The state of the labour movement in

Malaysia
Malaysiakini |

Editor's note: This is part one of a series on the Malaysian labour movement.

FEATURE | In Malaysia, the trade union movement seems to be weakening, with

the number of unions and unionised workers steadily decreasing.

According to the Trade Union Affairs Department, only 875,193, or six percent, of
the 14.5 million workers in the country, are currently union members. Union
membership in the private sector also shows a marked decrease, dropping from
433,702 in 2009 to 359,206 in 2017.

Traditionally, trade unions have been controlled by laws, first imposed by the
British colonial administration. This practice was continued post-independence by
their successors, the Umno-led BN.

Malaysian trade union and labour laws fall far short of minimum international
standards.

Even when Malaysia wanted to be part of the Trans-Pacific Partnership

agreement (TPPA) itself perceived to be a threat to labour rights one of the
preconditions was that Malaysia should make significant amendments to its

1
labour laws to bring it up to par with minimum human rights and worker rights
standards.

Although the government promised to implement some of the provisions of the

TPPA despite the deal falling through, no amendments have been made to
labour laws.

When there are violations of worker or trade union rights, many Malaysian unions
still do not choose to struggle through pickets, strikes or campaigns against
employers.

Instead, they choose to lodge complaints with relevant government institutions,

which leads to court actions, and possibly the appeal process, which can last for
many years.

Even when workers and unions do win, the remedies are weak, having no real
impact on employers nor instrumental in bringing about legislative changes.
Employers are very happy with the state of affairs, for this method of industrial
dispute resolution does not really impact its business and profits. The only
victims are workers and unions.

Surviving within a limited space

What has happened to the trade union movement is an acceptance of the

limitations imposed on them by authorities, and a choice of surviving within that
limited space with a strong adherence to the law, even if that law is unjust.

There is also very little effort to reach out to the Malaysian public or even elected
representatives for help in the fight for justice.

2
Since 1998, Malaysians generally have become braver, and have started coming
out in much larger numbers in peaceful assemblies to protest wrongdoings and
demand changes. But alas, this has not moved the trade union movement or
workers to do the same, despite the continued erosion of worker and trade union
rights.

The absence of a progressive and dynamic new breed of worker leaders may
also be a factor. Current existing union leaders seem to have been compromised
worried more about union de-registration, the financial security of union
members, or perhaps their own.

But the struggle for better rights and justice will always have an element of risk,
and unless unions and their leaders are brave enough to fight for justice and
rights, then things will not change.

Union leaders have also forgotten how to use their largest asset, namely the
large numbers of workers acting in solidarity.

Union leaders today often choose to act alone, in a representative capacity but
neither employers nor government ministries are really worried because they
believe that unions are weak, and that their leaders are incapable of moving even
their own membership to collective action.

Even when pickets are carried out, the members that do come out and
participate is but a small percentage of the membership. The last few large
pickets or protests that occurred in Malaysia were from migrant workers, and
many of them are not even unionised.

What happened with Malaysian Airlines when the company decided to of about
6,000 workers is an indication of the state of the labour movement. These were
all mostly unionised workers, with the unions affected having thousands of
members, and yet not a single dedicated mass protest took place.

3
To appreciate how the Malaysian trade union movement came to be this way, the
history of the labour movement in the country has to be recounted, particularly
before the subjugation of the labour movement by the British.

The Malaysian Trade Union Congress (MTUC), unfortunately, is a creature of

British manipulation, emerging only after much stronger unions, federations, and
leaders were suppressed.

One would have expected that the MTUC and the larger labour movement would
have undergone a resurrection after Malaya gained independence in 1957, but
that did not happen.

The union way

With the passage of time, workers themselves have forgotten the past, and how
strong the labour movement was at one point in the history of Malaysia.

This lack of historical knowledge, complemented by a lack of education and

empowerment of workers and union members by existing leaders, keeps
unions weak.

For many workers today, the union is simply a subscription deducted

automatically from their salary by employers and transmitted to their unions, and
the little benefit that they get from collective bargaining, which are usually salary
increments and bonuses.

4
Unions now also seldom have regular meetings for its members, if at all, which
has been proven to be essential for the strengthening of solidarity, enhancing
knowledge of members, and strengthening unions as a whole.

The lack of members being involved in decision-making and union actions has
also developed in an overall lack of interest. The dearth of new leaders is also
problematic, and we find the same old people retaining union leadership
positions for years and years.

Things need to change, if unionism and the labour movement are to become
stronger and more effective, but standing in the way are the existing leaders of
unions.

It is easy to blame the government and existing laws, but if workers and unions
are not ready to fight for better rights together, then the legislative hurdles to
overcome will only get taller.

There must be a union way a collective struggle with all workers standing
together in solidarity, not a handful of representatives working without the
participation or support of their members.

This article was first published by Aliran . Malaysiakini has been authorised to
republish it.

5
The origins of the labour movement
in Msia
Malaysiakini |

Editors note: This is part two of a series on the Malaysian labour movement.

FEATURE | The fact that the Malaysian trade unions movement played a
significant role in the political, economic and sociocultural life of Malaysia has
been forgotten by many.

The labour movement did actively struggle for independence from the British
colonial powers, and contributed significantly even in the determination of the
future of Malaysia, including the drafting of the Malaysian Constitution.

But alas, all that is in the past, and the trade unions have been systematically
weakened and isolated from involvement in the life of the nation, first by the
British colonial masters and thereafter by the Umno-led coalition that has
governed Malaysia since independence.

This weakening, nay, annihilation, of the labour movement still continues today
through the actions and omissions of a government that seems to not just have
embraced neoliberalism, but is also seen today as being pro-business. Of late,

6
government-owned and controlled companies also are seen to be violating
worker rights.

The future of the labour movement in Malaysia now depends on the workers and
the trade unions, who really must appreciate the history of the Malaysian labour
movement and decide whether they would want to struggle to make the labour
movement once again strong and relevant, or just allow the slow withering away
of not just the movement, but also worker and trade union rights.

Origins of union: Protection and promotions of rights

A worker alone is weak, but workers united are strong. Workers have always
naturally come to a realisation that only together as workers will they be able to
fight and get better rights and justice at their workplace. As such, more likely than
not, there have been organised worker solidarity actions in one form or another
ever since there have been workers in Malaysia.

For Malaysia, the advent of worker struggle would have been in the rubber
plantations and the tin mines (photo), whose labour was primarily workers of
Indian and Chinese origins a reality then when Malay workers resisted working
in such mines and plantations, choosing rather self-employment, small
businesses, farming, fishing and the civil service. The majority of the workers in
the civil service were Malay.

The origins of organised labour in the form of worker unions in Malaysia date
back to the 1920s. Workers then, who were primarily of Chinese and Indian

7
origins in the private sector and Malay workers in the civil service, formed what
was known as General Labour Unions (GLUs).

GLU membership was generally open to any worker, with no restrictions with
regards to any particular industry, sector or workplace, unlike what we have
today in Malaysia.

GLUs were generally formed in different geographical areas all around Malaya.
They attracted many workers and were strong. In the struggle for rights, history
shows that many actions were taken by GLUs, including strikes.

The labour movement then was not restricted to merely employer-employee

matters, but also played an active role in the political, economic and sociocultural
lives of the country.

The labour movement, together with other pro-independence groups (photo -

MPAJA), was also actively involved in the struggle for independence from the
British. They were also active in the struggle against Japanese occupation forces
during World War II.

An example of a union then was the Selangor Engineering Mechanics

Association, which was registered in 1928, and was maybe one of the first
registered trade unions in Malaya.

The GLUs and many of the unions also started coming together as coalitions and
federations and finally merged into the Pan-Malayan General Labour Union
(PMGLU) and the Singapore GLU.

8
British moves to weaken labour movement

The British colonial powers, worried about the growing labour movement,
decided to try to control and influence it. The British colonial government were
especially concerned about the perceived influence that the Malayan Communist
Party (MCP) and other pro-independence groups had in the labour movement.

Methods the British employed to weaken and control the labour movement
included the enactment of laws like the Trade Union Ordinance of 1940, and the
appointment of the Trade Union Advisor.

One of the primary objects of this Trade Union Ordinance was to stabilise the
labour situation in the interest of increasing production to sustain Britain's
economy and its war efforts. It was not concerned about worker or trade union
rights.

The Malayan economy at that time was geared to support the wartime needs of
Britain. As such, labour and trade union rights, and existing struggles for better
rights had to be suppressed and subordinated to what the British considered
more important Imperial Defence.

Malaya then was considered the dollar arsenal for the British empire, and the
1940 Ordinance was enacted for the purpose of ensuring a continued flow of
revenue to the British Empire.

9
The stated object in the title of this 1940 Ordinance was, An Enactment for the
Registration and Control of Trade Unions''. Its declared purpose was the
fostering of the right kind of responsible leadership amongst workers and at the
same time to discourage or reduce such influence as the professional agitators
may have had and to reduce the opportunities or the excuse for the activities of
such persons.''

It was clearly to weaken the existing labour movement, and transform existing
trade unions and union leadership into what the British wanted.

The existing worker solidarity was to be destroyed, and a divide and weaken
policy was the aim. Private sector workers were to be separated from public
sector workers, and workers from different industry and sectors were to be kept
apart.

The role of unions were to be limited to simply industrial relations matters

matters between workers and employers only. Unions were no longer allowed to
be involved in matters concerning the nation, including the struggle for
independence.

This new Trade Union Ordinance now required unions in Malaya to be registered
(or rather re-registered), which meant submitting an application to the
government, and receiving government approval prior to registration. This
allowed the government not to re-register some of the stronger unions, and
federation of unions across different sectors or industries.

10
As such, the new law prevented government (or public sector) employees and
private sector employees from belonging to the same union. The affiliation of
unions with other classes of unions was also prevented. Restriction was also
imposed on the usage of union funds.

The registration rules were somewhat restrictive. For instance, government

employees and non-government employees could not anymore belong to the
same union or even to affiliate themselves with unions of other classes of
workers. The usage of union funds was also restricted - it could no longer be
used for a variety of other purposes, including political purposes.

Under these rules, all the existing GLUs (or even other federations of unions
across different sectors, industry or occupation) were not qualified for registration
and therefore could no longer operate legally.

The new Trade Union Ordinance and laws that came into force in 1946
effectively killed the GLUs, which could no longer be registered (or re-registered)
under the new law, and as such were no longer able to operate legally. It also
killed off many stronger unions.

What is of interest was that this new policy and laws did not apply to the union
movement in Britain and the UK. It only applied to Malaysia. British unions to
date are still involved in political struggles, and even political parties like the
Labour Party, in the UK.

This article was first published by Aliran . Malaysiakini has been authorised to
republish it.

11
How the British suppressed the
Malayan labour movement
Malaysiakini |

This is part three of a series on the Malaysian labour movement.

FEATURE | In 1947, the Pan-Malayan General Labour Union, which was

established in 1946, changed its name to Pan-Malayan Federation of Trade
Unions (PMFTU).

It boasted a membership of 263,598, and this represented more than half the
total workforce in Malaya. 85 percent of all existing unions in Malaya were part of
the PMFTU.

The attitude of the Malayan worker was more assertive during this period. For
instance, a strike was reported of Chinese and Indian hospital workers because
they no longer wanted to be addressed as 'boy', and workers began to see their
subjection to physical punishments as unacceptable.

Tamil trade unionists refused to suffer any longer the use of the derogatory term
Kling. Estate workers no longer dismounted from their bicycles when a dorai, or
planter, passed by.

In short, unions concern went beyond limited industrial relations matters or

employee-employer matters concerning work rights and working conditions.

12
The British colonial government wanted to crush this development, and the ever-
strengthening labour movement decided to reconstruct the organised labour
movement in Malaysia and Singapore.

While the Singapore Trade Union Adviser, SP Garett, allowed the Singapore
GLU (SGLU) to re-organize as a federation and operate legally without
registering which led to the formation of the Singapore Federation of Trade
Unions (SFTU) in August 1946.

In Malaya, however, the then Trade Union Adviser John Alfred Brazier did not
want the same for Malaya he did not want the PMGLU to be recognised or
continue to exist.

Brazier ruled that all the branch unions had to register, and that thereafter there
be no relationship between any of the newly registered unions with the PMGLU
(that later came to be known as the PMFTU). The registered unions were not
allowed to seek guidance or remit funds to PMFTU. This created problems for
the PMFTU, that ultimately led to its demise.

The Trade Union Ordinance required the registration (or re-registration) of trade
unions according to sector or industry, and this allowed the government to deny
registration to unions they considered strong, unacceptable or militant unions.

13
Until the proclamation by the British colonial authorities of a state of emergency
in Malaya and Singapore in 1948, most of the plantation trade unions and
federations of plantation trade unions in Malaya were affiliated with the PMFTU.

It is of interest that the British may have considered the PMFTU a bigger threat
than even the Communist Party of Malaya (CPM), for the PMFTU was outlawed
even before the CPM was.

The influence of the Trade Union Adviser

Another method that was employed by the British, was to try and influence the
trade unions, and to this end in 1945, a British trade unionist, John Alfred Brazier,
was appointed by the government as Trade Union Adviser.

