How effective is the present law to control trade unionism

Trade unions have long served an important and vital role in the industry, acting as the
vanguard to protect the workers’ rights and financial livelihood, along with their health and
safety. The primary role of trade unions is to represent workers to ensure their welfare. The
union members also expect the leadership style to be consistent with meeting union’s policies
and objectives.
There are several ways to measure the effectiveness of the present trade union laws and
a study initiated by the Department of Trade Union Affairs in collaboration with the Institute
of Labour Market Information and Analysis under the Ministry of Human Resources Malaysia
mentioned the effectiveness refers to the ability to be successful and produce the intended
results. Trade Union effectiveness is regarded being caused by factors such as trade unions’
sustainability, its membership and leadership, its objectives, contributions, and achievements
or successes.
For the factors of union membership and leadership, the common ways to measure
strength of a trade union is by the size of the membership as well as types of leadership. A
trade union that has a large membership among the labour force is considered effective if it has
a respectable leader. The effectiveness of a trade union is also determined by the degree and
character of support on the part of its structure. The capacity to deliver to its members is
determined by the success rate of collective bargaining and agreements. Other than that, The
ability of trade union to persevere in its working environment is an important factor that
contributes to trade union effectiveness.
A trade union is pointless and useless without members. The primary objective of a
trade union formation is to meet its members’ need by protecting and promoting their interest.
Trade unions also advocate for members’ rights as when representing them in court
proceedings particularly in labour related disputes. Thus, objective presented by the trade
unions that are consistent with their members’ aspirations do continue to their effectiveness as
a whole. Besides that, workers join a trade union partly because they believe that the entity is
able to contribute to their welfare and wellbeing with respect to their employment and the
common measures of trade union success include its ability in conducting collective bargaining
leading to sound agreements and favourable decisions in trade dispute. Trade Union that have
good track records and achievements exhibit a positive image to the existing and prospective
members. The good reputation will either directly or indirectly help in developing trust or
increase the interest of workers to join trade unions or remain as members.
 To regulate the relations between workmen and employer. This is to promote good
industrial relations between the parties, to improve the workmen’s working conditions and
enhance their economic and social status which benefits the workmen and also to increase
productivity, in which the employer will benefit from it as mentioned in Section 2 (c) (i) of
Trade Union Act 1959. This is achieved through negotiation of collective bargaining to
conclude collective agreement between employers and employees. The effectiveness of
Section 2 (c) (i) of Trade Union Act 1959 is in the case of National Union of Bank Employees
v Director General of Trade Unions & Anor [2014] 3 MELR 614, where the court held that
trade union regulate the relationship between employer and employee to protect the rights of
its members by involving in the negotiation of collective bargaining and concluding collective
agreement.
Employer is legally and morally bound to respect the employees’ right. This is apparent
in the Industrial Court decision in the case of Kesatuan Sekerja Industri Elektronik Wilayah
Barat Semenanjung Malaysia v Renesas Semiconductor KL Sdn Bhd [2016]. The employer
was found to have embarked on a planned course of action to stop one of its employees from
testifying for the union in the process of getting recognition. The learned Chairman of the
Industrial Court held that the employer is legally and morally bound to respect the employees’
right to be involved in trade unionism and in the current case, the employer was found to have
breached the Trade Union Rights.
The Industrial Court made its ruling in accordance with equity, good science and having
regard to the substantial merits of the case. The court notes that employers are lawfully bound
to respect worker’s right to engage in unionism and to participate in the lawful activities of a
union. The Industrial Relations Act further makes the employer morally and ethically
constrained to do so. Article 8 of the Code of Conduct for Industrial Harmony dated 9 February
1975 declares that employers agree not to support or encourage any unfair labour practises
such as interfering with affairs of a Trade Union and the right of workers to organise,
discriminate, restrain, or coerce against any worker because of legitimate Trade Union
activities and abuse authority in any form. The protection of the right of the employees to
unionise for their common good is stated in Section 4(1) of the Industrial Relations Act 1967,
no person shall interfere with, restrain or coerce a workman or an employer in the exercise of
his rights to form and assist in the formation of and join a trade union and to participate in its
lawful activities. Therefore, the court in the case of Kesatuan Sekerja Industri Elektronik
Wilayah Barat Semenanjung Malaysia v Renesas Semiconductor found that the company has
violated the employee’s right that needs to be protected under the law of trade unionism.
 During the pandemic of Novel Corona Virus 2019, there was a mass laid off as what
happened with Malaysian Airlines when the company decided to get rid of about 6,000 workers
is an indication of the state of the labour movement. The workers that were being laid off were
all mostly unionised workers, with the unions affected having thousands of members, and yet
not a single dedicated mass protest took place. 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. This shows the importance and effectiveness of the current law
to control trade unionism in Malaysia. 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, most of these unionised workers choose to lodge complaints with
relevant government institutions, which leads to court actions, and possibly the appeal process,
which can last for many years.

