COURT OF MALAYSIA CASE NO. : 6(22)/4-40/20 BETWEEN LOO SHUH SIA AND MDSA RESOURCES SDN. BHD.

AWARD NO: 2266 OF 2023 Before : Y.A. TUAN AMRIK SINGH - Chairman (Sitting Alone)

Venue : Industrial Court Malaysia, Kuala Lumpur Date of Reference : 17.12.2019 Dates of Mention : 05.02.2020, 26.02.2020, 13.07.2020, 28.07.2020, 15.03.2021, 02.09.2021, 13.01.2022, 17.03.2022, 29.03.2022 & 18.08.2022 Dates of Hearing : 06.04.2022, 12.08.2022, 13.03.2023 & 28.03.2023 Representation : Ms. Jane Tan Yang Qian with Ms Angeline Tay Messrs. Bodipalar Ponnudurai De Silva Counsel for the Claimant Mr. Kee Tong Kiak with Mr Choong Jun Hong Messrs. Chee Siah Le Kee & Partners Counsel for the Company REFERENCE :

This is a reference made under section 20(3) of the Industrial Relations Act 1967 (the Act) arising out of the dismissal of Loo Shuh Sia (hereinafter referred to as “the Claimant”) by MDSA Resources Sdn.

Bhd. (hereinafter referred to as “the Company”) on 17.09.2019.

AWARD [1] This Court considered the following cause papers and documents in handling down this Award namely :

(a) Statement of Case dated 04.03.2020; (b) Statement in Reply dated 13.10.2020;

(c) Rejoinder dated 11.01.2021;

(d) Claimant’s Witness Statement marked as CLWS; (e) Company’s witness Statement marked as COWS; (f) Claimant’s bundle of document marked as CLB 1;

(g) Claimant’s Supplementary bundle of document marked as CLB 2;

(h) Company’s bundle of document marked as COB 1;

(i) Company’s Supplementary bundle of document marked as COB 2;

(j) Company’s Supplementary bundle of document marked as COB 3; and (k) Company’s Supplementary bundle of document marked as COB 4.

Factual Matrix [2] The Company together with the Hatten Asset Management Sdn Bhd is part of the Hatten Group which developed and manages, inter alia, shopping malls known as Dataran Pahlawan Melaka Megamall and Hatten Square and a hotel known as Hatten Hotel located in Melaka town.

[3] The Claimant was initially employed by Hatten Asset Management Sdn Bhd as a secretary vide letter dated 24.06.2009 with the salary of RM3,200.00 per month reporting only to the Managing Director (‘subsequently known as the Group Managing Director- GMD’). Her salary was increased to RM3,500.00 when she was confirmed in her employment with effect from 01.09.2009. Through a corporate restructuring exercise, on 30.08.2016, the Claimant was transferred to the Company and continued to be in employment until her dismissal.

[4] From the year 2013 to 2018, the Claimant received several promotions with salary adjustments. In addition to that, the Claimant was presented with a ‘Long Service Award’ in recognition and appreciation of her 9 years of loyal and dedicated service to the Company.

[5] On 24.07.2019, the Claimant was issued a letter of warning due to her unsatisfactory work performance. On 31.07.2019, a second letter of warning was issued to the Claimant for showing lack of professionalism when responding to the GMD’s instruction via WhatsApp with the word ‘NOTED’ in capital letters.

[6] The Claimant replied to the second warning letter denying that she displayed dissatisfaction and unprofessionalism.

[7] On 19.08.2019, the Claimant received a notice terminating her role as an Administrator and following that, the Claimant’s services in the Company was terminated vide letter of termination dated 17.09.2019.

[8] The Claimant prays for an order that she be reinstated to her former position, without any loss of wages, allowances, privileges and any other benefit (monetary or otherwise) together with arrears from the date of her termination to the date of reinstatement.

The Company’s Case [9] The Company contends that in the course of performing her role as a Senior Manager – Admin, the Claimant had failed to contribute and perform her duties and functions up to a satisfactory level.

[10] The events leading to the Claimant’s dismissal are as follows:

(i) On or about the 2^nd week of July 2019, the Claimant failed to provide smooth administrative su