4-743/06 between encik adar bin ya and proton ... - Industrial Court
4-743/06 between encik adar bin ya and proton ... - Industrial Court 4-743/06 between encik adar bin ya and proton ... - Industrial Court
Reference: The reference of the Honourable Minister of Human Resources, Malaysia is regarding the dismissal of Encik Adar bin Ya (“the claimant”) by Proton Edar Sdn. Bhd. (“the company”). AWARD (NO: 64 OF 2011) This is a Ministerial reference to the Industrial Court under section 20 (3) of the Industrial Relations Act 1967 (“the Act”) made on 17 March 2006 for an award in respect of the dismissal of Adar bin Ya (“the claimant”) by Proton Edar Sdn Bhd (“the company”). Background The case was heard by the previous Y.A. Chairman of Industrial Court No. 28 and he has been transferred from Industrial Court effective in March 2009. As such, the learned President of the Industrial Court transferred the matter to this Division on 8 December 2010. It is pertinent to note that counsel for both parties on 16 November 2010 have agreed for this Court to deliver the award. After having carefully perused, examined and considered the notes of evidence from both the company as well as the claimant, the Court does 2
not find any problem in handing down the Award, as the issue is straightforward, plain and clear. Brief Facts Of The Case The claimant commenced employment with the company as a Workshop Manager on 5 April 1996 at a salary of RM2,600.00. The claimant alleged that he was unfairly dismissed by the company on 6 May 2004. The claimant's last drawn salary was RM5,022.00 per month. However, the company did not agree with the claimant's allegation and contends that the claimant was dismissed for committing two serious misconducts. It is important to note that a domestic inquiry was conducted by the company against the claimant on 22 April 2004 and the domestic inquiry panel found him guilty on charges no. 2 and no. 3. For ease of reference the notice for domestic inquiry is reproduced below: 3
- Page 1: INDUSTRIAL COURT OF MALAYSIA CASE N
- Page 6 and 7: “It is trite that the Industrial
- Page 8 and 9: incident between the claimant and S
- Page 10 and 11: Vide his written statement (CLWS2 (
- Page 12 and 13: contradict them. This appears in al
- Page 14 and 15: oth the evidence of the company thr
- Page 16 and 17: “parang” but it was done with a
not find any problem in h<strong>and</strong>ing down the Award, as the issue is<br />
straightforward, plain <strong>and</strong> clear.<br />
Brief Facts Of The Case<br />
The claimant commenced employment with the company as a Workshop<br />
Manager on 5 April 1996 at a salary of RM2,600.00. The claimant alleged<br />
that he was unfairly dismissed by the company on 6 May 2004. The<br />
claimant's last drawn salary was RM5,022.00 per month. However, the<br />
company did not agree with the claimant's allegation <strong>and</strong> contends that<br />
the claimant was dismissed for committing two serious misconducts. It is<br />
important to note that a domestic inquiry was conducted by the company<br />
against the claimant on 22 April 2004 <strong>and</strong> the domestic inquiry panel<br />
found him guilty on charges no. 2 <strong>and</strong> no. 3. For ease of reference the<br />
notice for domestic inquiry is reproduced below:<br />
3
Change language