
Need to justify termination
Published on: Mon, Aug 11, 2025
By: John Mark Text Size: JUST LAST week the Industrial Court (IC) ordered Football club Perak FC Sdn Bhd to pay RM1.04 million in compensation to former head coach Lim Teong Kim for unfair dismissal.In an earlier case, two former director-employees were awarded more than RM2 million.
Advertisement These outcomes underscore the significant financial risks businesses face when termination of employment are mishandled. An ex- employee who believes they have been unfairly dismissed can file a complaint under Section 20(1) of the Industrial Relations Act 1967 with the Industrial Relations Department (IRD) within a strict 60-day window from the date of termination. The IRD's initial step is to organise a conciliation session to help both the former employee and employer find an amicable resolution. If a settlement is reached, the IRD will facilitate the creation of a Memorandum of Agreement. If the dispute cannot be settled, the Director-General of the IRD will refer the case to the Industrial Court (IC).
Advertisement Our employment laws are very different from the at-will employment such as in the US where there's no requirement to establish 'just cause' for termination. The Federal Court in Maritime Intelligence Sdn Bhd v Tan Ah Gek [2021] 10 CLJ 663, stated that the right to livelihood in the context of employment is a fundamental right guaranteed under Article 5(1) of the Federal Constitution. Section 20(1) exemplifies this very right. The Federal Court also emphasised the importance of giving clear reasons when terminating an employee as these will be closely scrutinised by the IC. Employment law in essence is a social legislation which is intended to protect employees but it allows employers to terminate employees if they have valid reasons. It puts in place, checks and balances on the employer to justify the reasons for termination. Some examples of direct termination of employment Misconduct Covers a wide spectrum of situations from absenteeism to sexual harassment and criminal breach of trust (CBT). Rules of natural justice require the employee to be given an opportunity to be heard and defend himself. The employee should be given a show cause letter with clear descriptions of his misconduct. Material facts such as description of the alleged misconduct, time and date, location and the parties (such as immediate superior, colleague or even a victim). This would enable the employee to understand the alleged misconduct and give a proper reply. The employee would either admit/plead guilty or deny. The employer may accept the employee's explanation or disagree if the reply is found unsatisfactory. The employer may proceed to conduct a formal domestic inquiry (or due inquiry), an internal process to investigate whether the employee has committed the alleged misconduct. Based on the domestic inquiry findings, the management would be able to decide an appropriate punishment such as a written warning or dismissal being the heaviest punishment. Failure to conduct a domestic inquiry is not fatal or a must. Hence some employers may choose not to conduct a domestic inquiry and base their decision on their investigation and on the show cause letter. However, the importance of having a domestic inquiry cannot be soft-peddled. The IC in Syarikat Telekom Malaysia Berhad v Saidon bin Puteh [1996] 1 ILR 619, observed that: 'A due inquiry properly conducted and well documented …provides a reliable record for the employer to turn to when, due to the effluxion of time witnesses have become unavailable or memories have faded, the employer is fixed with difficulties in having to prove his case before an industrial tribunal…' There's a possibility that witnesses and records may be unavailable to the employer when the case reaches the IC. Hence, conducting a domestic inquiry may still be relevant and practical. It is pertinent to note, that establishing misconduct doesn't always justify dismissing an employee. The Doctrine of Proportionality of Punishment requires that the punishment must fit the offence or must be appropriate. The employer should consider the severity of the alleged conduct, the employee's employment record and other relevant factors. Non-confirmation and poor performance These concern employees who don't meet minimum standards or achieve targets. New hires would normally be on a probationary period (usually for three to six months) to test them on their suitability and ability to perform the job. If they fall below the standards or do not perform, employers may choose not to confirm the employee. They must be appraised, warned of their shortcomings and given sufficient opportunity to improve and given guidance/coaching. If confirmed employees later become non-performers, it would be prudent to place them on a Performance Improvement Plan (PIP) to give them the opportunity to improve. Having a structured and documented process is a must. Redundancy and rightsizing Restructuring of a business may result in a position being redundant or irrelevant. Businesses might do so to cut losses or to be sustainable in the long term. But they have to adduce evidence to justify such reasons or reasonable steps they have taken before taking such drastic measures. Advancement of technology or automation can also make a job redundant. For example, Elevator Operators, a position which existed since the invention of elevators became almost extinct with automation by the 70s. More recently, with artificial intelligence, there is a possibility that some jobs will be redundant. Incapacity or frustration of contract The employment contract becomes frustrated when it has become impossible for both parties to perform their obligations under the contract. Some examples include: Long-term illness or disability where the employee is unable to perform the job Impossible for a driver of a bus to drive a bus legally if he has been banned from driving busses by the authorities A new law or regulation which makes it impossible to conduct a business. If one day the government decides to ban vape/e-cigarettes, the manufacturer would be forced to cease operations. Expiry of a fixed-term contract Fixed-term employment contracts are employment contracts for a specified duration. Businesses commonly use such contracts for temporary work assignments or for a specific project. Such contracts merely end at the expiry of its term. The IC will scrutinise whether such contracts are genuine, based on business needs or not genuine, an attempt to circumvent protections afforded to employees. Finale caution The law mandates that employers must have a valid justification for terminating an employee. To successfully defend their actions in the Industrial Court, employers must ensure their termination process is meticulously structured and thoroughly documented.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Borneo Post