English-educated middle-class individuals were groomed and trained to replace

the then existing progressive worker leadership of trade unions. One of the
targeted unions were the plantation worker unions.

The government-appointed trade union advisers objective was not to strengthen,

but rather, to weaken the labour movement in Malaya. This included eliminating
the labour movements role in the political, socio-economic and cultural lives of
the nation, and narrowly restricting its activities to industrial relations, that is the
disputes between employers and workers.

This was an unnatural development, as workers are also citizens and humans
who live in the country. Who wins the federal, state and local government

14
elections is material the wrong people and parties may mean anti-worker and
anti-trade union policies and laws.

This restriction led to further erosion of worker rights and the power of negotiation
for better terms. If the price of water, basic amenities, and the cost of living go
up, it also has a direct impact on the lives of workers and their families. To bar
unions and workers from taking up or speaking on such issues was absurd.

It must not be forgotten that workers and their unions had played a very
significant role in the struggle for independence of Malaya from the British
colonial government. They also played a significant role in developing the
Constitution of Malaya - now Malaysia.

The PMFTU, Clerical Unions of Penang, Malacca, Selangor and Perak, and the
Peasant's Union were a part of the All-Malayan Council of Joint Action
(AMCJA), with Tan Cheng Lock as chairperson and Gerald de Cruz as
Secretary-General, who actively campaigned on matters concerning the
Malaysian Constitution.

It must be reiterated that what the British did to the trade unions in Malaysia was
contrary to the accepted position and role of trade unions in England. To this day,
trade unions in the United Kingdom continue to play an active role in the political
life until today, being still very much affiliated to the Labour Party.

15
The manner in which the British treated the labour movement in Malaya and
Singapore was not at all the same the way they treated their own labour
movement in Britain.

In Malaysia, the object was clearly union busting for the benefit of employers
and businesses, most of which were British-owned or controlled.

Other laws to suppress labour movement

Besides the new labour laws, the British colonial government also used other
laws to suppress or carry out union busting.

In 1947, the ordinary trespassing law was used to keep union organisers from
meeting and speaking with workers in plantations.

For instance in late March 1947, a large police force came to the Dublin estate in
Kedah to arrest a federation of trade unions official for trespassing as he was
speaking to a group of workers there. When the workers closed ranks around the
official, the police opened fire, killing one worker and wounding five.

In a clash between police and workers at the Bedong estate on 3 March 1947, 21
workers were injured; whereby "the strike leader died of injuries received at the
hands of the police a few days later". 61 of these workers were charged and
sentenced to six months' imprisonment.

The existing law then was that workers could not be terminated just for exercising
their right to strike, which was a workers right. But in October 1947, the Supreme

16
Court ruled in a case involving three rubber tappers that striking was a breach of
contract and that the dismissal was justified. This was a major change of law and
policy.

Unionists were also convicted for intimidation. In November 1947, S Appadurai,

vice-president of the Penang Federation of Trade Unions and chairperson of the
Indian section of the Penang Harbour Labour Association was charged for having
written to an employer warning him against using backlegs.

Backlegs are persons who act against the interests of a trade union by
continuing to work during a strike, or taking over a striker's job during a strike. In
law then and before this, it was wrong for employers to use backlegs when
workers are on strike. However, in this case, the said union leader was found
guilty and sent to prison.

In January 1948, K Vanivellu, secretary of the Kedah Federation of Rubber

Workers Unions was charged for having written to an employer asking him to
reinstate 14 workers who had been dismissed for striking and suggesting that if
he did not, the remaining workers might leave their jobs.

Hence, various other laws and the courts were also used wrongly, for the
purpose of union-busting pursuant to the new British policy of weakening the
labour movement in Malaysia.

New amendments to the Trade Union Ordinance

The Trade Union Ordinance of 1940 was again amended to weaken unions. New
amendments to the Trade Union Ordinance were passed by the Federal
Legislative Council on 31 May 1948. The amendments were in three parts.

The first stipulated that a trade union official must have at least three years of
experience in the industry concerned.

The second prohibited anyone convicted of certain criminal offenses (notably

intimidation and extortion, which were common charges against unionists) from
holding trade union office.

The third stated that a federation could only include workers from one trade or
industry.

As Michael R Stenson said in his 1969 book, Repression and Revolt: the Origins
of the 1948 Communist Insurrection in Malaya and Singapore, the first provision
was seen as "a measure designed to exclude educated 'outsiders'.

17
It also created problems because many workers worked in different industries
and sectors, as work available during that time was not permanent, and had
more of a seasonal or transient nature.

It was similar to what is happening now, with the use of precarious short-term
contracts, where after the end of contracts, workers have no choice but to find
another job, which more often than not is in a different industry and sector.

The third part that insisted that a federation could only include workers from one
trade or industry effectively killed the PMFTU and even the SFTU. This divided
private sector workers further, and it also affected public sector workers, because
it prevented workers from different sectors and industries from coming together
and fighting for better rights and common issues.

PMFTU outlawed in June 1948

On 12 June 1948, the British colonial government finally outlawed PMFTU. This
is interesting considering the fact that the Malayan Communist Party and other
left-wing groups were only made illegal later in July 1948.

Can we say that for the British colonial government, the bigger concern or threat
was the labour movement and unions - not the Communist party?

Many of the leaders of the labour movement were arrested, charged, convicted
and sentenced. SA Ganapathy, for example, who was the first president of the
300,000-strong PMFTU, was hanged by the British in May 1949.

18
He was said to be on the way to the police to surrender a firearm he found, when
he was arrested by the police and sentenced to hang in Pudu Jail.

The birth of the Malaysian Trade Union Congress (MTUC)

Effectively, the British colonial government succeeded in crushing the labour

movement in Malaya. With the requirement of registration, and the powers
vested in the Registrar of Trade Unions, the government could now eliminate the
stronger troublemaker trade unionist and trade unions, and break up the labour
movement according to sectors/industries divide and rule.

In January 1949, there only remained 163 registered trade unions with a total
membership of only 68,814. In comparison, PMFTU had a membership of about
263,598 which represented more than 50 percent of the total workforce.

The Council of Trade Unions was formed. It organised the Conference of

Malayan Trade Union Delegates from 27 to 28 February 1949, and this gave
birth to what is today known as the Malaysian Trades Union Congress (MTUC).

Now, since the amended new trade union laws prohibited the formation of trade
union federations from different trades, sectors and industry, MTUC could not be
registered as a trade union or a federation of trade unions, and had to be
registered under the Societies Act as a society.

After Merdeka: The oppression continues

On 31st August 1957, Malaya got its independence from the British, but alas, the
position of the new Umno-led coalition government that ruled since then until now
did not differ much from their past British colonial masters.

Malaysia may have gained independence, but workers and trade unions
continued to be denied independence.

They continued to be oppressed and suppressed, by the Umno-led government

who adopted and continued the British divide and rule policy and laws, and the
restrictions and control with regard to trade union activities, trade union funds
and even trade union leadership restrictions.

The struggle for Malaysian independence took many forms ranging from armed
struggle to diplomatic negotiations, and for some the handing over power to the
Umno-led coalition was not real independence, and some continued to struggle
on.

19
The Umno-BN government and some leaders continue to be confused as to
whom we were fighting to gain our independence from the British or the
Communist Party of Malaya (and others).

Members of the police and military serving the British colonial government are
shockingly still seen as heroes of independence, and the recent invitation of 31
British army veterans to participate in the 2017 Independence Day celebration
highlights this continued confusion.

Some suggest that the British choice in handing over power to the Umno-led
coalition, a friend, was basically to ensure the protection of British-owned
companies and assets, and the continued flow of resources and profits from
Malaysia to Britain.

All these may not matter, as we now accept that Malaysia is an independent
state. What matters is that workers, unions and the labour movement continue to
be oppressed and/or stifled even many years after independence.

The role and influence of the labour movement in socio-economic and political
life and future of the nation continues to be slowly eroded as the current
governments policy is perceived to be pro-businesses and employers.

A greater concern seems to be to ensure smooth unhindered operation of

business and profits, something that may not change soon as the government
too now are employers in the growing number of government-owned and/or
controlled private businesses.

20
This article was first published by Aliran . Malaysiakini has been authorised to
republish it.

The last breath of the labour

movement?
Malaysiakini |

This is the final part of a series on the Malaysian labour movement.

FEATURE | Malaysia continues with its divide and rule policy with the labour
movement, permitting only unions based on occupation, sector and industry, and
disallowing the formation of unions or federations across different sectors.

Private and public sector workers alike are still prevented from belonging to
common unions. The Malaysian Trades Union Congress (MTUC) and the
Congress of Unions of Employees in the Public and Civil Services (Cuepacs)
continue to be registered as societies.

The justification for the control of unions and labour rights is competitiveness, or
the need for Malaysia to attract foreign investors to set up factories, and hence
create jobs and income.

21
Low wages and a passive workforce make Malaysia attractive, and the fact that
there have been no mass strikes for almost four or more decades is seen as a
positive.

Such justifications may be good for businesses, but it certainly is not helping
workers. Their wages remain low, and their rights continue to be eroded. A
perusal of laws will see that the Umno-BN government has been continuously
worker rights through various amendments of existing laws, and even a handful
new laws.

Worker rights education is also not a priority, and is absent from the curriculum.
Hence, many workers are not even aware of existing rights in Malaysia, and
more importantly, how they can claim it.

The government does not seem to be bothered as well with the inspection and
enforcement of labour and trade union rights, except maybe for occupational
safety and health rights (photo).

The Human Resources Ministrys statistics on employment and labour, for

instance, provide no figures of the number of inspections and enforcement
actions concerning labour rights, save for matters concerning occupational safety
and health, even though the law permits authorities to do so.

This would suggest that Malaysia may not even be interested in protecting
existing worker and trade union rights. These inspections must be done
randomly, and/or based on information received on alleged violations.

22
To not act until victims to lodge formal complaints particularly in the Malaysian
labour context, where many employees are easily terminated if they lodge
complaints is unreasonable.

'Unions remain weak'

Union busting continues. Union presidents and leaders are easily terminated for
issuing public statements. Union members are terminated for sending
memoranda to election candidates to get them to commit to the struggle for
better worker rights.

Workers participating in legal pickets are arrested for making noise. Union
registration and recognition processes are delayed, not expedited not just by
government bodies, but also by allowing drawn-out litigations initiated by
employers.

Malaysia finally introduced its minimum wage in 2013, which was bumped up to
RM1,000 (Peninsular Malaysia) and RM920 (East Malaysia) per month in 2015.

The figure is absurd when the government itself acknowledges that families with
a household income of less than RM4,000 per month are in need of BR1M
assistance (logically, assuming a family unit has two income earners, the
minimum wage should really be set at RM2,000).

But even here, there were not only implementation delays granted to employers,
but also a lack of enforcement against errant employers who refused to pay even
the paltry figure.

Unions remain weak. Mass layoffs of unionised workers in the thousands are met
with muted protests, if any, such as in the case of Malaysia Airlines.

The labour movement in Malaysia has been weakened successfully. The

reasons are not just laws and government policies, but also weak, fearful union
leaders and members cowed into submission.

The unwillingness of workers and unions to stand for their rights and fight for
better worker and trade union rights is a major problem no struggle will mean
no improvement. To depend solely on the government to bring about
improvements for rights is foolish, especially when its victims fail to highlight
abuses in the first place.

As noted previously, Malaysias worker and trade union laws fall short of existing
international standards, which became evident when even the now-defunct
Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement (TPPA) which could have in theory
overruled existing labour laws set improved labour rights as one of its
provisions.

23
https://www.malaysiakini.com/news/402157

It is perhaps good that some countries, as a matter of policy and law, have
adopted policies that they will not enter into trade agreements with countries that
do not at the very least have a minimum standard of human and labour rights.

The government claimed that it would review existing labour laws to bring it in
line with TPPA provisions, even if the deal is no more. But this has not as yet
been carried out.

It is also confusing and somewhat embarrassing that some trade union leaders in
Malaysia still consider trade union adviser John Alfred Brazier, a tool used by the
British to carry out union busting in the 1940s, as the father of trade unionism in
the country.

https://www.malaysiakini.com/news/402284

On a positive note, some unions have of late gone beyond just focusing on
employer-employee issues into addressing other pressing socioeconomic, politic
and cultural issues affecting the nation like the increase of cost of living brought
about by the introduction of the goods and services tax, as well as kleptocracy
and corruption scandals that have impacted the economy of the country.

MTUC and other trade unions have also in the past endorsed and campaigned
for some candidates contesting in general elections, which even saw the Umno-
BN government reacting by temporarily removing MTUC from its position as the
representative workers body at the International Labour Organization (ILO).

What next?

24
There will always be risks in the struggle for rights. The question now is what
Malaysian workers and trade unions are willing to do.

Remain in the shadows, as desired by the then British colonial government, and
the present Umno-BN government? Or will they wake up and fight for better
worker and trade union rights, and cause the re-emergence of a strong labour
movement?

Without highlighting wrongs, violations, issues and concerns, the struggle for
better rights will not be known to others, meaning there will be no pressure on the
government and employers to protect and improve labour rights in Malaysia.

