amrc march final · the early history of the labour movement in malaysia is really that ... the...
TRANSCRIPT
���������������� ����������
���������������� ����������
�� �� ���������
�� �������������� �
��������������� ������re
����
Asia Monitor Resource Centre
��������������� ������re����
AMRC is an independent non-governmental organisation
that focuses on Asian and Pacific labour concerns.
The Center provides information, research, publishing, training, labour networking
and related services to trade unions, pro-labour groups, and other development NGOs.
AMRC’s main goal is to support democratic and independent labour movements in Asia and the Pacific.
In order to achieve this goal, AMRC upholds the principles
of workers’ empowerment and gender consciousness, and follows a participatory framework.
� ������� ��
Asia Monitor Resource Centre Ltd (AMRC), 444 Nathan Road, 8-B, Kowloon, Hong Kong, China SAR
Tel: (852) 2332 1346 Fax: (852) 2385 5319 E-mail: [email protected] URL: www.amrc.org.hk
Copyright © Asia Monitor Resource Centre Ltd, 2003
ISBN 962-7145-18-1
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmit-
ted
in any form without prior written permission.
������� ����
Stephen Frost, Omana George, and Ed Shepherd
����
Tom Fenton
���� ������
Eugene Kuo
���������������
AMRC expresses sincere thanks to the following people and organisations for their gratefully received
contributions to this book.
Suchada Boonchoo (Pun) is co-ordinator for the Asian Network for the Rights of Occupational Accident
Victims. We thank her for all the help in organising our conference of authors in Bangkok.
Thanks to the American Center for International Labor Solidarity, Bangkok, Thailand for a financial con-
tribution towards printing the book.
We are indebted to Oxfam Hong Kong for their financial contribution towards the production costs.
Thanks to the International Labour Organisation for allowing us to use photographs from their library free
of charge.
Eugene Kuo, a freelance photographer and designer, a big thank you for contributing photographs and de-
signing the cover free of charge. Look at www.226-design.com for some of Eugene’s stunning work and
ideas.
To Tom Fenton, co-founder (with Mary Heffron) of AMRC – thanks a lot for advice, maps, and all the time
devoted to the layout of the book, free of charge. E-mail: [email protected].
Finally, we would like to thank the International Centre for Human Rights and Democratic Development,
Canada, for an extremely generous contribution that covered much of the publishing costs of this book.
Without their last-minute financial assistance, it is possible that this book would never have proceeded be-
yond the editing stage. E-mail: [email protected]; URL: www.ichrdd.ca.
1
�� �� �������������7�������
/�/����� �����
���� ����
The early history of the labour movement in Malaysia is really that of the activities of immigrants arising from
trend of development of the country (then Malaya) under British colonialists, who needed a constant adequate
supply of labour to meet their economic interests.
During that period our Malay brothers and sisters were engaged in the rural and agricultural sector as farmers
and fishermen whilst the world economy and consumption demand called for tea, coffee plantations in the early
nineteenth century and subsequently in the early twentieth century the opening up of tin mines and rubber planta-
tions to meet demand for its use in Malaya. Under British Rule vis-à-vis their economic interest, immigrant la-
bour from China and India was encouraged to work in tin mines and rubber estates respectively.
The British Colonial penetration into Malaya in stages was through the Straits Settlement (Penang, Malacca
and Singapore), the Federated Malay States (in states of Selangor, Negeri Sembilan, Pahang, and Perak) adminis-
tered by British Residents and Non-Federal States of Malaysia (i.e. Johore, Kedah, Perlis, Kelantan, and
Terengganu), which had British Advisors. The genesis
of the Malayan labour laws has its roots in legal mecha-
nisms that were enacted to deal with issues and matters
of the immigrant labour force and the peculiarities aris-
ing over the conditions of work at the mines and rubber
plantations.
Malaya gained political independence from the Brit-
ish on 31 August 1957. Subsequently in 1963, Sabah,
Sarawak, and Singapore joined Malaya to form Malay-
sia. In 1965, Singapore ‘left’ Malaysia and became
independent.