42 minutes ago
- Borneo Post
Sabah's 40% revenue claim: High Court decision Oct 3
Photo for illustration purposes only. – Photo from KOTA KINABALU (Aug 12): A High Court here fixed October 3 to deliver its verdict of a judicial review brought by Sabah Law Society (SLS) to get declaration on 40 percent net revenue grant for Sabah which allegedly had not been reviewed for 48 years since 1974. The decision date was set through virtual hearing via Zoom on Tuesday. On July 7, a full hearing for the substantive judicial review was heard before Justice Datuk Celestina Steul Galid. Three years ago, SLS was granted a leave to commence their judicial review by a High Court here which was on November 11, 2022. The federal government had appealed against the High Court's decision on May 16, 2024 which was dismissed on June 18, 2024, with no order as to costs. SLS had named the government of the federation of Malaysia and the state government of Sabah as the first and second respondents respectively in their judicial review. It sought from court a declaration that the failure of the first respondent to hold the second review in 1974 with the second respondent is a breach and contravention of its constitutional duty stipulated under Article 112D, Clauses (1), (3) and (4) of the Federal Constitution. SLS also sought from court a declaration that 40 percent entitlement remains due and payable by the first respondent to the second respondent for each consecutive financial year for the period from the year 1974 to 2021. Apart from that, SLS further sought from court a declaration that the failure to pay the 40 percent entitlement by the first respondent to the second respondent for each consecutive financial year for the period from 1974 to 2021 is a breach of the fundamental right to property of the second respondent and ultimately of the people of Sabah as enshrined under Article 13 of the Federal Constitution. Further, they sought an order of mandamus directed to the first respondent to hold another review with the second respondent under the provisions of Article 112D of the Federal Constitution to give effect to payment of the 40 percent entitlement under Article 112C read with subsection (1) of Section 2 of Part IV of the Tenth Schedule of the Federal Constitution for each consecutive financial year for the period from 1974 to 2021 within 30 days and to reach a decision within 90 days from the date of this order. Lastly, SLS is also seeking an order that the first respondent pays the entitlement as determined under paragraph 3 (a) above to the second respondent or as constitutional damages for breach of Article 13 of the Federal Constitution or both. For this Zoom hearing, counsel Jeyan Marimuttu represented SLS, Senior Federal Counsel Ahmad Hanir Hambaly @ Arwi and Sabah State Attorney General Datuk Brenndon Keith Soh acted for the federal and state governments respectively. SLS Immediate Past President Datuk Roger Chin emphasized the historic significance of the case, stating: 'This judicial review addresses Sabah's constitutional rights under the Malaysia Agreement 1963 (MA63) and the Federal Constitution. It has attracted substantial public interest as it concerns long-standing issues of revenue entitlement and fiscal autonomy for Sabah.' He invited the public, civil society organizations, and media to attend the open-court proceedings, noting they 'reflect the principles of transparency and public accountability.'


New Straits Times
3 hours ago
- New Straits Times
Clean sock: Trader fined RM1,200 for punching stall owner over cleanliness rebuke
BATU PAHAT: A trader was fined RM1,200 by the Yong Peng magistrate's court here today for punching a stall owner in the mouth until it bled after being told by the victim to stop littering on Saturday. He was charged with voluntarily causing hurt to the 31-year-old man at his stall in Taman Putera Indah, Tongkang Pechah, at 5pm on Aug 9. The charge carries a jail term of up to one year, a fine of up to RM2,000, or both upon conviction. However, magistrate Arun Noval Dass imposed the fine on S.M. Yusoff Othman, 56, after taking into account his guilty plea as well as submissions from both the prosecution and defence. The court also ordered a two-month jail term if the fine was not paid. Yusoff settled the fine. According to the facts, the victim had rebuked the accused for littering at his stall and told him to maintain cleanliness, which angered the latter. A quarrel broke out before Yusoff punched the man in the mouth, an act witnessed by his brother-in-law, who later lodged a report. Deputy public prosecutor Farah Wahidah Mohd Sharip appeared for the prosecution, while Tan Song Yan from the National Legal Aid Foundation represented the accused.


The Sun
3 hours ago
- The Sun
STR Phase 3 aids families with kitchen and school essentials
KUALA LUMPUR: The third phase of Sumbangan Tunai Rahmah (STR) disbursement, which commenced today, has brought relief to low-income families across Malaysia. In Kedah, vegetable seller Noor Syakilah Adzhar, 42, plans to use the funds for diapers and milk for her twin sons. 'My husband's income as a grass cutter is irregular, so this assistance is crucial for our family of six,' she said. Retiree Borhan Abd Rahim, 67, from Pendang, will allocate his STR aid for staple food items. 'I appreciate the government's care for seniors like me,' he added. In Melaka, cobbler Asyraf Ismail, 35, highlighted how the aid eases his end-of-month financial strain. 'It helps me stock up on food before the school holidays,' he explained. Perak food trader Mohd Rithauddeen Mohd Mustapha, 48, emphasised the programme's role in offsetting high living costs. 'The STR lets me buy extra household essentials,' he said. Kelantan housewife Norizan Hasan, 57, appreciated the flexibility of STR compared to SARA. 'Today, I bought basmati rice for special nasi lemak,' she shared. Sabah fisherman Mohidin Sugarin, 52, noted the aid's timeliness amid rising fuel and equipment costs. 'This RM650 helps repair my fishing net,' he said. Kota Belud trader Juriah Muntang, 45, relies on STR for her children's schooling needs. 'Road closures disrupt my business, so this aid is vital,' she added. Kota Marudu farmer Ligundao Akoi, 63, praised the extended application period. 'It ensures more villagers receive help,' he remarked. In Sarawak, cold storage worker Alvin Ayin, 37, called STR a lifeline. 'It covers kitchen and school expenses before payday,' he said. Prime Minister Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim announced the RM2 billion allocation yesterday, reaffirming the government's commitment to easing living costs for vulnerable groups. – Bernama