Failing this, the election manifestos and policies of political parties may one day
not even contain any commitment to the improvement of rights and the
strengthening of the labour movement.

If 100,000 Felda settlers and their families can quite rightly make their welfare a
major national concern, why not the 14.5 million workers in a country of 31
million? We do not just have the power to change the course of the labour
movement, but also to shape the future of Malaysia.

This article was first published by Aliran . Malaysiakini has been authorised to republish
it.

25
An old photo of estate workersllllllllll

History of the labour movement in

Malaysia
Aliran | 2017-10-11T23:51:15+00:00

In a three-part series, Charles Hector looks at the history of the workers struggle
spanning from the struggle for independence, British suppression and the post-
independence weakening of the movement.

In Malaysia, the trade union movement seems to be weakening, and the number of
unions and the number of union members have not only stagnated but are also
decreasing.

Of the 14.6m workers, only 924,961 are union members in 2017. In the private sector,
union membership has been declining from 376,362 in 2014 to 354,313 in 2017.

Trade unions have been controlled by laws, first imposed by the British colonial
government, which was continued post-independence by the Umno-dominated coalition
government today known as the Barisan Nasional.

Malaysian trade union and workers laws fall far short of minimum international
standards, so much so when Malaysia wanted to be part of the Trans Pacific Partnership
Agreement, one of the preconditions was that Malaysia had to make significant
amendments to its existing labour laws to make them more at par with minimum human
rights and workers rights standards. The TPP may be no more, and still no amendments
have been made.

26
When there is a violation of workers or trade union rights, sadly Malaysian unions still
do not choose to struggle through pickets, strikes or campaigns against employers but
rather choose to simply lodge complaints with the relevant government institutions,
which lead to court actions, which may also go through the appeal process lasting many
years.

Sometimes, even when workers and unions do win, the remedies are lame and it really
has no impact on employers; neither are they instrumental in bringing about changes in
laws. Employers are happy with the state of affairs, for this method of resolution of
industrial disputes does not really have an impact on their businesses and profits; the
only victims are workers and the unions.

What has happened to the trade union movement is an acceptance of the limitations
imposed on them by the authorities, and a choice of surviving within that limited space
with a strong adherence to the law, even if that law is unjust.

Very little effort has been made to reach out to the Malaysian public and even members
of Parliament, state assembly members and senators for help in the fight for justice.

Since 1998, Malaysians generally have become braver and have started coming out in
much larger numbers in peaceful assemblies to protest against wrongdoings and to
demand changes. But alas, this has not moved the trade union movement or workers to do
the same despite the continued erosion of workers and trade union rights.

READ MORE: Continued weakening of labour movement in post-independence

Malaysia

The absence of a progressive, dynamic and new breed of workers leaders may also be a
factor. Current existing union leaders seem to have been subdued perhaps worried more
for about the de-registration of unions or maybe really their own financial security and
their union employees.

The struggle for better rights and justice always will have an element of risk, and unless
unions and their leaders are brave enough to fight for justice and rights, things will not
change.

Union leaders have also forgotten how to use their biggest asset: the large numbers of
workers acting in solidarity. Unions leaders today often choose to act alone, in a
representative capacity.

But most employers and the government are really not at all worried because they believe
that Malaysian unions are weak and these leaders really do not have the capacity to move
their membership to act collectively.

Sadly, even when pickets are carried out, the number of union members who come out
and participate is such a small percentage of the union membership. The last few large

27
pickets and/or protests that happened in Malaysia were carried out by migrant workers,
and many of them were not even unionised.

What happened in Malaysian Airlines when the company decided to get rid of about
6,000 workers is an indication of the state of the labour movement. These were all mostly
unionised workers, and the unions affected had more than 10,000 members, mmaybe
even closer to 20,000. But not a single mass protest or picket involving thousands of
union members took place.

To appreciate what happened to the Malaysian trade union movement, which was at one
time very strong, we need to recall the history of the labour movement in Malaya,
particularly before the subjugation of the labour movement by the British.

The Malaysian Trades Union Congress (MTUC), sadly, is a creature of British

manipulation, emerging after the stronger unions, federation of unions and workers
leaders were suppressed.

One would after expected that the MTUC and the Malaysian labour movement would
have resurrected after Malaysia gained independence from the British in 1957, but sadly
that did not happen.

As time moves on, workers themselves forget the past,\ and how strong the labour
movement was at one time in the history of Malaysia. This lack of historical knowledge
and lack of education and empowerment of workers and union members by existing
leaders keeps unions weak.

READ MORE: Workers, peasants should shape their socio-political, economic order

For many workers today, union is simply a subscription deducted automatically from
their salary by employers and transmitted to their unions, and the little benefit that they
get from collective bargaining agreements, which provide for salary increments and
bonuses.

Unions now also seldom have regular meetings for their members, if at all, which has
been proven to be essential for strengthening solidarity, enhancing knowledge of
members and generally strengthening unions.

The lack of involvement of members in decision-making and union actions has also
developed into an overall lack of interest in unions. The lack of development of new
leaders is problematic, and we find the same old people retaining union leadership
position for years and years.

Things need to change if unionism and the labour movement in Malaysia is to become
stronger and effective. But standing in the way sadly are sometimes the existing leaders
of unions. It is easy to blame the government and existing laws, but if workers and unions

28
are not ready to fight for better rights together, then there will not be any improvement
and rights and hurdles in law will simply continue to increase.

The union way must be the union way a struggle together with all workers standing
together, and not a representative struggle of one or two leaders alone, without the
participation or support of the rest of union members.

So, let us recall the history of the strong labour movement in Malaysia and what
happened.

Labour movements involvement in the struggle for independence

The fact that the Malaysian trade union movement played a significant role in the
political, economic and socio-cultural life of Malaysia has been forgotten by many. The
labour movement did actively struggle for independence from the British colonial powers
and contributed significantly in the determination of the future of Malaysia including
the drafting of the Malaysian Constitution.

But alas, all that was in the past, and the trade unions have been systematically weakened
and isolated from involvement in the life of the nation, first by the British colonial
masters and thereafter by the Umno-led coalition that has governed Malaysia since
independence.

This weakening, nay annihilation, of the labour movement continues to this day by the
actions and omissions of a government that seems to not just have embraced neo-
liberalism, but is also seen today as being pro-business. Government-owned and
controlled companies, of late, are also seen to be violating workers rights.

The future of the labour movement in Malaysia now depends on the workers and the
trade unions, who must appreciate the history of the Malaysian labour movement. They
must decide whether they want to struggle to make the labour movement once again
strong and relevant or just allow the slow withering away of not just the movement but
also workers and trade union rights.

READ MORE: German subsidiary's action in Malaysia amounts to 'union busting', claim
55 groups

Origins of union: protection and promotion of rights

The worker alone is weak but workers united are strong. Workers have always naturally
come to a realisation that only together as workers will they be able to fight and get better
rights and justice at their workplace. As such, more likely than not, organised workers
solidarity actions in one form or another have existed ever since there have been workers
in Malaysia.

29
For Malaysia, the advent of the workers struggle would have taken place in the rubber
plantations and the tin mines, where labour primarily consisted of workers of Indian and
Chinese origin a reality when Malay workers resisted working in such mines and
plantations, choosing rather self employment, small businesses, farming, fishing and the
civil service. The majority of the workers in the civil service were Malay.

General labour unions

The origin of organised labour in the form of workers unions in Malaysia dates back to
the 1920s. Back then, workers, who were primarily of Chinese and Indian origin in the
private sector and Malay workers in the civil service, formed what was known as general
labour unions (GLUs).

General labour union membership was generally open to any worker, with no restrictions
to any particular industry, sector or workplace, unlike what we have today in Malaysia.
These unions were generally formed in different geographical areas all around Malaya.
They attracted many workers and were strong. In the struggle for rights, history shows
that many actions were taken including strikes.

The labour movement then was not restricted to merely employer-employee matters, but
also played an active role in the political, economic and socio cultural life of the country.
The labour movement, together with other pro-independence groups, was also actively
involved in the struggle for independence from the British. They were also active in the
struggle against Japanese occupation forces during World War Two.

An example of a union then was the Selangor Engineering Mechanics Association, which
was registered in 1928, maybe one of the first registered trade unions.

The general labour unions and many of the unions also started coming together as
coalitions and federations and finally into the Pan Malayan General Labour Union
(PMGLU) and the Singapore GLU.

30
Continued weakening of labour
movement in post-independence Malaysia
Aliran | 2017-10-16T23:35:38+00:00

Will workers and unions choose to remain in the restricted space provided for them by
the British colonial government and now the Umno-BN government, wonders Charles
Hector in the final part of a three-part series.

On 31 August 1957, Malaya obtained its independence from the British. Alas, the
position of the new Umno-led coalition government, which has ruled since then, has
not differed much from the past British colonial rulers.

Malaysia may have gained independence, but workers and trade unions continued to be
denied independence. They continued to be oppressed and suppressed, by the Umno-led
government, which continued the British divide and rule policy and laws and
restrictions and control over trade union activities, trade union funds and even trade union
leadership.

31
The struggle for the independence of Malaysia took many forms ranging from armed
struggle to diplomatic negotiations and for some the handing over power to the Umno-
led coalition was not real independence and they continued to struggle on.

The Umno-BN government and some leaders continue to be confused as to who the
nation was fighting to gain our independence from the British or the Communist Party
of Malaya (and others). Those serving the British colonial government are shockingly
still seen as heroes of independence, and the recent invitation of 31 British army
veterans to participate in the 2017 Independence Day celebration highlights this
continued confusion.

Some suggest that the British choice in handing over power to the Umno-led coalition, a
friend, was basically to ensure the protection of British-owned companies and assets,
and the continued flow of resources and profits from Malaysia to Britain.

All this may not matter, as we now accept that Malaysia is an independent state. What
matters is that workers, unions and the labour movement continue to be oppressed and
stifled even many years after independence.

The role and influence of the labour movement in the socio-economic and political life
and future of the nation continues to be slowly eroded as the current governments policy
is perceived to be pro-business and pro-employer.

The greater concern seems to be to ensure the smooth unhindered operation of business
and profits, something that may not change soon as the government too are now
employers in the growing number of government-owned or government-controlled
private businesses.

READ MORE: German subsidiary's action in Malaysia amounts to 'union busting', claim
55 groups

Labour movement today and in the future

Malaysia continues with a divide and rule policy over the trade union movement
permitting only unions based on occupation, sector and industry while disallowing the
formation of unions or federation of unions across different sectors, industries and
occupations.

Private sector workers and public sector workers are still prevented from belonging to
common unions. The Malaysian Trades Union Congress (MTUC) and Cuepacs continue
to be registered as societies.

The control over the trade union movement, unions and workers rights and powers was
justified through the argument that Malaysia needed to attract foreign investors to set up
factories, and hence make available more jobs and income for Malaysia. Low wages and

32
a passive workforce are believed to make Malaysia attractive, and the fact that there have
been no strikes for four or more decades is seen as positive.

Well, such justifications may be good for businesses and maybe even Malaysia, but they
certainly are not helping workers their wages remain low and their rights continue to be
eroded.

A perusal of laws will see that the Umno-BN government has been continually eroding
workers rights through various amendments of existing laws and even new laws. [In a
previous article Worker and trade union rights in BN-ruled Malaysia, I dealt with this
erosion of rights.]

Workers rights education is also not a priority, and it is not even in our education
curriculum. Hence, many workers are not even aware of their existing rights in Malaysia
and, more importantly, how they can claim it. The government also does not seem to be
bothered about the inspection and enforcement of workers and trade union rights and
perhaps occupational safety and health rights.

A perusal of the regular Ministry of Human Resources Statistics on Employment and

Labour (Statistik Pekerjaan dan Perburuhan) provides no figures of the number of
inspections and case of enforcement of workers and trade union rights, apart from
matters concerning occupational safety and health even though the law provides for the
power of inspection and enforcement of these rights.

This sadly suggests that Malaysia may not even be interested in protecting existing
workers and trade union rights. These inspections must be done randomly and be based
on information received.

To not act until worker-victims lodge formal complaints, in this Malaysian working
environment, where many employers tend to easily terminate workers who lodge formal
complaints, is not reasonable. Like for other rights, inspection and enforcement must be
done randomly or on receipt of information of alleged violations coming from any
source.

READ MORE: Three vital reasons to oppose the TPPA

Union-busting continues. Union presidents and leaders are easily terminated for issuing
public statements. Union members are terminated for sending memorandums to election
candidates to secure their commitment to struggle for better worker rights. Workers
participating in legal pickets are arrested for making noise.

Union registration and the recognition processes are delayed, not expedited not just by
government bodies but also by allowing long-drawn-out litigation initiated by employers
in court challenging even ministers decisions.

33
Malaysia finally introduced a minimum wage, which today is RM1,000 a month an
absurd figure given that the government itself acknowledges that families with an income
less that RM4,000 are in need of government assistance ie BR1M (Bantuan Rakyat
1Malaysia).