From an agricultural based economy, Malaysia has
rapidly moved towards an industrial based economy
with foreign direct investment drastically reduced. The
Malaysian economy will have to depend on stronger do-
mestic activities. The National Economic Policy which
was drawn up in 1970 after the civil riots in 1969 has not
achieved its target i.e. 30 percent of the economy to be
reserved for the Malays (constitutes slightly more than
50 percent of the total population). In relations to this
the Chinese( constitutes about 30 percent of the popula-
tion) have been very successful compared to the Indians
(population about 10 percent) who own less than one
percent of the economy.
Minority parties through are sympathetic towards the
workers’ right including the PAS government (which
rules two States i.e. Trengganu and Kelantan) but labour
laws are within the purview of the Federal Government
which is governed by Barisan Nasional with more than
two thirds majority in the Parliament.
1 ��������!����������
������!������������ �����
The initial labour laws in the nineteenth and twentieth
centuries dealt principally with immigrants’ conditions of
work, housing, and health. In 1877, the Colonial Govern-
ment appointed a Protector of Chinese Affair, and in 1899
a Chinese Affairs Enactment was in place to deal with
disputes and arbitrate thereon. In 1912, the Labour De-
partment had been set up for Straits Settlement and ex-
tended to Federal Malaya State (FMS) in the same year.
A Labour Code was enacted for FMS in 1912 and
Straits Settlement followed suit, which applied to all
races in the labour force of the country but the main fo-
cus was on conditions of work at mines and rubber plan-
tations. If the fundamental element for ensuring
workers’ rights are the rights to organise, associate, and
form trade unions then in Malaysian terms one has to
look at the development of comprehensive laws to en-
shrine and confirm trade union rights. No trade union
law per se existed before the 1930s and though there was
the Malaya Registration of Societies Ordinance
1889-1895. No trade union were registered and until
1948 though trade union may have emerged and oper-
ated, none were registered with the government.
The precursor to trade union laws in Malaysia, or Ma-
laya then, were three distinct scenarios.
i) The aspiration of the Labour Government in Brit-
ain and labour movement there led to the passing of
the following by the British Parliament: the Trade
Union Act 1871, the Trade Disputes Act 1906, and
the Trade Union Act 1913.
ii) The change in geo-politics in the world level with
emergence of communism as a champion of workers’
rights and as a negation of capitalism, gave rise to in-
dustrial unrest and series of strikes from 1930 – 1935
in Malaya for example the famous Batu Arang Coal
Mine Strike. This period witnessed well-organised
strikes and work stoppages all over Malaya.
iii) In Britain, Parliament also passed the Colonial
Development and Welfare Act in 1940 which deemed
it essential for continued long-term financial aid to the
colonies there should be laws protecting trade unions,
wages, and employment in the Colonies.
These three factors acted as undertones and, for polit-
ical and economic reasons, forced the colonial govern-
ment to enact the following laws and regulations: the
Trade Union Enactment of 1940, which was extended to
the whole of Malaya, setting up of the Department of
Registrar of Trade Unions, and the compulsory registra-
tion of trade unions in 1947 – 1948.
The year 1940 can be regarded as a watershed of the
labour rights and trade union movement.
������!� �����������
Following independence however the comprehensive
labour laws that emerged continues to be in force are:
%�!�������� ��������3466
This law as later entitled the Employment Act 1955
(EA), which regulates employer-employee relations and
2
-�������������
Asia Monitor Resource Centre
provides for basic terms and conditions of employment
and termination of employment, lay-offs, and termina-
tion benefit. This Act is administered by the Labour De-
partment of the Ministry of Human Resources. The EA
provides the minimum benefits for private sector em-
ployees whose wages do not exceed RM1,500 (US$395)
per month as follows :-
i)Termination and Lay Off Benefits 1980 - provides
payments for retrenched employees or in case of
plant closure:
• less than two years - 10 days wages for each year
of service;
• more than two years but less than five years - 15
days wages for each year of service; and
• five years and more - 20 days wages for each year
of service.
ii) Though employment of women between 10.00
p.m. and 5.00 a.m. is only allowed with the written
permission of the Director General of Labour, it ap-
pears in most cases it is allowed.
iii) Maternity allowance- 60 days paid leave.
iv) One day per week must be given as a rest day. Ad-
ditional payment for work on rest day.
v) Hours of work - 48 hours per week.
vi) Holidays - 10 paid holidays. Total public holidays
in some provinces is 16 days, others 17 days - 14
provinces in Malaysia).
vii) Annual leave between 8 to 16 days paid leave.
viii) Sick leave between 14 to 22 days paid leave and
in case of hospitalisation, 16 days paid leave. Em-
ployers must provide free medical attention for its
employees but not in the case of hospitalisation.
ix) Employment contracts can be either in writing or
oral but benefits provided cannot be less favourable
than the EA.
