Company loses appeal over recognition of union for employees

The Court of Appeal noted that the company had failed to respond to a request to submit a complaint specifying the alleged breaches by the director-general of the industrial relations department.

PUTRAJAYA: An employer has lost an appeal against the decision of the director-general (DG) of the industrial relations department to allow a national union to represent its workers.

A three-member Court of Appeal bench said the DG could not be accused of failing to investigate complaints raised by Valeo Malaysia Sdn Bhd, which produces automotive parts, with regards to a secret ballot held to determine if the workers agreed to have a union to represent them.

Justice Azizah Nawawi, who chaired the panel, said the DG had advised the company to file a precise complaint specifying the relevant sections for the alleged breaches by the DG.

“The appellant (company) had agreed to do so. However, the appellant failed to do it despite the two-month time frame that was given,” said Azizah, who sat with Justices See Mee Chun and Wan Ahmad Farid Wan Salleh.

She said hand-written letters purportedly obtained from the workers, which the company allegedly complained of brainwashing by union representatives to vote for them, were never presented to the DG for his consideration in arriving at the decision to grant the recognition.

“The appeal has no merit and, therefore, is dismissed with costs and the High Court decision is upheld,” she said in the ruling delivered earlier this week.

The bench also awarded RM10,000 each to the DG and the National Union of Transport Equipment & Allied Industries Workers.

Senior federal counsel Teh Li Siew and federal counsel Nordiyanasari Omar represented the DG, while Muhendaran Suppiah and Chong Wan Loo appeared for the union.

Shamesh Jeevaretnam, Kumarappan Ramasamy and Parvin Kausar represented the company.

Justice Quay Chew Soon, who sat in the High Court in Penang, said in his written grounds last year the DG had acted reasonably in exercising his discretion to accord recognition to the union after the secret ballot was held on Dec 14, 2021.

He said the secret ballot showed that a majority of the company’s employees were members of the union.

“It cannot be said that the facts point overwhelmingly in favour of a different decision. The DG had come to a conclusion which any reasonably placed individual would have come to,” he said.

Quay said he was satisfied that the DG’s decision was not tainted with illegality, irrationality, unreasonableness or procedural impropriety.

According to the facts of the case, the majority of the 500-plus workers wanted the union to represent them in future collective bargaining and industrial disputes.

However, the company had refused voluntary recognition of the union.

A secret ballot conducted by the DG showed that 56.82% of the workers supported having the union to represent them.

The law states that 51% is sufficient majority.

During the balloting, the company complained of irregularities such as corruption, undue influence, and interference to workers to join the union.

The DG had also advised the company to bring the matter of alleged corruption to the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission, but it did not do so.

Unhappy with the decision to issue Form F according recognition to the union, the company filed a judicial review in the High Court to quash the decision.