Logically, assuming a family unit has two income earners, the minimum wage should be
set at RM2,000. Again, with this, there were not only delays granted to employers, but
also a lack of enforcement against errant employers.

Unions remain weak, for even when about 6,000 out of about 20,000 employees of
Malaysian Airlines (the majority of whom) were unionised workers, were terminated, not
even a single mass protest or legally permissible picket was held by these unions.

The labour movement in Malaysia may have been successfully weakened, and the
reasons may not simply been the laws and government policies but also a weak fearful
union leadership and members. The unwillingness of workers and unions to stand up for
their rights and fight for better workers and trade union rights is a major problem.

No struggle will mean no improvement. To depend solely on the government to bring

about an improvement of rights is foolish, when victims fail to highlight violations or
campaign for better working conditions.

Malaysias workers and trade union laws fall short of existing international standards.
This became evident recently, when as a precondition of being the part of the Trans
Pacific Partnership Agreement, the United States insisted on significant amendments to
Malaysian workers and trade union laws.

It is good that some countries, as a matter of policy and law, today have adopted a policy
that they will not enter into agreements and/or trade agreements with countries that do not
at the very least have a minimum standard of human rights and workers rights.

In response, Malaysia started reviewing with the intending of amending labour laws,
and it is hoped that this will still be done despite that fact the TPPA may be no more.

READ MORE: History of the labour movement in Malaysia

It is rather confusing, embarrassing and sad that some trade union leaders in Malaysia
still consider Trade Union Adviser John Alfred Brazier, one of the tools used by the
British to carry out union-busting of the Malaysian labour movement in the 1940s, as
the father of trade unionism in Malaysia.

But, of late, some unions have gone beyond just focusing on employer-employee issues
to address other more pressing concerns: the socio-economic, political and cultural issues
affecting the nation. These include the rising cost of living brought about by the
introduction of new taxation laws such as GST, government failures, and possibly

34
kleptocracy and corruption, which have caused significant losses of money and has had
an impact on the economy of the country.

In the past, the MTUC and other trade unions endorsed and campaigned for some
candidates contesting in the general elections. This saw the Umno-BN government
reacting and removing temporarily the MTUC from its position as the body representing
workers in Malaysia and at the International Labour Organisation.

There will always be risks in the struggle for rights and the question now is, what will
Malaysian workers and trade unions do? Will they remain in the role that the British
colonial government wanted, which seems also the same as what the present Umno-BN
government wants? Or will they wake up and fight for better workers and trade union
rights and for a re-emergence of a strong labour movement in Malaysia?

Without highlighting wrongs, violations and struggles for better rights, these issues and
concerns will not be known to others. There will also be no pressure on governments and
employers to protect and improve workers and trade union rights in Malaysia.

Will the election manifestos and policies of the political parties in Malaysia contain any
commitment to improve the rights of and strengthen the labour movement? Will workers
and unions choose to remain in the restricted space provided for them by the British
colonial government and now the Umno-BN government? Or will they finally break out
and regain some of their old glory, strength, power and relevance?

There are about 14.6m workers in a country of about 30m-plus people. As such, they do
have much power and say in not just the future of the labour movement, but also in
Malaysia. It is sad when just about 100,000 Felda setters and their families can make
their rights and welfare a major national concern while the many more workers and union
members cannot.

35
Workers, peasants should shape their
socio-political, economic order
Aliran | 2016-09-29T17:25:17+00:00

Destiny is shaped not by accepting an unjust order but by dismantling it and replacing it
with an order that harnesses the talents and abilities of all human persons, writes Ronald
Benjamin.

During my lunch break, I usually walk to a bookshop at a mall near my workplace,

searching for the latest books on developments in human resources and the latest
latest magazines on corporate and socio-political issues that could help in my
writings.

While there are many books to meet these needs, what I have realised after reading these
books is that there is a common pattern that tends to emphasise political and economic
elitism. These books tend to focus on prominent personalities and a political-economic
ideology that has very few links to the lives of workers and peasants.

36
Magazines like Bloomberg and Time illustrate this disconnect. It is difficult to find print
journals on workers contribution to the economy or workers journals critical of the
current corporate control of the global socio-economic order.

This coincides with news reports from western news channels about how in Austria big
corporations such as Amazon and Starbucks pay less taxes than a normal sausage stand.
Apple owes the government of Ireland 14.5bn euros in back taxes, as revealed by the
European Commission. I wonder how the life of workers and peasants would look like if
these taxes could be used to train them in handling new technology that could increase
their income.

READ MORE: How the British suppressed the labour movement in Malaya

In Malaysia, the government embraces this neoliberal ideology in a slightly different

shape, where private interests with a Malay-Muslim ethno-religious coding intersects
with the ruling Barisan Nasional government, creating monopolies that have increased
the costs of basics good and services. There are also business elites from other ethnic
groups benefiting from reciprocal, mutual self-interest.

The link between the political and business elites of the state with the mainstream
media on their side has obviously shaped Malaysia and the world at large. Workers and
peasants have to take whatever crumbs are thrown at consumers to survive as individuals
sand families.

It is amazing that inadequacies surrounding democracy, free elections and a corruption-

free government have been the source of of dissent against the ruling regime in
Malaysia.But the fact that all this is done with the acceptance of the current framework of
unjust big business-corporate dominance which has its roots in a neoliberal economic
system is puzzling. The question is, what are the alternatives?

The most important area that Malaysian workers and peasants should focus on is not just
wages and benefits. They should come to grips to the fact they are oppressed in a social
order dominated by big corporations that have strong support from political elites
whether from the Barisan National government or the opposition.

Malaysian workers need to seek a peaceful alternative order in collaboration with their
global counterparts and dismantle the connection between the political elite and Big
Business.

Trade unions that represent workers in Malaysia should play a larger role in coming up
with journals on the aspirations and success of workers in their professions. There should
be more workers forums dissecting the nature of the current socio-economic order that is
inimical to their interest.

READ MORE: Labour Day reflections: Why foreign workers are not the enemy

37
Workers have to break free from the handout culture by the government. Economic
limitations of income such as minimum wage should be replaced by a higher income
based on hard work and competence.

There should be focus on development that has to liberate the work culture that is current
dependent on the goodwill of employers. The desire to succeed with discipline and the
shunning of excuses should be the cultural norms of the Malaysian workforce.

Skills training should go beyond what is needed in the corporate world. There should be
alternative professional skills that would help create wealth without destroying the
environment. Breaking away from a wage-earner mentality is crucial. Harnessing the
resources of millions of workers in the country is vital to achieve this aim.

On a political level, labour leaders should work on dismantling the connection between
the political elites and corporate lobbies. The governments role is to provide the best
services, by progressive tax collection based on income.

Destiny is shaped not by accepting an unjust order but by dismantling it and replacing it
with an order that harnesses the talents and abilities of all human persons. Sacrifice is the
key rather than the self-seeking culture of the big corporations.

38
German subsidiarys action in Malaysia
amounts to union busting, claim 55
groups
Aliran | 2017-03-04T13:11:04+00:00

Fifty-five NGOs and unions have called for the reinstatement of Infineon Technologies
union president Muhammad Zulfadlee Thye bin Abdullah, who they claim was
wrongfully dismissed.

We, the 55 undersigned organisations and trade unions, are shocked to hear about
the wrongful termination of Muhammad Zulfadlee Thye bin Abdullah, the
president of the Infineon Technologies Malaysia Workers Union (Kesatuan Pekerja
Pekerja Infineon Technologies (M) Sdn Bhd) at Infineon in Malacca, which is said
to be the largest assembly of Infineon with a workforce of about 8,000 people.

Zulfadlee, an employee since 1998, has been the president of the union since 2005.

Infineon, a German company that produces, amongst others, electronic and auto
components, which are said to be used by major brands including Apple, Bosch, Philips,
Microsoft, Hewlette Packard, Dell and Continental.

On 13 December 2016, Zulfadlee was terminated on the grounds that he committed the
act of malingering, with reference to sick leave obtained on 18 October from a doctor,
Dr Aw Cheng Yew, of Klinlk Melaka, which is a panel clinic of the employer.

The basis of the allegation seems to be because he was present at an activity of the
Selangor division of the Malaysian Trade Union Congress (MTUC) in Putrajaya on the
same date when he was on sick leave. As such, one may assume that maybe the charge
was simply pretending to be sick (or faking illness) for the purpose of avoiding work or
duty.

It must be stated that the reason for termination used was not an employment misconduct
stated in Infineon Technologies (Malaysia) Sdn Bhds document entitled Policy for
Misconduct and Disciplinary.

Further, the word malingering is not a commonly used word, and as such many are
unaware of the meaning of that word. To compound matters, in this case, the word
malingering allegedly was never even clearly explained to Zulfadlee, whose mother
tongue is the Malay language. When such English words are used in a charges levied
against a worker, and then not explained clearly, it will have a tendency to be confusing
and may result in injustice.

39
In law, Zulfadlee was entitled to 22 days of paid sick leave every year, and it must be
pointed out that he was examined by a qualified doctor who concluded that he was
entitled to sick leave, and a medical certificate was signed and issued by the doctor. Sick
leave is given only when the doctor, after examining, decides a worker is not medically
fit to perform his/her duties at work.

There was no question of Zulfadlee lying or pretending to be sick, for on the subsequent
day he went to see a specialist doctor, who allegedly discovered that he had a stone in his
bladder, and he was then given further sick leave for three days on 19-21 October.

Despite being on sick leave, Zulfadlee did come to the office for a few hours to do some
urgent work on two of these days but he was not charged for committing the act of
malingering for these days.

Being on a sick leave does not mean that one is to be confined at home and rest in bed
and cannot do any other things including attending some union meeting or activity. Sick
leave only means that he is not medically fit for work on the day, and in law he becomes
entitled to paid sick leave.

On 18 October 2016, Zulfadlee said that he had no plans whatsoever to go to the

Putrajaya union activity with his union members who planned to go. It was only after he
had obtained medical leave whilst he was sending off the union members heading to
Putrajaya, that he was convinced by his fellow union members and suddenly decided to
follow them in the bus.

Now, even if an employer disputes the medical certificate issued by the doctor, then the
employer should reasonably have taken action against the doctor and/or the clinic not
with the employee. It must be pointed out that generally a clinic on the panel of the
employer is less likely to simply issue medical certificates to employees unless the doctor
is convinced that the worker is entitled to sick leave.

READ MORE: Pemecatan Kohila: Bank Negara mencabul hak asasi dan kebebasan
individu

In this case, the employer really had no reasonable basis to even suggest that Zulfadlee
was malingering or lied to obtain the sick leave. In such health matters, the employer is
certainly not competent only the qualified doctor is.

We do not believe that any failings of a doctor, if there even is, should ever be blamed on
a worker, and certainly should not be used as justification for termination.

Further, attending or participating in a union activity cannot and should never be an

employment misconduct and/or a breach of the employment contract.

Anti-union action and discriminatory action against union president

40
As such, we are of the opinion that the termination of the union president may really not
be because of an act of malingering by an employee, but simply a unionbusting action
targeting the union president and the union.

In Infineons letter dated 6 January 2017 rejecting Zulfadlees appeal against the
termination, it was stated amongst others, The basis of our decision was premised on the
fact that the Management could not condone nor mitigate punishments for a serious act of
misconduct committed by a Union President leading the employees of Kesatuan Pekerja
Pekerja lnfineon Technologies Malaysia itwu.

This letter was signed by Lee Cheong Chee, the president and managing director of
lnfineon Technologies Melaka.

The letter also stated your illustrious career and contributions to the Company has been
well acknowledged through your progress during your tenure. While that may ordinarily
be a mitigating factor in considering any appeal, the Management has decided that the
your act of malingering is deemed to be unacceptable and is aggravated in view of you
being the Union President at the point the act of misconduct was committed

Besides Zulfadlee, six other members of the executive committee of the union, including
the vice president and the secretary, were also targeted and subjected to disciplinary
action and some of this had ended with a stern warning, whilst only the union president
was terminated.

Considering the fact that out of the over 40 employees that participated in the union
programme on 18 October 2016, and only the president and six of the union leaders have
been subjected to disciplinary action, it certainly looks that Infineon may be
discriminating against employees who are leaders of the union, and it may be reasonably
said to be an act of union busting.

The timing of these disciplinary actions and the termination of the union president, when
the union and Infineon is starting negotiations concerning the next collective bargaining
agreement, whereby the first meeting was scheduled for 23 January 2017, is most
disturbing. Members of the union will most likely be prejudiced by this.

It looks like the employers actions in this case was maybe to instil fear in the union, its
members and other employees, which may affect the effectiveness of the trade union.
These actions of the employer would impact on the duty and obligation of unions to fight
for better rights and working conditions, highlight future wrongdoings, and fight against
violation of the workers rights. It is a failure to recognise and respect the freedom of
association.

The failure of this union and/or its members to openly protest the wrongful dismissal of
the union president indicates that the employers strategy to create a docile and compliant
union may be working. It may also seriously affect the upcoming collective bargaining
agreement to the detriment of employees and union members.