� ����'���������3464
This act requires the registration of trade union and un-
ion federations specifies their composition, membership
and details, rights, powers, duties, and responsibilities.
This Act is enforced by the Department of Trade Union
Affairs in Peninsular Malaysia of Ministry of Human
Resources. The Director General of the Trade Union De-
partment has sweeping powers and decisions are made
by him based on his opinions.
.����� ������������������345B
This Act regulates the relations between employer and
employees and their trade union and provides for the
recognition of trade unions at the workplace and preven-
tion and settlement of Trade Disputes.
.����� ������������������345B
This Act is administered by the Industrial Relation De-
partment in West Malaysia. All three main acts men-
tioned are administered by the Labour Departments in
Sabah and Sarawak (East Malaysia).
Other crucial legislation is for health, safety, and so-
cial security:
���!������8����������-���������
344E�����/���� ��������7������ ���
����345B
These acts provide for the regulation, supervision of fac-
tories and registration of inspection of machinery in or-
der to secure safety, health, welfare, and social security
of workers.
The Pension Act for public sector employees and the
Employees Provident Fund Act 1991 for private sector
employees provides old-aged security and protection to
retired employees. Normal retirement age for public sec-
tor employees is 56 whereas private sector employees
retire at the age of 55.
The Social Security Act 1969 and the Workmen
Compensation Act 1952 are to provide protection and
compensation for accidents at work and work-related
illness.
Superficially the other legislation compliments the
EA - the Trade Union Act 1959 and the Industrial Rela-
tion Act 1967 were considered liberal but from the
1970s they have been extensively amended.
De-liberalisation was the key objective of all changes
and amendments to these three essential labour laws.
A 1971 amendment to the law was a minor limitation
to the right to strike especially in the public sector. But
the 1980 amendment has considerably hardened the la-
bour laws. The government of the day did not hesitate to
use the Internal Security Act against unionist and social
activist and political leaders aligned to the trade union
movement.
The laws were hardened in a number of ways, the de-
tails of which will be examined below. Under the Ordi-
Asia Pacific Labour Law Review
7��F-.�
3
nance, discretionary powers of the Registrar of Trade
Unions were progressively increased, giving extensive
latitude to reject applications by potential unions, to de-
register individual union members, and to register un-
ions in such a way as to promote weak sectoral units. In
1980 the Registrar was given the power to conduct pros-
ecutions, monitor union funds investment, call wit-
nesses to inform on union activities, and to obtain court
orders to enter union premises and seize articles or
documents.
Provisions of the Industrial Relations Act to which
the unions object include allegedly inadequate protec-
tion against dismissal for union activists and workers,
severe restrictions on picketing, limitations on industrial
actions in the public sector, constraints on political ac-
tivities by union leaders, and extensive discretionary
powers of the Minister for Labour and Manpower to
compel conciliation or arbitration and to suspend union
registration.
The reasons for this tightening process lay primarily
in the government’s growing belief that Malaysia could
not afford industrial instability, especially as it relied
heavily on foreign investment by multinationals and on
increased manufactured exports. One government publi-
cation for foreign investors emphasised the low wage
levels and cost of living, restrictions on the right to
strike, and the ease with which employees could be
dismissed.
However, there was mounting pressure in the late
1970s for a tightening of economic policies. This was
because of concern about affecting foreign capital and
protection of foreign investors export competitiveness
as a trade deficit grew and fears for the country’s image
of political and industrial stability, which worsened in
early 1979 with an internationally publicised strike by
employees of its international airline. This affair re-
sulted in the detention of strike leaders and the passing
of draconian amendments to the industrial laws in 1980.
