Table of Contents
The Company 3
Main Issues 4
First issue 4
Second issue 4
Third issue 7
Analysis of the Issues 9
First issue 9
Second issue 9
Third issue 10
The Employees 11
The Employers 12
Islamic Perspectives 13
The six main functions of a Human Resource Management (HRM) are recruitment and selection, training and development, performance management and appraisal, compensations and benefits, safety and health, and employee and labor relations. However, this assignment only focused on issues related to compensations and benefits function in the context of Utusan Printcorp Sdn. Bhd. ...view middle of the document...
Bhd. stated that this is a reference made under section 20 (3) of the Industrial Relations Act 1967 (the Act) arising out of the dismissal of Badrol Hisham bin Mohd Noh (hereinafter referred to as “the Claimant”) by Utusan Printcorp Sdn. Bhd. (hereinafter referred to as “the Company”) on 24 September 2012.
The Claimant stated in his Statement of Case (SC) that he was employed by the Company since the year 2003 and had continued to be engaged by the Company until he was unlawfully terminated of his employment in September 2012. The Claimant's appointment as a Chief Executive Officer (CEO) with the Company had been permanent and was confirmed in writing via the Company's letter dated 21 September 2011. The Claimant as ordered to go on paid leave with effect from 11 May 012 by the Company vide the Company's letter dated 10 May 2012. On 31 August 2012, the Company ceased paying the Claimant his salary despite the Claimant's demands who had notified the Company of its failure to pay the Claimant's salaries and benefits.
The Company denied ever terminating the Claimant and stated that the Claimant was ordered to go on paid leave by the Company on 10 May 2012 as a result of the Company's restructuring process. A letter dated 10 May 2012 was issued to the Claimant informing him of the Company's decision which was duly received by the Claimant. The Company stated that although the Claimant's salary was not paid for the months of August and September 2012, the Company had not intended to cease paying the Claimant's salary. It was averred that the Claimant's salary was not paid for those two (2) months as the Company was experiencing cash flow problems whereby the Claimant's payment of salary was to be reinstated and the arrears in the Claimant's salary was to be paid thereafter.
The Claimant pleaded that even though the Company had decided to give the Claimant paid leave as per the letter dated 10 May 2012, commencing 11 May 2012, the Claimant had not received any of his salaries and allowances in August and September 2012. The Claimant had to send a letter of demand to the Company, demanding for all outstanding salaries and allowances.
Surprisingly, there was no documentary evidence adduced that the Company had indeed undergone a restructuring and there was cash flow problems, in the form of the Company's bank statements and other accounts. The Claimant had sent the letter to the Company after he had not received his salary for two (2) months. He had given the Company 48 hours to pay him, failing which he said he was going to make the necessary reports to the authorities including taking court action.
In the case before this court, it was crystal clear that the Company was aware why the Claimant was not being paid his salary. It was also known why the Claimant had demanded for it and consequently the Claimant's final resort to file his complaint to JPPS. It was the...