41
Obligation to uphold worker and union rights and freedom of association

Infineon Technologies (Malaysia) Sdn Bhd, a subsidiary of Infineon, a German company,

in this case seems to have acted contrary to Infineons own policy and Code of Conduct,
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) Guidelines, the
Electronic Industry Citizenship Coalitions Code of Conduct, UN standards and
principles; and other relevant standards and good practices.

READ MORE: History of the labour movement in Malaysia

Brands and corporations that have Infineon in their supply chain have the obligation to
ensure that justice be done, and that codes of conduct or policies not be violated by
reason of these action/s of Infineon, via its Malaysian subsidiary, Infineon Technologies
(Malaysia) Sdn Bhd, including the discrimination and the wrongful termination of the
union leader.

Justice demands that Infineon Technologies (Malaysia) Sdn Bhd should immediately
reinstate Zulfadlee without electing to simply just wait for a long drawn out court process
in Malaysia that could take even five to nine years before the court may award victory to
a wrongfully terminated worker.

As such, unless Infineon immediately reinstates Zulfadlee, an employee of Infineon for

18 years, great injustice would be done to this worker who has wrongfully been deprived
of his employment and income that is so needed for him and his family to survive.

Unjust Malaysian laws at present state that if a worker cannot be reinstated, he or she
would be awarded compensation in lieu of reinstatement for just a maximum of 24
months whereas previously this compensation would have been payment of all income
the worker would have earned from the date of wrongful dismissal until the date of
judgment (or reinstatement).

The new amended limit is not anymore a deterrent for employers seeking to wrongfully
get rid of employees, especially worker leaders.

Further, in the case of a union leader, the chances of getting employment with any other
employer, especially in the same sector, is also most difficult compared to other workers.
Termination of strong union leaders is grossly unjust to the union and its members.
Without immediate reinstatement, great injustice will be done.

Therefore, we

call for the immediate reinstatement of Zulfadlee Thye Bin Abdullah, the
president of the InfineonTechnologies Workers Union;

42
 call for the immediate withdrawal of disciplinary action/s against other union
leaders and/or members, and/or for the revocation of any punishment that has
already been handed out;

call on Infineon and its subsidiary, Infineon Technologies (Malaysia) Sdn Bhd, to
respect and promote worker and trade union rights and cease discrimination
against union leaders, and also cease union-busting activities;

call on Apple, Bosch, Philips and other companies that has Inineon in its supply
chain to immediately ensure that Infineon respect the freedom of association of
workers and workers and trade union rights;

call on Germany to ensure that Infineon complies with OECD guidelines; United
Nations and International Labour Organisation (ILO) standards, principles and
best practices; and other similar obligations to ensure that human rights and
workers rights are respected, protected and promoted;

call on Infineon and Infineon Technologies Melaka to respect and promote human
rights, including workers and trade union rights

Charles Hector
Syed Shahir bin Syed Mohamud
Mohd Roszeli bin Majid
Pranom Somwong

For and on behalf of the 55 organisations, trade unions and groups listed below:

Aliran
Asociacin de Trabajadoras del Hogar a Domicilio y de MaquilaAtrahdom, Guatemala
CA
Association of Human Rights Defenders and Promoters (HRDP)
Building and Wood Workers International (BWI) Asia Pacific
Cereal Centro De Reflexin Y Accin Laboral (Cereal), Mxico
Center for Alliance of Labor and Human Rights (Central), Cambodia
Christian Development Alternative (CDA), Bangladesh
Clean Clothes Campaign International Office (CCC)
Club Employees Union Peninsular Malaysia
Committee for Workers International (CWI) Malaysia
Electrical Industry Workers Union (EIWU)
Electronics Industry Employees Union Southern Region Peninsular Malaysia (EIEUSR)
Electronic Industry Employees Union Northern Region Peninsular Malaysia
GoodElectronics Thailand
IndustriALL Global Union
Institute for Development of Alternative Living (Ideal)
Kesatuan Eksekutif Airod
Kesatuan Pekerja-Pekerja Mitsui Copper Foil (MCFEU)

43
Kesatuan Pekerja-pekerja Perodua Engine Manufacturing Sdn Bhd
Kesatuan Pekerja-Pekerja Perusahaan Otomobil Nasional Sdn Bhd (KPP Proton)
Malaysians Against Death Penalty and Torture (Madpet)
Malaysian Trade Union Congress (MTUC)
Movimentu Kamponezes Timor Leste-Mokatil
National Union of Bank Employees (Nube)
National Union Employees in Companies Manufacturing Rubber Products (NUECMRP)
National Union of Flight Attendants Malaysia (Nufam)
National Union of Transport Equipment & Allied Industries Workers (NUTEAIW)
North South Initiative (NSI)
Paper Products Manufacturing Employees Union of Malaysia (PPMEU)
Parti Rakyat Malaysia (PRM)
Pertubuhan Angkatan Bahaman, Temerloh, Pahang, Malaysia
Persatuan Komuniti Prihation Selangor & KL
Persatuan Sahabat Wanita Selangor (PSWS)
PINAY (The Filipino Womens Organisation in Quebec), Canada
Progressive Voice, Myanmar
Persatuan Promosi Hak Asasi Manusia (Proham)
Sawit Watch, Indonesia
Solidarity of Cavite Workers (SCW), Philippines
Suara Rakyat Malaysia (Suaram)
Tenaga Nasional Junior Officers Union (TNBJOU)
Workers Hub for Change (WH4C)
Workers Assistance Centre, Inc, Philippines
Yayasan Lintaas Nusa, Batam-Indonesia
Global Womens Strike UK
Legal Action for Women UK
Women of Colour GWS
Pusat Komas
MTUC Selangor & Wilayah Persekutuan
SHARPS, South Korea
GoodElectronics International Network
Cividep, India
Students & Scholars Against Corporate Misbehaviour (Sacom), Hong Kong
Parti Sosialis Malaysia (PSM)
Jaringan Rakyat Tertindas (Jerit)
Community Development Centre (CDC)

READ MORE: Three vital reasons to oppose the TPPA

Infineons response:

Infineon employs ca. 8,000 employees in Malacca, Malaysia. The plant is Infineons
biggest semiconductor production site worldwide. Infineon is well respected as a good
and responsible employer in Malacca, and has been cultivating long-term and trusting
relationships with employee representatives. Infineon enjoys an excellent reputation in
Malaysia.

44
The report of 31 January by Good Electronics is known to us. Unfortunately the report
contains factually incorrect and subjective conclusions. There is no truth to the allegation
that Infineon is union busting or discriminating against union leaders and officers.

The insinuation that Infineon is taking these steps shortly before negotiations for the next
Collective Agreement begin, just to prejudice union members, is ignoble. That the events
drove the timing of Infineons dismissal/disciplinary action; Infineon was not in control
of these events.

What is true is that Infineon does not tolerate or condone misconduct by its employees at
any time; whether or not they are union leaders and officers is irrelevant.

Infineon is committed to human rights and workers rights. Infineon does not impinge on
its employees freedom of association or participation in union activities. Union members
(and union leaders/officers) are entitled to attend union activities when they are free (e.g.
while on annual leave or on non-working days).

However, the company has an obligation to investigate cases of apparent misconduct,

even if those cases involve union leaders and officers. There is neither preferential
treatment nor discriminatory treatment for union leaders and officers.

Infineon gave notice to an employee at the Malacca production site, who has been
president of a local trade union since 2005. Reason for the dismissal was a case of
misconduct by that employee in autumn 2016.

The employee did admit his misconduct towards the company and the case is well
documented. Infineon does not want to go into more details until the
administrative/judicial process brought by the employee is completed.

We can assure you that Infineon did not make that decision easily and has carried out an
in-depth examination of the case. Considering compliance guidelines and in accordance
with Malaysian labour laws, the local management has hereby concluded that this form of
misconduct cannot be tolerated. Also Infineon has taken decisions and dismissed
employees for clear cases of misconduct in compliance with the common application of
Malaysian law.

Infineon also investigated six other union leaders for misconduct and discovered that they
acted contrary to Malaysias Industrial Relations Act and contrary to the existing
collective agreement between the union and Infineon Malaysia. Therefore, the
disciplinary action against them was justified by law. It was not done as an act of union
busting, nor in violation of any of Infineons internal policies or the employees freedom
of association.

Integrity is our guiding principle in dealings with our customers, shareholders, business
partners, employees and the general public. We expect from all employees on all levels
especially high-ranking colleagues a professional conduct according to the rules.

45
Outlining the important regulations and providing support in legal and ethical questions,
the Infineon business conduct guidelines apply to all persons employed at Infineon and
members of corporate bodies of Infineon Technologies AG and its affiliates worldwide.
We are absolutely bound by it.

The business conduct guidelines is available on our website.

Please contact me if you have further questions.

Yours sincerely,

Alexander Trost
Vice President, Human Resources
Infineon Technologies Asia Pacific Pte Ltd, Singapore

46
Three vital reasons to oppose the TPPA
Aliran | 2016-01-20T23:04:04+00:00

The TPPA does not look good for democracy and human rights in the participating
countries, says Kua Kia Soong.

The government insists that there are no good arguments for opposing the TPPA.

47
For six years, very few knew the contents of the TPPA except for the corporate lobbyists
that had been drafting it in total secrecy. All they said was that it was good for you, good
for free trade and they just wanted you to support it.

Critics were told to shut up on the grounds that they knew nothing about it. Meanwhile,
the neo-liberal ideologues have maintained that the opponents of the US-inspired trade
agreement do so based on ideological rather than substantive reasons.

This is surprising when we bear in mind that among the people who oppose the TPPA are
a Nobel laureate economist, Joseph Stiglitz, and the worlds most notable public
intellectual, Noam Chomsky.

Let us look at just three good reasons why we oppose the TPPA.

Limiting US and MNCs domination

Lest anyone has any doubts, the main purpose of US President Obamas two visits to
Malaysia within the last year was to try and speed up the signing of the Trans-Pacific
Partnership Agreement that is so critical to US capitalism in its effort to check the growth
of Chinas trade relations in the region.

It is nave for neo-liberals to claim that this TPPA is in the interest of promoting free
trade in the Asia Pacific when they blithely ignore the elephant in the region, namely
China! The TPPAs blatant exclusion of China from this trade agreement is clearly the
next stage of the US Pivot to Asia after their military encirclement of China with a
noose of military bases and warships.

This article is by no means a defence of China or Chinas interests in the region; rather, it
is a condemnation of US imperialistic designs which are not in the interest of free trade
and harmonious co-existence in the region. US imperialistic designs do not just take a
military form; they stretch into strategic economic forays by US-based multinationals in
an effort to exclude China from this so-called free trade agreement.

The TPPA is clearly more than just a trade deal; it also imposes parameters on non-trade
areas. This is the point stressed by Stiglitz. It sets new rules for everything from food
safety and financial markets to medicine prices and internet freedom, requiring countries
to maintain compatible regulatory regimes; facilitate corporate financial transactions;
establish copyright and patent protections to govern intellectual property rights and to
safeguard foreign investors.

READ MORE: Peluang emas untuk kaji semula dasar perdagangan antarabangsa

The Investor State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) mechanism is the extra-judicial process
written into the TPP (Chapter 28), whereby governments can be dragged before tribunals
by corporate lawyers if they think national (health, environmental, public policy) laws
violate their TPP rights or limit the MNCs expected profits.

48
These corporate lawyers can decide whether our national environmental laws, safety
regulations, public policy, or labour laws get in the way of the MNCs profits. Thus, it
has been pointed out that when Egypt attempted to raise its minimum wage recently, a
French water concessionaire operating in the country lodged an Investor-State Dispute
Settlement (ISDS) suit against the Egyptian government.

Under the agreement, pharmaceutical companies, which are among those enjoying access
to negotiators as advisers, can challenge any attempt to make generic drugs more
affordable by claiming that such measures undermine their new rights granted by the
(TPPA) deal.

In the financial sector, the agreement will water down regulatory safeguards put in place
after the 2008 financial crisis and block any ban placed on risky financial products,
including those toxic derivatives that contributed to the crisis in the first place.

Chapters 9, 10, 11 of the TPPA provide a free rein to the operations of international
finance capital via the dismantling of capital controls, prohibition on financial taxation
and by undoing the stabilising tools set up in certain economies to counter the 2008
financial meltdown. Stiglitz has warned that the TPPA presents grave risks as it serves
the interests of the wealthiest.

Negative impact on Malaysian SMEs

According to the PricewaterhouseCoopers (PWC) study of the impact of the TPPA on the
Malaysian economy and society, there is potential for negative impacts on bumiputra
businesses and SMEs but these impacts appear to be largely mitigated based on the
concessions secured by Malaysia. The potential negative impacts are mainly due to
bumiputra businesses being domestic oriented, and dependent on government contracts
and vendor programmes. However, there is a need to transform bumiputra businesses and
SMEs to reap the full benefit of the TPPA Despite the concessions; there is a need for
programmes to increase the competitiveness of bumiputra businesses and SMEs,
especially in the areas that will be open to foreign competition.

According to the study, only 38% of the SMEs in Malaysia are bumiputra-owned while
the majority are non-bumiputra-owned and operated.