In the early 1980s this development strategy appeared to
be working but industrial tension was increasing at that
time.
������� ����!� �����
Malaysia has not ratified Convention 87 1949 (Freedom
of Association and the Protection of the Right to Organ-
ise) but has ratified Convention 98 1949 (The Right for
Organise and Collective Bargaining) but public sector
unions have been deprived of collective bargaining
rights. It should be noted in spite of this situation the
Public Sector employees have received 20 percent sal-
ary increase in 25 months i.e. on 1 January 2000 and 1
January 2002.
������������ �������
A cornerstone of collective bargaining is the obligation
on both the parties to bargain in good faith with sincere
desire to reach an agreement. The Freedom of Associa-
tion Committee of the International Labour Organisa-
tion (ILO) has stressed the importance it attaches to
good faith bargaining by both trade unions and manage-
ment but stopped short of prescribing behavioural stan-
dards indicative of bad faith bargaining in order to
enforce this obligation.
The obligation of the parties to collective bargaining
to negotiate with a sincere desire to reach an agreement
is implied (though not explicitly stated) in the definition
of ‘collective bargaining’ under section 2 of the Indus-
trial Relations Act 1967, where the Act defines it as ‘ne-
gotiating with a view to the conclusion of a collective
agreement’.
Malaysian law does not provide for any special ma-
chinery like the National Labour Relations Board
(NLRB is an independent tripartite authority) in the
USA either to spell out behaviour indicative of bad faith
bargaining or to enforce the statutory obligation of good
faith bargaining between the parties.
However the Industrial Relations Act 1967 sought to
prevent types of bad faith behaviour as identified by the
NLRB;
i) refusal by the employer to respond to an invitation
by the union to bargain within 14 days leads to a trade
dispute under section 13(4) of the Act; and
ii) refusal to commence bargaining within 30 days af-
ter employer’s acceptance of union’s invitation also
gives rise to a trade dispute under section 13(b) of the
Act.
There was no need to spell out other types of bad faith
behaviour, such as failure of the employer to send for
bargaining session person with authority as required by
the labour standards, or parties engaging in delaying or
dilatory tactics since the Industrial Relations Act 1967
4
-�������������
Asia Monitor Resource Centre
provides for a party to report to the Director General of
Industrial Relations of failure to reach an agreement.
When conciliation by the Director General fails on its
notification, the Minister may refer the dispute to the in-
dustrial court for a binding award. (sections 18 and 26 of
the Industrial Relations Act).
In the context of effective conciliation and arbitration
provisions in the Act, the pressure on the parties to bar-
gain in good faith is evident because in the absence of it,
ultimately the industrial court would impose its own
award on the parties. Hence it appears under the law that
there is no need for any specialised machinery to enforce
the obligation to bargain in good faith.
������������������� �� ���
The scope of the rights and prerogatives are dynamic
and in a state of permanent flux for it depends on the rel-
ative bargaining power and the relative strength of the
parties.
The international labour standards (the collective
bargaining convention 154 1981) indicated broadly the
bargainable issues or negotiable items but desisted from
spelling out non-negotiable issues. Specifically, this
convention calls for negotiations to determine working
conditions and terms of employment, regulate relations
between employers and workers, and regulate relations
between employers or their organisations and workers’
organisations. Thus international standards clearly in-
clude ‘relational matters’ as well as ‘economic issues’ as
appropriate for bargaining.
Under the Malaysian Industrial Relations Law the
scope of collective bargaining has been included in the
definition of the collective agreement under section 2 of
Industrial Relations Act 1967: ‘it is in agreement … re-
lating to the terms and conditions of employment and
work of workmen or concerning relations between such
parties’.
However the wide scope of collective bargaining was
curtailed by the ‘management prerogative clause’ viz
section 13(3) introduced in the Industrial Relations Act
in November 1971.
The management prerogative clause specifically pre-
cluded a trade union from raising any bargaining de-
mand concerning the recruitment, transfer, or promotion
of workers, retrenchment by reason of redundancy or re-
organisation, dismissal, and reinstatement, or allocating
of duties and tasks.