On the other hand, the Malaysian trade union movement is faced with a number of
challenges, such as neoliberal policies where in this regards, it does advocate the elimination
of government-imposed restrictions on involving or operating in several nations or nationalities
for movements of goods, capital and people and changing structures of employment. Malaysian
unions are in general small, fragmented and regional. This is also due to the strict requirements
of the Trade Union Act 1959.
Trade unions can be seen as important instruments for protecting workers’ interests but
yet the laws lacked strong involvement in national development policy and were quiet and
conservative. 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 and
the Congress of Unions of Employees in the Public and Civil Services 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. 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.
 Labour related matters in Malaysia are governed by the Employment Act of 1955,
Industrial Relations Act of 1967 and the Trade Union Act 1959. There are several issues
confront the labour movement, and pose a great challenge to its ability to protect workers’
interests. These issues include, implementation of technology without due regard to
implications on workforce, unfavourable national labour laws, excluding trade unions from
many economic activities. Traditional work systems are changing, with increasing focus on
flexibility of duty calls outside working hours. More women are joining the workforce;
therefore there are exposure of women to discrimination, such as low wages, harassment and
poor working conditions. Consumerism and environmentalism, and social issues such as drugs,
alcohol addiction, smoking and HIV/AIDS and health care need to widen the scope of coverage
for the employees.
The National Union of Bank Employees also voice out their opinion on the present laws
as Trade unions in our country play a vital role for the economy and in protecting workers
against injustices and exploitation. Hence, Labour laws with flaws must be amended to
accommodate Equitable Justice for all concerned. For example, the limit of RM 2, 000 to be
eligible for protection under the Employment Act 1955 must be repealed and the minimum
benefits stated therein must be enhanced, recognition and registrations of trade unions should
be simplified and the 6-month’s processing period reduced to accommodate unions’ priority,
shorter redress period for trade disputes and dismissals, dismissal cases should be referred to
the Industrial Court directly for resolution.
In conclusion, regarding the effectiveness of the current law to control trade unionism
in Malaysia, Trade Unions need to be strengthened and consolidated to have social dialogue
with government and employers to sort out and voice out about the current challenges to
achieve the above improvement in Labour Laws.
Hector, C., 2017. The State Of The Labour Movement In Malaysia. [online] malaysiakini.
Available at: <https://www.malaysiakini.com/news/402157> [Accessed 23 October 2020].

Kuruvilla, S. and Venkataratnam, C.S. (1996) “Economic Development and Industrial

Relations: The Case of South and Southeast Asia” Industrial Relations, Vol. 27 No. 1, pp. 9-
23.

Mahathir Mohamed (1982) The Malay Dilemma, Federal Publications, Kuala Lumpur.

Murugasu, S. (2000) “Has Labour Day lost its purpose?”, Section 2, The Star, May 1.

Ramasamy, N., 2008. The Future of the Trade Union Movement in Malaysia. The Way
Forward, [online] pp.1-14. Available at: <http://www.amco.org.my/n-
archives/The_Future_of_the_Trade_Union_Movement_in_Malaysia.pdf> [Accessed 23
October 2020].

Rasiah, R. and von Hofmann, N. (eds)(1998) Workers on the Brink: Unions, Exclusion and
Crisis in Southeast Asia, Friedrich Ebert Stiftung, Singapore.

Rowley, C. and Bhopal, M. (2002) ‘The state in employment: The case of Malaysian
electronics’, International Journal of HRM, 13, 8: 1166-85.

Vanessa Ee-Lyn Gomes, Workers have right to protest, says MTUC, published on 2nd May
2015 Accessed 23 October 2020 http://m.themalaymailonline.com/malaysia/article/workers-
have-right-to-protest-saysmtuc