READ MORE: Don't sign TPP without committing to human rights, development, urges
UN expert

While it is not clear how bumiputra businesses which are not dependent on government
contracts and vendor programmes are expected to cope, as usual the government does not
elaborate on how, if any, the 62% of the non-bumiputra-owned SMEs will be assisted
during the onslaught by these multinational corporations after the TPPA is in place.

In recent years, SMEs in the services sector have been affected by increasing
international competition. This is a major concern for SMEs which have not been able to

49
develop their capabilities or to grow when the sub-sectors were liberalised. It is therefore
surprising that the Chinese community, especially the mainly Chinese-operated SME
sector, has not been more vocal in their response to the TPPA.

Erosion of democracy and human rights

The TPPA does not look good for democracy and human rights in the participating
countries. First of all, the secrecy of the TPPA negotiation process itself was an affront to
the principles and practice of democratic governance.

It has been claimed by the US government that the TPPA will be in the interest of
Malaysian workers because the Malaysian government will have to abide by the
stipulations relating to labour standards.

Organised labour in the United States has criticised the TPPA, arguing that the trade deal
would largely benefit big business at the expense of workers in the manufacturing and
service industries.

Chomsky has also warned that the TPPA is designed to carry forward the neo-liberal
project to maximise profit and domination and to set the working people in the world in
competition with one another so as to lower wages.

The White House has said that the TPPA is a high standard trade agreement that levels
the playing field for American workers, and businesses, supporting more made in
America exports and higher paying American jobs.

In fact, the logic of neo-liberal trade agreements like the TPPA is to drive jobs to
wherever they are the cheapest without a care for labour rights and labour protection as
has been clearly evident in the record of MNCs all these years.

Since when have the MNCs championed international standards for workers rights
throughout the world? Have MNCs suddenly developed a soft spot for Trans-Pacific
workers compared to workers in the rest of the world?

Would the Malaysian government and MNCs like us to believe that the anti-union laws
and policies that have been in place in this country since the free trade zones were
established in the seventies will give way to a new deal for all workers in Malaysia once
the TPPA is ratified? Can the government spell out in no uncertain terms what workers
can expect in terms of organisation and workers rights when we ratify the TPPA?

READ MORE: The trans-Pacific shell game

The chapter on labour and labour rights (Chapter 19) offers nothing substantive or
meaningful, merely fluffy minimal enforcement of workers rights and mandated
cooperation to diffuse adversarial relations between workers and employers.

50
It also contains provisions that allow foreign companies to bypass Malaysias industrial
courts during labour disputes by the setting up of a labour council to mediate such
disputes, and if a resolution is not reached in 60 days, the case can be referred for
arbitration through the ISDS system.

It has also been pointed out that the TPPA will facilitate corporations control and
possession over what people all over the world have come to expect as their commons.
Hence, the internet will be increasingly privatised and subject to surveillance while the
right to privacy, open communication, reporting, comment, teaching and research will be
curtailed.

The restrictive interpretation of US copyright and intellectual property laws would

become the global standard. This has grave consequences for the freedom of expression
and right to information.

The human right to health will be curtailed when the TPPA reduces access to basic life-
saving generic medicines and medical procedures while public health measures will be
privatised and medicines and medical services become unaffordable.

And according to Food & Water Watch, under a TPPA regime, agribusiness and biotech
seed companies can now more easily use trade rules to challenge countries that ban GMO
imports, test for GMO contamination, do not promptly approve new GMO crops or even
require GMO labelling.

Thus, the human right to a safe environment and the sovereignty of our nation will be
curtailed when the MNCs can sue the local government that tries to put a moratorium on
mining or other resource extraction that are hazardous to health of the local community.

We demand full public consultation on TPPA.

It is instructive that with the election of the reform-minded Prime Minister Justin Trudeau
in Canada, the Council of Canadians has demanded a full public consultation before
Trudeau goes any further with the deal.

They have cited concerns over how the TPPA would impact human rights, health,
employment, environment, and democracy.

Since our prime minister has often professed to be likewise concerned about reform and
transformation, we call on the government to undertake a full public consultation on this
potentially disastrous treaty and to answer the questions we have raised.

The writer is adviser to Suaram.

Source: thesundaily.com

51
Pemecatan Kohila: Bank Negara
mencabul hak asasi dan kebebasan
individu
Aliran | 2017-11-07T21:22:29+00:00

Jaringan Rakat Tertindas (Jerit) mengutuk tindakan Bank Negara Malaysia ang telah
memecat Kohila Yanasekaran, pengurus di Muzium dan Galeri Seni Bank Negara
Malaysia dan juga seorang aktivis hak asasi Jerit.

Kami memandang serius pemecatan ini dan kami berpendirian bahawa pemecatan
Komrad Kohila daripada Bank Negaradalah tindakan yang mencabul hak asasi dan
kebebasan individu yang diperuntukkan dalam Perlembagaan Persekutuan Malaysia dan
Deklarasi Hak Asasi Manusia Sejagat 1948 (UDHR).

Latar belakang
Kohila adalah salah seorang aktivis Jerit yang aktif dan mempunyai pengalaman dalam
aktivisma selama lebih 20 tahun iaitu sejak dari zaman universiti lagi. Beliau adalah
seorang aktivis yang mempunyai rekod dalam mempertahankan hak asasi rakyat yang
tertindas seperti pekerja ladang, peneroka bandar, pekerja kilang, Orang Asli dan
sebagainya. Pada tahun 2010, beliau juga pernah menjadi salah seorang anggota dalam
sekretariat Suaram yang merupakan antara NGO hak asasi manusia yang terulung di
Malaysia.

52
Maka sebelum Kohila menyertai Bank Negara pada tahun 2005, beliau sudah pun aktif.
Kohila telah bekerja di Bank Negara selama 12 tahun, bermula sebagai pegawai bank di
Jabatan Muzium, Galeri Seni dan Pusat Pengurusan Pengetahuan, Bank Negara Malaysia.

Pada Mei 2010, beliau telah dinaikkan pangkat sebagai pengurus di Jabatan Muzium dan
Galeri Seni. Ini dengan jelas menunjukkan bahawa beliau adalah seorang staff yang baik
dan berdedikasi sehingga boleh dinaikkan pangkat dalam masa lima tahun sahaja,
walaupun pada ketika itu pun beliau masih seorang aktivis.

Namun pihak Bank Negara telah memulakan beberapa tindakan untuk menyekat
kebebasan asasi individu Kohila walaupun semua aktiviti peribadi beliau dilakukan
dimasa sendiri beliau dan langsung tidak ada satu bukti bahawa beliau membuat kerja-
kerja ini masa kerja atau menggunakan kedudukan beliau untuk menyerang atau
mencemar imej Bank Negara.

Pada tahun 2011, pada masa himpunan Bersih 2, beliau telah diberi surat tunjuk sebab
serta diadakan siasatan dalaman kerana menyokong Bersih 2. Namun pada masa itu,
beliau dilepaskan dengan amaran keras.

Pada 4 Mei 2017, Kohila telah diberi surat tunjuk sebab oleh Bank Negara bagi tiga
tuduhan:

Tuduhan pertama: merayu sokongan untuk Parti Sosialis Malaysia dan ahli parti itu iaitu
Dr Nasir (Kota Damansara), Dr Jeyakumar (Sungai Siput), Sarasvathy (Jelapang) dan
Arutchelvan (Semenyih) bagi tujuan bertanding di dalam pilihanraya umum ke-13
dibawah logo sendiri melalui satu kenyataan awam bertarikh 12 April 2013 yang bertajuk
Allow PSM to contest under their own banner yang ditulis dan diterbitkan di dalam
laman sesawang Jerit pada 12 April 2013.

Tuduhan kedua: merayu sokongan untuk setiausaha agong PSM iaitu Arutchelvan pada
hari penamaan calon bagi tujuan bertanding di dalam pilihanraya umum ke-13 untuk
kawasan Semenyih melalui satu kenyataan awam bertajuk Jerit supports Aruls
candidacy in Semenyih, urges civil socity to show support on nomination day yang
ditulis dan diterbitkan di laman sesawang Jerit pada 17 April 2013.

READ MORE: Kerugian forex Bank Negara: Mengapa saya tidak dibenarkan hadir
siasatan, tanya Anwar

Tuduhan ketiga: berkelakuan tidak sewajarnya (befitting) dengan status puan selaku
pegawai bank iaitu dengan menyertai satu perhimpunan awam anjuran PSM yang
berlangsung pada 1 Mei 2016 (Hari Buruh) bertema Utamakan Pekerja, Selamatkan
Malaysia, di mana perhimpunan awam tersebut tidak memenuhi kehendak di bawah
Akta Perhimpunan Aman 2012 dan juga memakai kemeja-T yang mempamerkan antara
lainnya perkataan Batal GST dan logo anti-GST semasa puan menyertai perhimpunan
awam tersebut.

53
Selepas itu, satu prosiding dalaman telah berlangsung pada 30-31 Mei dan 2 Jun 2017.
Dalam tempoh lebih kurang sebulan, pada 19 Julai 2017, Kohila telah menerima surat
yang menyatakan bahawa beliau didapati bersalah dalam ketiga-tiga tuduhan dan beliau
disuruh keluar dari premis Bank Negara dalam masa satu jam sahaja. Rayuan telah dibuat
keatas keputusan bank pada 3 Ogos 2017, dimana rayuan tersebut ditolak pada 5
September 2017.

Isu pokok Pelanggaran kebebasan hak asasi

Bank Negara tidak menghormati hak seorang individu yang dewasa untuk mengamalkan
hak seperti yang diperuntukkan dalam Perkara 4, 5, 8 dan 10 Perlembagaan Persekutuan,
Deklarasi Hak Asasi Sejagat dan beberapa lagi instrumen hak asasi sedunia.

Berikut adalah limapelanggaran hak manusia yang ketara yang telah berlaku dalam kes
pemecatan Kohila.

1. Semua manusia dilahirkan bebas

Perkara 5 (1) dalam Perlembagaan Persekutuan menyatakan bahawa tiada seorang pun
boleh diambil nyawanya atau dilucutkan kebebasan dirinya kecuali mengikut undang-
undang.

Perlu ingat bahawa Artikel 4, Perlembagaan Persekutuan menyatakan bahawa,

Perlembagaan Persekutuan adalah undang-undang utama persekutuan dan apa-apa
undang-undang yang bercanggah dengannya terbatal.

Perkara yang sama juga telah dinyatakan dibawah Artikel 1, Deklarasi Hak Asasi Sejagat
(UDHR) yang menyatakan bahawa semua manusia dilahirkan bebas dan samarata dari
segi kemuliaan dan hak-hak.

Ini bermaksud bahawa Kohila mempunyai segala kebebasan sebagai warganegara

Malaysia dan sebagai seorang individu boleh mengamalkan kebebasan hak indvidu untuk
melakukan sebarang aktiviti yang sah dibawah undang-undang termasuklah aktiviti
semasa waktu tidak bekerja, bersendirian dan semasa cuti umum.

Maka dengan ini, Kohila mempunyai hak untuk mengamalkan kebebasan diri tanpa
kebenaran atau pengesahan daripada sesiapa atau mana-mana pihak.

Untuk makluman, Arutchelvan dan Dr Nasir adalah kawan peribadi Kohila dan mereka
juga terlibat dalam penubuhan Jerit, maka mengapa hak seseorang individu untuk
menyokong mana-mana calon disekat.

Yang lebih aneh adalah Kod Etika Bank Negara 2012 memberikan hak untuk seseorang
staff Bank menjadi ahli parti politik. Jika andaikata Jerit atau Kohila memberi sokongan
kepada calon Barisan Nasional, adakah beliau akan diambil tindakan sebegini?

54
Malah, Perkara 5(1) juga boleh interprestasikan bahawa seseorang itu mempunyai hak
untuk mempunyai privasi. Namun, seperti yang dinyatakan dalam tuduhan satu dan juga
dalam kertas prosiding dalaman oleh Bank Negara, Kohila telah dipantau dari semasa ke
semasa oleh pegawai dari Bank Negara termasuk pada hari berehat dan cuti umum.

Maka, kami berpegang bahawa Bank Negara telah mencabuli kebebasan dan privasi
Kohila dan ianya adalah salah dibawah Perlembagaan Persekutuan dan UDHR.

2. Hak kesamarataan

Perkara 8, Perlembagaan Persekutuan menyatakan bahawa semua orang adalah sama rata
di sisi undang-undang. Artikel 8(1) pula menekankan bahawa:

READ MORE: Three vital reasons to oppose the TPPA

Perlembagaan ini tidak boleh ada diskriminasi terhadap warganegara semata-mata atas
alasan agama, ras, keturunan, tempat lahir atau jantina dalam mana-mana undang-undang
atau dalam pelantikan kepada apa-apa jawatan atau pekerjaan di bawah sesuatu pihak
berkuasa awam atau dalam pentadbiran mana-mana undang-undang yang berhubungan
dengan pemerolehan, pemegangan atau pelupusan harta atau berhubungan dengan
penubuhan atau penjalanan apaapa pertukangan, perniagaan, profesion, kerjaya atau
pekerjaan.