In other words, this clause is restrictive because it re-
moves ‘personnel matters’ from the scope of collective
bargaining, even though all these matters fall within the
meaning of the statutory definition of collective
bargaining.
Moreover, the prerogative given to the management
under section 13(3) of the Act are not absolute but very
much qualified. For example, while dismissal of a work-
man due to misconduct is a management prerogative, if
it is not for just cause or excuse, the union or worker may
raise a dispute under section 20 of the Act. Similarly
while retrenching workers is its right, if it is not due to
redundancy or reorganisation, a dispute can be effec-
tively raised under the law governing management
prerogatives.
����� ���������� ������ ��
The Malaysian Federal Constitution Part 8 – Equality
has been specifically amended so that there can be no
discrimination on gender.
‘All persons are equal before the law and entitled to
the equal protection of the law.’
‘Except as expressly authorized by this Constitution,
there shall be no discrimination against citizens on the
ground only of religion, race, descent, place of birth or
gender in any law or in the appointment to any office or
employment under a public authority or in the adminis-
tration of any law relating to the acquisition, holding or
disposition of property or the establishing or carrying on
of any trade, business, profession, vocation or employ-
ment.’
Asia Pacific Labour Law Review
��������
������� �� ������ ������������������ ������������ ��� ������� ��
5
Though it appears the Federal Constitution is very
clear on equality, women employees especially in the
private sector are discriminated against, for instance em-
ployees in the private sector retire at the age of 50
whereas male employees retire at 55 and women em-
ployees are also paid lower wages for performing simi-
lar jobs as men. Such discrimination is not rampant in
the public sector.
The truth is that the Constitution is not fully observed
regarding Part 8.
*���� ���������0
������������ ������������
The weakness of the Malaysian trade union movement
was deliberately designed by the British colonial gov-
ernment to eradicate the subversive influence of the
communists on the trade union movement. It is of cru-
cial importance to note that after Malaysia became inde-
pendent, the Government, in consolidating the existing
laws and regulations of trade unions introduced a new
definition of trade union as any association or combina-
tion of workmen … within any particular trade, occupa-
tion, or industry within similar trades, occupations or
industries. (Section 2 of T.U. Act).
This provision limiting trade union membership to
workers in similar trades etc has been responsible for
small trade unions and a weak trade union movement. It
effectively pre-empted the emergence of large powerful
national unions envisaged by the Malaysian Trades Un-
ion Congress (MTUC) and prevent the MTUC from be-
ing recognised as a federation of trade unions under the
Trade Union Act 1959. (MTUC is registered under the
Society Act and not under the Trade Union Act 1959).
The persistence of the government in not allowing
the National Union of Electrical Workers to organise the
electronic workers on the ground that they are not work-
ers in similar industries, illustrates the government pol-
icy not to intimidate the electronic multinationals by
allowing this powerful union to make inroads into the
electronic industry. The government frankly explained
to the ILO that the national union of electrical workers
with around 45,000 workers, if allowed to organise the
million electronic workers would have daunted the elec-
tronic industry and would have frightened foreign inves-
tors to leave the country creating an unemployment
problem in its wake. The saga of organising the elec-
tronic workers in Malaysia is well known and under
pressure of the ILO. All that these workers could gain
was the right to organise themselves into in-house un-
ions in electronic establishments, which are still reluc-
tant in accepting even this form of unionisation or their
workers.
Finally when the Malaysian government looked east
to Japan for inspiration, it was enamoured of reorganis-
ing the trade union movement into enterprises unions,
(called in-house unions in Malaysia), if necessary by
fragmenting the national unions into in house-union.
The definition of Trade Union as its stands today is any
association or combination of workers within any partic-
ular establishment, trade, occupation, or industry within
similar trades, occupations, or industries.
The definition of ‘trade union’ has not only denied
the MTUC the status of a federation of trade unions un-
der the Trade Union Act 1959 but has effectively
pre-empted the emergence of large powerful workers’
organisations. Finally the introduction of the word, ‘es-
tablishment’ in the definition of trade union 1989
amendment to the trade Union Act 1959 is an enabling
provision to break up national unions by organising
in-house unions in establishments. Till 1980 the law
stipulated that trade union officials must have a mini-
mum of three years experience in the industry of their
union. It is of interest to note that the Government,
through an amendment Section 29 (1b) to the Trade Un-
ion Act 1959, reduced the minimum period from three to
one year to speed up the process of in-house formation in
new enterprises, not to conform to the labour standard.