Apa yang berlaku pada Kohila adalah diskriminasi kerana latar belakang beliau yang
merupakan seorang aktivis hak asasi.

3. Hak untuk berpersatuan

Jika kita melihat pada tuduhan satu dan tuduhan dua adalah kenyataan akhbar yang
dikeluarkan oleh Jerit pada tahun 2013. Pihak Bank Negara telah menggunakan
kenyataan akhbar yang dikeluarkan pada 2013, yang tidak menunjukkan ianya ditulis
oleh Kohila, sebagai salah satu alasan pemecatan beliau. Bank Negara telah membuat
satu keputusan yang tidak sah dan tergesa-gesa tanpa sebarang bukti yang kukuh bahawa
beliaulah yang telah menulis kedua-dua kenyataan akhbar tersebut.

Jerit adalah sebuah organisasi yang mempunyai aktivis-aktivis sukarelawan yang

mempunyai pendirian tentang pelbagai isu-isu rakyat termasuk pilihanraya umum.
Kohila, selaku salah seorang aktivis Jerit dan sebagai seorang warganegara Malaysia
yang bertanggungjawab dan mempunyai kesedaran sivil, mempunyai hak dan kebebasan
untuk terlibat dalam mana-mana organisaasi.

Beliau tidak melanggar mana-mana undang-undang kerana hak berpersatuan

diperuntukkan dalam Perkara 10, Perlembagaan Persekutuan Malaysia. Tambahan pula,
hak ini juga turut diiktiraf dalam UDHR dalam Perkara 20 dimana Setiap orang adalah
berhak kepada kebebasan berhimpun secara aman dan menubuhkan persatuan.

55
4. Hak untuk bersuara dan berhimpun secara aman

Tuduhan ketiga adalah merangkumi dua isu yang utama iaitu penyertaan dalam
Sambutan Hari Pekerja dan memakai baju Batal GST.

Seperti yang telah dinyatakan diatas, setiap individu mempunyai hak untuk berhimpun
secara aman dan seperti yang sedia maklum hak berhimpun ini turut diperuntukkan dalam
Akta Perhimpunan Aman (2012). Perkara yang paling penting ialah pihak Bank Negara
tidak mempunyai sebarang bidang kuasa atau pengetahuan untuk mengisytiharkan
sesebuah perhimpunan itu haram. Malah, dibawah Akta Perhimpunan Aman, tidak ada
provisi yang menyebut tentang perhimpunan haram. Apa yang dilakukan oleh Kohila
dalam masa lapang beliau adalah urusan beliau dan ianya tidak kena mengena dengan
Bank Negara dan mana-mana individu.

Kedua, isu pemakaian baju Batal GST adalah hak bersuara seseorang kerana memakai
baju adalah hak individu dan ianya salah sebuah cara seseorang itu mengeksperasi. Baju
itu tidak pernah menjadi isu bagi pihak polis mahupun pihak kerajaan. Maka, ianya juga
seharusnya tidak boleh dijadikan sebagai isu oleh Bank Negara. Jika ada seorang
kakitangan bank memakai T-shirt I love Maybank atau I love PM, adakah beliau
juga melakukan kesalahan atau membuat iklan?

Memandangkan pentingnya hak kebebasan bersuara dan hak berhimpun secara aman
untuk perkara-perkara yang melibatkan kepentingan umum, hak penjawat awam dan
pekerja lain untuk melibatkan diri adalah tidak salah malah ianya dijamin dalam undang-
undang.

Sesiapa yang mempraktikan hak mereka seperti dalam undang-undang seharusnya

dilindungi bukannya dipecat. Gangguan terhadap hak Kohila, khususnya hak untuk
berhimpun dan bersuara, tidak seharusnya berlaku dalam sistem dalam demokrasi.

Maka, Jerit ingin menegaskan bahawa kebebasan bersuara, termasuk kebebasan

berhimpun, adalah sebahagian daripada sistem semakan dan imbangan dalam sistem
demokrasi dan kedua-dua hak ini termaktub dalam Perkara 10 Perlembagaan Persekutuan
dan Artikel 19 dan Artikel 20 UDHR.

READ MORE: German subsidiary's action in Malaysia amounts to 'union busting', claim
55 groups

5. Hak kesamarataan dalam partisipasi dalam politik dan hal ehwal awam

Hak penglibatan politik dan masyarakat memainkan peranan penting dalam memajukan
tadbir demokratik, kedaulatan undang-undang serta dalam kemajuan semua hak asasi
manusia.

Hak untuk secara langsung dan tidak langsung berpartisipasi dalam kehidupan politik dan
awam adalah penting dalam memperkasakan individu dan kumpulan, dan merupakan

56
salah satu unsur teras pendekatan berasaskan hak asasi manusia yang bertujuan untuk
menghapuskan peminggiran dan diskriminasi.

Hak penyertaan adalah berkaitan dengan hak asasi manusia yang lain seperti hak untuk
perhimpunan dan persatuan secara aman, kebebasan bersuara dan pendapat serta hak
untuk pendidikan dan maklumat.

Antara cara rakyat Malaysia partisipasi dalam proses politik dan hal ehwal awam
termasuk juga melalui pilihan raya dan juga melalui masyarakat sivil. Perkara ini diiktiraf
dalam Artikel 21(1) UDHR bahawa, Setiap orang berhak mengambil bahagian dalam
kerajaan negaranya, secara langsung atau melalui wakil-wakil yang dipilih dengan
bebas.

Maka, Kohila hanya menjalankan tugas beliau sebagai seorang masyarakat sivil dalam
masa lapangnya partisipasi dalam hal ehwal awam dan isu-isu kepentingan rakyat. Maka,
tuduhan satu hingga tiga adalah sesuatu yang tidak harus berlaku kerana segala hak
beliau ada termaktub dalam undang-undang dan undang-undang hak asasi.

Kesimpulan
Maka dengan ini kami dari Jerit dan para pendukung hak asasi yang hadir pada hari ini
percaya bahawa sistem undang-undang yang membenarkan pemecatan daripada
pekerjaan semata-mata disebabkan oleh kepercayaan seseorang dalam isu kepentingan
awam dan isu politik negara telah melanggari hak asasi manusia, dan mencabul hak
seseorang daripada mempraktiskan hak mereka. Pihak Bank Negara telah
menyalahgunakan segala kuasa yang ada pada mereka tanpa mempertimbangkan dan
tanpa menghormati hak asasi manusia.

Pencabulan dan pemecatan yang berlaku keatas Kohila dimana beliau diambil tindakan
atas kegiatan beliau dimasa lapang dan aktiviti yang tidak melanggar mana-mana
undang-undang di Malaysia adalah satu trend yang merbahaya, perlu dikutuk dan tidak
harus dilaksanakan oleh mana-mana pihak terutamnya sebuah agensi besar dan
berpengaruh seperti Bank Negara.

Kebebasan berfikir, berhimpun dan mengeluarkan pandangan adalah hak asasi yang amat
penting dalam proses demokrasi negara. Menghalang dan menyekat seseorang individu
yang melibatkan diri dalam aktiviti seperti ini pada masa lapang mereka merupakan satu
pencabulan yang amat serius. Bank Negara harus insaf, menarik balik pemecatan dan
memastikan perkara ini tidak berlaku lagi.

Dengan ini kami menuntut Bank Negara untuk:

membatalkan pemecatan Kohila dan mengambilnya untuk kerja semula pada

tahap yang sama.
membayar gantirugi untuk pemecatan tidak sah, termasuk gaji bagi tempoh masa
tidak kerja, penderitaan emosi, mental dan reputasi.

57
 bonus tahun 2016 yang telah ditahan kerana kes disiplin ini.
semua kemudahan sebagai staff Bank Negara dikembalikan.
semua klausa yang tidak berperlembagaan dalam Kod Etika BNM 2012 termasuk
Perenggan 18(3)(d) BNM Code 2012, dibatalkan kerana bertentangan dengan
Perkara 10(1)(a), 10(1)(b) dan/atau 10(1)(c) Perlembagaan Persekutuan.

Abolish the contractor for labour system

Aliran | 2012-05-23T19:30:37+00:00

A joint statement endorsed by 90 local and international civil society groups has been
sent to the Prime Minister demanding that the government withdraw the 2012
amendments to the Employment Act 1955.

sulekha.com

We, the undersigned 90 trade unions, civil society groups and organisations object to the
actions of the government of Malaysia in destroying the direct employment relationship
between the principal, as employer, and their workers, as employees, with the latest
amendments to the Employment Act 1955.

The Malaysian Trade Union Congress (MTUC) , which not only represents the about
800000 unionised workers but also the over 12 million workers in Malaysia, have
strongly and consistently opposed the proposed amendments since it was first tabled in
Parliament vide Bill No: D.R.25/2010 in July 2010, which the government later
withdrew.

The government re-introduced the Bill with minor changes in June 2011 vide Bill No:
D.R.15/2011. MTUC came out even more strongly and also picketed at Parliament House
on 3 October 2011 and in spite of strong resistance from many quarters, including on the
Dewan Rakyat floor, the controversial Bill was passed on 6 October 201 and finally came
into effect on 1 April 2012.

58
We would like to address just one of several aspects of the new amendments that is the
main bone of contention, i.e. the introduction of the new provision for the definition of
contractor for labour.

With the amendment, the contractor for labour will be the third party (or the middleman)
who will come in between the now direct employment relationship between the owner-
operator of trade or business (defined as the principal) and their worker-employee.

Background

The Employment Act 1955 was introduced before independence (Merdeka) by the British
administration, effectively abolishing indentured labour, bonded labour and the kanggani
system in Malaya. (collectively then known as the contract system).

The Act also established two very important principles of law which are considered
sacrosanct to this day. They are security of tenure ensuring permanence of employment
and the proprietary right to the job where termination of workers, shall be only with just
cause and excuse and by due process.

The employment scenario in the country began to change in the early 1990s. In 1992 the
government allowed migrant workers for the construction and plantation sector. In 2000,
it was extended to the manufacturing and service (hotel and restaurants) sectors, and in
2002, it was extended to all sectors.

Originally migrant workers were employed directly by the principal employer but this
started to change in 2005, when the Cabinet Committee on Foreign Workers in its
meeting on 5 July 2005 agreed to the recruitment of foreign workers through outsourcing
companies (now known as Contractor for Labour in the amended Act). The issuance of
these outsourcing licences was strangely done by the Ministry of Home Affairs, not the
Ministry of Human Resources. There are today about 277 registered labour outsourcing
companies in the country today (The Star, 23 February 2010).

This establishment of the outsourcing companies allowed for the re-emergence of the old
contract system. It opened doors resulting in a direct assault on the basic foundation of
labour rights, the undermining of the dignity of labour, the perpetuation of the
establishment and operation of dehumanised and bonded labour. The practice, which
started with migrant workers, was then extended to local workers.

These outsourcing companies recruited local workers and migrant workers, some on
fixed-term contracts, with terms and conditions usually less favourable than that of
workers directly employed by principals.

The incidence of principals using workers supplied by outsourcing companies is growing.

The principal company pays the outsource company an agreed sum of money for the
number of workers supplied, whether they are local or migrant workers.

59
READ MORE: Political will can resolve labour migration issues

The principal company effectively is able to avoid the employers duty and obligation to
ensure their workers rights and welfare are protected. This practice also saved the
principal companys money that would have ordinarily been expended for workers like
medical costs, insurance, bonus, wage increments, retirement benefits, transport and
accommodation, service awards, and several other benefits. It also allows them to evade
statutory contributions to the Employees Provident Fund and for social security schemes.
The principal company also evades all obligations and safeguards in law when workers
are hired or terminated, including domestic inquiries, lay-offs and termination benefits. If
the principal wants to now get rid of workers, it now merely has to inform the
outsourcing company.

To convert the workforce from permanent employees to short-term contract employees

and now outsourced workers, most principals either retrenched their workers, used
voluntary separation schemes or other methods, or simply terminated their employees
substituting them now with workers supplied by the outsourcing companies.

Reason for the amendment

These outsourcing companies have been allowed to operate outside the law with no law
regulating them. Even though they were labour suppliers, they were not created under
and/or regulated by the Private Employment Agencies Act 1981, which would have also
ensured these labour suppliers would only provide workers and not become employers of
workers supplied.

The recent amendment to the Employment Act is to give these outsourcing companies
statutory recognition under the Employment Act, and at the same time institutionalise and
legitimise employment through the outsourcing companies, which now legally will be
legally known as the contractor for labour.

A primary reason for the creation of the contractor for labour and the introduction of
labour outsourcing is to stifle workers and trade unions capacity to demand and
negotiate better rights and benefits. The MTUC Memorandum to the HR Minister dated 7
October 2008 refers to an interview with Ishak Mohamed, the Enforcement Director of
the Immigration Department, that was published in New Straits Times, 20 July 2008,
where he, amongst others, said, outsourcing is good as it will attract foreign direct
investment. Investors do not want unions to be formed in their establishments. Through
outsourcing, it would be difficult for unions to be formed as (the) outsourcing company,
and not the factory, would be the employer This is indicative of the intention of the
government.

Sub-class of workers

The creation of this new sub-class of workers, who are not considered employees of the
principal, also jeopardises the existing employment relationship between the principal

60
and their current worker-employees; likewise the relationship with their trade unions.
Today, this new sub-class of workers, made up of both local and migrant workers, is
found in most workplaces, including even government-linked companies; in some
factories they currently make up about 50 per cent of the total workforce. Trade unions
are being weakened, and their bargaining powers for better rights and benefits for
workers is slowly eroding by the increasing presence of workers who are not employees
of the principal, and also by the loss of security of tenure created by short-term contracts.

Contractor for labour is actually outsourcing of labour which is very different from
outsourcing of work. Outsourcing of work is when the principal employer outsources
some specified work or operations which are not their core operation, to another
company, which carries out the work for the principal using their own employees under
their own control and supervision. For example, in several manufacturing companies,
cleaning, turf work/gardening, canteen and security services are examples of outsourced
work. This outsourcing of work is legal, and the workers of those who are doing
outsourced work are protected by the Employment Act.

Contrary to the principle that workers doing core operation work should be employees of
the principal, the amendment to the Act now allows the contractor for labour to supply
workers to perform the core operation under the control and supervision of the principals
supervisory staff and managers. The contractor for labour merely collects the salary of
the labour supplied and apportions a part to himself and pays his workers usually less
than what the workers who are under the direct employment of the principal are paid,
though they do the same work. The principle of equal pay for equal work is thus
breached.

READ MORE: Do African lives matter?

The principal, who is considered not the employer of the workers supplied, absolves
himself of all liabilities and employers obligations with regard to these workers supplied
by contractor for labour who are working for the principals benefit,

Employment (Exemption) Order 2012

The Minister of Human Resources, in an attempt to placate the MTUC, trade unions, civil
society groups and workers issued an exemption order, effective 1 April 2012, which,
amongst others, stated:

Any person who enters into contract for service with a principal to supply employees
required by the principal for the execution of the whole or any part of any work for the
principal in any industry, establishment or undertakings other than the agriculture
undertakings, is exempted from sections 31, 33A, 69 and 73 of the Act

However, the words used in the said exemption order which by the way also did not
include the amendment in section 2, which was the very amendment that gave statutory
recognition to the contractor for labour and its practices only further affirms the

61
contractor for labour and their practices. The exempted sections referred to in the said
Order merely dealt with ancillary matters like registration of employees when supplied to
principal and priority of debt. The exemption order also would deny access to justice for
workers now being supplied by these contractor for labour in all the exempted sectors.

MTUC and all groups that opposed the amendments were not appeased by this exemption
order, and continue their objections to the contractor for labour.

Protest

We strongly object to the contractor of labour system. All workers that work under the
control and supervision of the principal must be the employees of the said principal not
some third party. The Malaysian governments action is in breach of article 8 of the
Federal Constitution. In 1998, Malaysia also ratified the ILO Declarations on
Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work but this amendment is in contravention of the
said Declaration. Further, it also is in contravention of the ILOs Decent Work Agenda
which Malaysia has committed to.

The International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC), many trade unions and civil
society groups, also opposed, and still oppose this amendment. The Malaysian Bar also
recently passed unanimously a resolution on 10 March 2012, amongst others, calling for
the maintenance of the existing two-party employment relationship, and for labour
suppliers and/or contractors of labour to never be or continue to be employers of workers
after they (the workers) are supplied, accepted and start working at the workplaces of
principals.

The contractor for labour and their practices should not be allowed in any sectors
including the plantation and agricultural sector.

Demand

We, therefore, demand the repeal of all amendments to the Employment Act 1955, in
particular the amendments to section 2, 31, 33A, 69, 73 brought about by the
Employment (Amendment) Act 2012 [ACT A1419] relating to the contractor for labour
and their practices, and, pending repeal, an immediate stop to the operation of the
amendments.

We call for the abolition of the contractors for labour and their practices and for all
workers currently supplied by these third party labour suppliers (contractors for labour)
and who are still not direct employees of the principal employer to be immediately made
employees of the principal and accorded the same benefits and treatment as accorded to
all other employees without discrimination, including the right to form/join trade unions
or afford protection and entitlement to the benefits accorded through their respective
Collective Agreements.

READ MORE: Workers, peasants should shape their socio-political, economic order

62
We call for the abolition of precarious employment, and for the retention of a just two-
party employment relationship between principals and workers, and for the respect of
workers and trade unions rights.

Charles Hector
Pranom Somwong
Bruno Pereira

For and on behalf,

1. ALIRAN (Aliran Kesedaran Negara), Malaysia

2. Amalgamated Union of Employees in Government Clerical and Allied Services
(AUEGCAS )
3. Amalgamated Union Employees Tenaga Nasional Berhad (AUETNB )
4. Anak Muda Sarawak (AMS)
5. Asian Migrants Center (AMC)
6. Asia Monitor Resource Centre (AMRC)
7. Asia Pacific Forum on Women , Law and Development (APWLD)
8. Asian Network for the Rights of Occupational and Environmental Victims
(ANROEV)
9. Association for Community Development -ACD, Bangladesh
10. BASF Asia Pacific Network
11. BASF-PETRONAS Malaysia
12. Burma Campaign Malaysia (BCM)
13. Burma Partnership
14. Centre For Reflection And Action On Labour Rights (Cereal Guadalajara),
Mexico
15. Center for Indonesian Migrant Workers-CIMW
16. Center for Migrant Advocacy, Philippines (CMA-Phils)
17. Centre des travailleurs et travailleurs immigrants / Immigrant Workers Centre
(Montral, Qubec)
18. Centre dappui aux Philippines Centre for Philippine Concerns (Montral,
Qubec)
19. Christian Development Alternative (CDA)-Bangladesh
20. Clean Clothes Campaign
21. Communication Workers Union Victoria, Australia
22. Community Action Network (CAN), Malaysia
23. Democratic Party for a New Society (DPNS), Burma
24. Dignity International
25. Ecumenical Institute for Labor Education and Research (EILER), Philippines
26. Electronic Industry Employees Union Western Region Peninsular Malaysia
(EIEUWRPM)
27. FAIR (Italy)
28. Families Against Corporate Killers, UK
29. Federation Independent of Trade Union (GSBI) Indonesia
30. FSPMI ( Federasi Serikat Pekerja Metal Indonesia)

63
31. Future In Our Hands, Norway
32. Garment and Allied Workers Union, India
33. Hsinchu Catholic Diocese Migrants and Immigrants Service Center (HMISC),
Taiwan
34. Institute for Occupational Health and Safety Development (IOHSAD),
35. International Metalworkers Federation (IMF)
36. International Union of Food, Agricultural, Hotel, Restaurant, Catering, Tobacco
and Allied Workers Associations (IUF)
37. Jaringan Rakyat Tertindas (JERIT), Malaysia
38. Kesatuan Pekerja-Pekerja Polyplastics Asia Pacific (KPPAP)
39. Kesatuan Sekerja Industri Elektronik Wilayah Selatan
40. Kesatuan Sekerja NUTEAIW Isuzu Hicom (M) Sdn Bhd, Pekan, Pahang,
Malaysia
41. Kesatuan Industri Elektronik Wilayah Timur Semenanjung Malaysia
42. Konfederasi Serikat Nasional (National Union Confederation)[KSN] , Indonesia.
43. Labour Behind the Label, UK
44. Lal Zenda Coal Mines Majdoor Union (LZCMMU), India
45. Lembaga Informasi Perburuhan Sedane-Sedane Labour Resource Centre Bogor-
Indonesia
46. LHRLA Lawyers for Human Rights & Legal Aid (Pakistan)
47. MADPET (Malaysians Against Death Penalty and Torture)
48. Malayan Nurses Union(MNU)
49. MTUC (Malaysian Trade Union Congress)
50. Migrant CARE, Indonesia
51. Migrant Forum in Asia (MFA)
52. Migrante International
53. National Domestic Workers Movement- AP Region
54. National Hazards Campaign of UK
55. NLD-LA (National League for Democracy-Liberated Areas), Malaysia
56. National Union of Banking Employees (NUBE)
57. National Union of Petroleum & Chemicals Industrial Workers (NUPCIW),
Malaysia
58. National Union of Transport Equipment and Allied Industries Workers
(NUTEAIW), Malaysia
59. Network of Action for Migrants in Malaysia (NAMM)
60. Occupational and Environmental Health Network of India (OEHNI)
61. Pakistan Rural Workers Social Welfare Organization (PRWSWO)
62. Paper & Paper Products Manufacturing Employees Union(Reg No 444), Malaysia
63. Parti Rakyat Malaysia (PRM)
64. Perak Women for Women Society (PWW)
65. Persatuan Masyarakat Selangor dan Wilayah Persekutuan (PERMAS)
66. Persatuan Sahabat Wanita, Selangor (PSWS)
67. PINAY The Filipino Womens Organization in Quebec
68. Public Services International, Malaysian Affiliates National Coordinating
Committee
69. Pusat Komunikasi Masyarakat (KOMAS)

64
 70. RightOnCanada.ca, Canada
71. Sarawak Medical Services Union (SMSU)
72. Solidarity of Cavite Workers, Philippines
73. Tenaga National Berhad Junior Officers Union (TNBJOU)
74. Tenaganita, Malaysia
75. Thai Committee for Refugees Foundation (TCR)
76. Thai Labour Campaign, Thailand
77. The Live And Livelihood Foundation, Bangladesh
78. The Womens Caucus (Southeast Asia Womens Caucus on ASEAN)
79. Think Centre Singapore
80. United Filipinos In Hong Kong (UNIFIL-MIGRANTE-HK)
81. United Students Against Sweatshops, US
82. University of Malaya General Staff Union (UMGSU)
83. WARBE Development Foundation, Bangladesh
84. Womens Legal and Human Rights Bureau, Inc.(WLB),Philippines
85. WOREC Nepal
86. Workers Assistance Center, Inc., Philippines
87. Workers Hub For Change (WH4C)
88. Yayasan LINTAS NUSA Batam-Indonesia
89. Yokohama Action Research (Japan)
90. Clean Clothes Campaign, the Netherlands

Labour Day reflections: Why foreign

workers are not the enemy
Aliran | 2016-05-01T23:59:21+00:00

The organisers of todays May Day Rally in KL asked Jeyakumar Devaraj to

participate in a press conference at the end of the programme. This is what he had to say.

Happy Labour Day!

Let me put todays event in perspective.

Forty-six years ago, in 1970, Malaysias GDP was RM10.5bn. Today it is RM1,250bn.
Okay, there has been inflation of about 400 per cent between 1970 and now. So
RM10.5bn would be RM42bn in todays ringgit. So in real terms our GDP is now 30
times bigger than it was in 1970!

Okay, we also have to factor in population growth. We were about 10m in 1970. We are
now 30m. So, per capita GDP has increased 10-fold over the past 46 years.

65
But are we living 10 times better? Are we 10 times more comfortable? Certainly not! Our
college students are burdened with huge loans that take years to pay. Our young people
cant afford to buy houses of their own. Their income just isnt enough! Many ordinary
families are struggling to make ends meet despite working overtime.

Why is this happening? We are a rich country. Our per capita GDP has grown 10-fold;
yet, we are suffering! The problem is that a lot of the wealth in this country has been
grabbed by the top 10 per cent. That is why the rest of us are struggling.

READ MORE: How the British suppressed the labour movement in Malaya

To challenge the top 10 per cent and claim a fair share of the wealth of this nation, the
ordinary people have to get together. This is why the PSM organises events like this May
Day rally to bring people together to talk about our issues and demand a better
distribution of our wealth.

It is important that we do not remain divided by race or religion but work together to
create a more fair society. We should be concerned about the welfare of all Malaysians
whatever race they belong to. It is only when an Indian activist speaks up for poor
Malays, and Malay progressives champion the cause of the Orang Asli, and so on can we
build the peoples movement that can challenge the greed of the top 10 per cent.

We have in our midst 5.5m foreign workers. And it is true that their presence poses
problems for our working people: because foreign workers can be bullied into accepting
lower wages or long working hours without overtime, Malaysian workers from the B40
(bottom 40 per cent) have difficulty finding jobs or getting decent pay when they do get
employment. The bosses much prefer to employ the foreign workers.

But lets be clear here: the foreign workers are not our enemy, and the way out is for us to
empower them. If they are not so easily bullied, then they would not represent such a big
savings to the bosses. And our B40 would have better access to jobs. Empowering
migrant workers is good for our B40.

READ MORE: The fallacy of Malaysia's economic realities and the foreign workers

Unfortunately, many Malaysians do not understand this. Whenever the PSM speaks up
for foreign workers, there are netizens who are quick to chide us saying that we should be
concerned about local workers. They do not understand that protecting foreign workers
from exploitation is actually beneficial to our workers.

If we wish to redistribute the wealth of this country more equitably, we must understand
who the real enemy is. It is not the foreign worker. It is that portion of our elite who make
hundreds of millions in commissions and fees from the business of importing foreign
labour. Its only when we understand this reality can we address income inequality in
Malaysia in a meaningful way.

66
Workers of the world unite! Happy Labour Day!

67