.��������������
���������� ��3
Dr James Alfred (Sabah) v. Koperasi Serbaguna Sanya
BHD (Sabah) and Anor, Federal Court, Kuala Lumpur
Dr James Alfred was dismissed from the employ-
ment of Koperasi Serbaguna Sanya Bhd (Sabah) on 1
June 1986. The industrial Court found for the appellant
and awarded him arrears of salary (back wages) from 1
June 1986 to 11 October 1995 (last day of hearing), com-
pensation in lieu of reinstatement of one month’s salary
for each year of service from 1 November 1984 (date
joined) to 11 October 1995, and 20 days; wages in lieu of
6
-�������������
Asia Monitor Resource Centre
unutilised leave. The High Court refused the Company’s
application for certiorari but the Court of Appeal al-
lowed the Company’s appeal in part in respect of back
wages. In quashing the award on back wages and remit-
ting the matter to the Industrial Court for reassessment,
the Court of Appeal held that in assessing the award for
back wages the Industrial Court should have taken into
account the fact that the appellant had found employ-
ment elsewhere after his dismissal. The worker appealed
to the Federal Court and the Federal Court upheld the
Court of Appeals decision and ruled that although the as-
sessment of back wages is a matter well within the dis-
cretion of the Industrial Court, that discretion is not one
which is unfettered; it has to be exercised according to
law and to equity as conceived by s. 30(5) of the Indus-
trial Relations Act 1967. The discretion is in the nature
of a decision-making process and is therefore open to ju-
dicial review. In line with equity and good conscience
the Industrial Court should, in assessing the quantum of
back wages, take into account the fact, if established by
evidence or admitted, that the worker has been gainfully
employed elsewhere after his dismissal. A failure to do
so amounts to a jurisdictional error of law and certiorari
will correct it. In the present case, the Industrial Court
had failed to take into account the material fact that the
appellant had been gainfully employed soon after his
dismissal. The award in respect of back wages was
therefore flawed.
���������� ��*
Prestige Ceramics SDN BHD v. Kesatuan Sekerja
Pembuatan Barangan Galian Bukan Logam and Anor,
High Court, Kuala Lumpur
The Non-Metallic Union, sought for an order under s.
56(1) of the Industrial Relations Act 1967 (IRA) to com-
pel the Prestige Ceramic Company to pay annual incre-
ments and contractual bonuses due under the collective
agreement agreed upon by both parties. The company
sought the protection of s. 56(2) of the IRA, which al-
lowed the Industrial Court to vary a collective agree-
ment in light of ‘special circumstances’. The company
premised its case on financial hardship due to economic
crisis. On 4 August 1999, the Industrial Court held the
‘special circumstances’ under s. 56(2)(c) did not include
financial difficulties because if it did it would ‘open the
flood gates’ for similar claims. The Industrial Court then
granted an award in favour the union.
The company made an application for certiorari in
the High Court an on the 26 June 2000. The High Court
decided that financial inability is ‘special circum-
stances’ and further decided the Industrial Court was
wrong by adopting ‘inflexible generalisation’.
The Union has appealed to the Court of Appeal.
Asia Pacific Labour Law Review
7��F-.�
7
�������$�%
/� ������������������!� �2������������� ������
ILO Convention No. Area Date Status
Convention No. 7 on Minimum Ace (Sea), 1920 Sarawak 3 March 1964 Denounced
Convention No. 11 on Right of Association (Agriculture)
Convention, 1921Peninsular
11 January 1960 Ratified by
Sarawak on 3 March 1964Ratified
Convention No. 12 on Workmen’s Compensation
(Agriculture) Convention, 1921Peninsular
5 June 1961 Ratified by
Sarawak on 3 March 1964Ratified
Convention No. 14 on Weekly Rest (Industry), 1921 Peninsular 3 March 1964 Ratified
Convention No. 15 on Minimum Age (Trimmers & Stokers) ,
1921Sabah and Sarawak 3 March 1964 Denounced
Convention No. 16 on Medical Examination of Young
Persons (Sea), 1921Sabah and Sarawak 3 March 1964 Ratified
Convention No. 17 on Workmen’s Compensation (Accidents),
1925Peninsular 11 November 1957 Ratified
Convention No. 19 on Equality of Treatment (Accident
Compensation), 1925Peninsular
11 November 1957 Ratified
by Sarawak on 3 March
1964
Ratified
Convention No. 29 on Forced Labour, 1930 Malaysia 11 November 1957 Ratified
Convention No. 45 on Underground Work (Women), 1935 Peninsular 11 November 1957 Ratified
Convention No. 50 on Recruiting of Indigenous Workers,
1936Malaysia 11 November 1957 Ratified
Convention No. 64 on Contracts of Employment (Indigenous
Workers), 1939Malaysia 11 November 1957 Ratified
Convention No. 65 on Penal Sanctions (Indigenous Workers),
1939Malaysia 11 November 1957 Ratified
Convention No. 81 on Labour Inspection, 1947 Malaysia 1 July 1963 Ratified
Convention No. 86 on Contracts of Employment (Indigenous
Workers), 1947Sabah and Sarawak 3 March 1964 Ratified
Convention No. 88 on Employment Service, 1948 Malaysia 6 June 1974 Ratified
Convention No. 94 on Labour Clauses (Public Contracts),
1949Sabah and Sarawak 3 March 1964 Ratified
Convention No. 95 on Protection of Wages, 1949 Malaysia 17 November 1961 Ratified
Convention No. 97 on Migration for Employment (Revised),
1949Sabah 3 March 1964 Ratified
Convention No. 98 on Right to Organise and Collective
Bargaining, 1949Malaysia 5 June 1961 Ratified
Convention No. 105 on Abolition of Forced Labour, 1957 Malaysia 5 June 1961 Denounced
Convention No. 119 on Guarding of Machinery , 1963 Malaysia 13 October 1958 Ratified
Convention No. 123 on Minimum Age (Under-ground Work),
1965Malaysia 6 June 1974 Ratified
Convention No. 100 on Equal Remuneration, 1951 Malaysia 9 September 1997 Ratified
Convention No. 138 on Minimum Age, 1973 Malaysia 9 September 1997 Ratified
8
-�������������
Asia Monitor Resource Centre
�������$��
��������0�(��������������������
1999 2000 2001p
2002f
Population (million persons) 22.7 23.3 23.8 24.3
Labour force (million persons) 9.2 9.6 9.9 10.2
Employment (million persons) 8.9 9.3 9.5 9.8
Unemployment (as% of labour force) 3.4 3.1 3.7 3.6
Per capita income (RM) 12,304 13,412 12,889
(US$) 3,238 3,529 3,392
Real GDP 6.1 8.3 0.4 3.5
(RM billion) 193.3 209.4 210.2 217.5
Agriculture, forestry and fishery 0.4 0.6 2.5 1.0
Mining and quarrying -2.6 3.1 0.2 3.0
Manufacturing 13.5 21.0 -5.1 4.2
Construction -4.4 1.0 2.3 2.4
Services 4.8 4.8 4.9 3.8
Nominal GNP 4.3 11.7 -1.7 5.3
(RM billion) 279.5 312.2 306.7 323.1
Real GNP 4.0 5.9 1.1 3.3
(RM billion) 179.7 190.3 192.4 198.3
Real aggregate demand¹ 2.0 14.5 2.3 2.8
Private expenditure¹ -3.8 16.0 -2.9 4.2
Consumption 3.3 12.2 2.8 5.0
Investment -21.8 28.7 -19.7 1.2
Public expenditure¹ 17.1 11.4 13.9 0.0
Consumption 18.5 1.7 11.9 4.1
Investment 15.9 19.9 15.5 -3.0
Gross national savings (as % of GNP) 41.1 39.5 34.9 33.8
Balance of payments (RM billion)
Goods 86.0 79.2 69.9 73.0
Exports (f.o.b.) 319.6 374.0 334.3 349.1
Imports (f.o.b.) 233.5 294.8 264.5 276.1
Services balance -10.7 -11.2 -8.4 -11.6
(as % of GNP) -3.8 -3.6 -2.7 -3.6
Income -20.9 -28.6 -25.9 -27.5
(as % of GNP) -7.5 -9.1 -8.5 -8.5
Current transfers -6.6 -7.5 -8.1 -8.4
Current account balance 47.9 32.0 27.4 25.5
(as % of GNP) 17.1 10.2 8.9 7.9
Bank Negara Malaysia reserves, net² 117.2 113.5 117.2 -
(as months of retained imports) 5.9 4.5 5.1 -
PRICES (% change)
CPI (2000 = 100) 2.8 1.6 1.4 1.8
PPI (1989 = 100) -3.3 3.1 -5.0 2.6
Average wages in the manufacturing sector 3.0 5.0 1.5 -
Note: Figures may not necessarily add up due to rounding
1. Exclude stocks
2. Arising from the fixing of the ringgit / US dollar exchange rate in September 1998, all assets and liabilities in
foreign currencies have been revalued into ringgit at rate of exchange ruling on the balance sheet data and the
cumulative gain / loss has been reflected accordingly in the bank’s current year account. The US dollar
equivalent of international reserves as at 31st December 1999 was US$ 30.9 billion.
p = Preliminary
f = Forecast
Source : Bank Negara Malaysia Annual Report 2001
Asia Pacific Labour Law Review
7��F-.�
9
�������$��
(������� ��������������
The MTUC, which was inaugurated in 1949, is the most
representative labour organisation in Malaysia and its
affiliates are from private sector unions and public sec-
tor unions including unions in the statutory bodies. The
MTUC represents workers on tripartite bodies such as
National Labour Advisory Council (NLAC) and the
Employees Provident Fund (EPF), SOCSO Board.
Out of the nine million workforce in Malaysia only
about 10 percent are organised. The MTUC represents
about 500,000 members. The administration of The
MTUC is carried out by a council elected at a convention
held once in three years.
Contact Person: Bro. G Rajasekaran - Secretary General
Address: Wisma MTUC, 10-5, Jalan USJ 9/5T, 47620
Subang Jaya, Selangor Darul Ehsan
e-mail: [email protected]
Telephone: 03-80242953
Congress of Unions of Employees in the Public and
Civil Service (CUEPACS) is a federation of unions of
government employees and has served as the representa-
tive for public service workers since it was registered in
1959. The administration of CUEPACS is carried out by
a council elected at a convention held once in three
years.
Contact Person: Bro. Abd Rahman b. Manan - Secretary
General
Address: Wisma CUEPACS, No. 34A, Jalan Gajah, Off
Jalan Yew, Pudu, 55100 Kuala Lumpur
e- mail: [email protected]
Telephone: 03-92858104 / 92856110
Though ILO Convention No. 98 has been ratified by
Malaysia, CUEPACS do not enjoy collective bargaining
rights.
�������$�;
���� ��������������������������3"����3��������������
�������������"�1
Employment Act 1955
Trade Union Act 1959
Industrial Relations Act 1967
Children And Young Persons (Employment) Act 1966
Employment Information Act 1953
Employment (Restriction ) Act 1968
Human Resources Development Fund 1992
Private Employment Agencies Act 1981
Employees Provident Fund 1991
Employees’ Social Security Act (SOCSO) 1969
Workmen’s Compensation Act 1952
Sabah Labour Ordinance 1949
Sarawak Labour Ordinance 1952
Wages Council Act 1947
Wages Regulation for Catering/Hotel 1967
Wages Regulation for Shop Assistants 1970
Wages Regulation for Commercial Workers Ordinance
1972
Wages Regulation (Penang Stevedores and Cargo Han-
dling Ordinance 1977
Wages Regulation Sarawak S.A. Ordinance 1972
Workers Minimum Standard of Housing & Amenities
Act 1990
Occupational Health & Safety Act 1994
Port Workers (Regulation of Employment ) Act 1965
10
-�������������
Asia Monitor Resource Centre