Latest news with #labourlaw
Malay Mail
an hour ago
- Business
- Malay Mail
RM1,700 minimum wage extended to apprentices as law takes effect, says HR Ministry
PUTRAJAYA, Aug 1 — The National Wages Consultative Council (Amendment) Act 2025 came into effect today, extending the current minimum wage to apprenticeship contract workers. In a statement, the Human Resources Ministry (Kesuma) said Minister Steven Sim had set Aug 1, 2025, as the commencement date for the amendments. 'Under the amendment, the current minimum wage now applies to apprenticeship contract workers, in line with the government's commitment to enhancing protection and welfare for all categories of workers,' the statement read. An apprenticeship contract refers to an agreement in which an employer undertakes to employ and systematically train a person in a specific trade, ranging from six to 24 months, during which the apprentice is bound to work for the employer. Kesuma also expressed appreciation to employers who had already been paying the minimum wage to apprenticeship workers ahead of the legal requirement. The ministry then reminded employers paying wages above the minimum rate that they are not permitted to reduce salaries to match the statutory threshold. Kesuma announced that the Minimum Wage Order 2024 will take effect on Aug 1, 2025, setting a minimum wage of RM1,700 per month for employers with fewer than five employees who are not engaged in professional activities classified under the Malaysian Standard Classification of Occupations 2020. The ministry urged employers to comply with the minimum wage laws enforced by the Peninsular Malaysia Department of Labour, Sabah Labour Department and the Sarawak Labour Department. Employers found guilty of failing to do so face fines of up to RM10,000 for each affected worker, the statement concluded. — Bernama
Times of Oman
4 days ago
- Times of Oman
Police foil theft attempt, arrest labour law violators in separate incidents
Muscat: The Royal Oman Police arrested individuals involved in theft and labour law violations in two separate incidents. The Muscat Governorate Police Command, in cooperation with the Directorate General of Airport Security, apprehended three Sri Lankan nationals, including a domestic worker, at Muscat International Airport as they attempted to flee the country after stealing gold jewellery from their employer's residence in Muttrah. Legal procedures are currently underway. Meanwhile, in the Wilayat of Sur, the South Sharqiyah Governorate Police Command arrested 18 women of Asian nationalities for violating the Labour Law and the Foreigners' Residence Law. Legal procedures are underway.
Mail & Guardian
16-07-2025
- Politics
- Mail & Guardian
Special leave or velvet-glove suspension? A trend in the public sector
Police Minister Senzo Mchunu has been placed on 'special leave'. What does this mean in law? In recent weeks, South Africa has witnessed two high-profile figures, the minister of police and the chief executive of the Road Accident Fund (RAF), being placed on what is termed 'special leave'. Although cabinet ministers are not employees for the purposes of the Labour Relations Act, this raises the question of whether this concept of 'special leave' is just suspension dressed in a velvet glove or whether it carries a different meaning in law and in practice. This article does not analyse the legality of, nor provide commentary on the 'special leave' imposed on the police minister and the RAF chief executive. Instead, it attempts to locate the concept of 'special leave' within the realm of labour law in South Africa. Special leave v Suspension Suspension refers to a temporary removal of an employee from their duties. Suspension in South Africa is typically divided into two categories: precautionary suspension and punitive suspension. A precautionary suspension is usually imposed when an employer is conducting an internal investigation that may lead to disciplinary proceedings. The aim is to safeguard the interests of the organisation by ensuring that the employee does not interfere with the investigation or operations. A punitive suspension, by contrast, is a disciplinary measure taken against an employee found guilty of misconduct. It is less severe than dismissal but entails suspension without pay or benefits — the suspended employee does not receive a salary or benefits while away from work. 'Special leave', on the other hand, is not expressly provided for or defined in South African labour legislation. But it can be said that it is a form of leave granted by an employer to an employee, usually at the behest of the employee, and it can either be based on a policy or an employment contract. Like precautionary suspension and unlike punitive suspension, special leave is generally paid and the employee receives full benefits. But, without a clear definition in legislation or case law, the concept of special leave can be misconstrued and, in some instances, used as means to (indirectly) suspend employees. This was the case in Sibanyoni v Speaker of the City of Mbombela and Others . Here, the applicant, the chief financial officer of the City of Mbombela, approached the labour court on an urgent basis seeking to have the council's resolution to place her on 'special leave' declared unlawful and set aside. This followed a report accusing her of alleged misconduct and recommending that it be investigated. The court found that the special leave as contemplated in the regulations can only be granted at the behest of an employee and there is no such concept as 'forced special leave'. In reaching its decision, the court referred to other precedents, including Heyneke v Umhlatuze Municipality , where the court in dealing with the placement of a municipal manager on 'special leave' found: 'Special leave that is imposed on employees is effectively a suspension in the hope of subverting the residual unfair labour practice provisions of the Labour Relations Act No 66 of 1995 (LRA) and all the time and other constraints that accompany suspensions.' Likewise, in South African Municipal Workers Union obo Matola v Mbombela Local Municipality , it was held that what the respondent labelled as 'special leave' resolution was nothing but the suspension of the applicant in that case. In the end, the court in Sibanyoni found that the special leave imposed by an employer is essentially a euphemism for a precautionary suspension, to create an impression that the provisions were complied with. Whether the special leave is imposed for a prolonged period or short period is irrelevant, because it remains a suspension regardless. As a result, the court declared the resolution adopted by the council to place the chief financial officer on special leave unlawful, set it aside and ordered her reinstatement. While special leave and suspension are theoretically distinct principles, the growing use of special leave to suspend employees blurs the lines between the two. Accordingly, when an employer considers placing an employee on 'special leave', it must do so in a manner consistent with the employment contract or the workplace policy regulating such leave. Failure to do so may result in a finding that the special leave was, in fact, a suspension, and that the employer used the term to mask procedural unfairness and evade legal obligations. If the employer intends to suspend the employee, it should follow the legal prescripts governing suspensions to avoid exposure to unfair labour practice claims. Andile Mphale is a dispute resolution attorney at Lebea Inc Attorneys.
CTV News
18-06-2025
- Business
- CTV News
Union slams package company DHL's ask for federal strike intervention
OTTAWA — OTTAWA — Unifor sent a letter to Prime Minister Mark Carney and cabinet ministers this week decrying a request from package company DHL to intervene in a strike. That request was made by DHL in a letter last week that was shared on the union's website. The letter said the change that takes effect on June 20 to federal labour law banning replacement workers during strikes threatens to 'severely undermine' DHL's operational capabilities. It said the cessation of its operations would lead to the loss of around 2,800 jobs and asks that the government intervene to allow DHL Express to continue operating while it negotiates with the union. The letter said the company saw 'similar interventions' during the ongoing strike at Canada Post and that it thinks such action is warranted in its case given that it provides 'essential logistics services to Canadians.' Unifor national president Lana Payne argued in the letter to Carney that DHL locked out its workers and forced members to respond with strike action. She said the company is asking for a 'free pass' to avoid having to comply with anti-scab legislation which sets a 'dangerous precedent.' She said the use of 'scabs' leads to longer disputes, contributes to higher conflict at picket lines, jeopardizes workplace safety and 'removes the employer incentive to negotiate and settle fair contracts.' With the two sides at an impasse, DHL Express Canada has said it will shut down operations across the country. DHL said it will halt parcel deliveries starting June 20, the day federal legislation banning replacement workers takes full effect. The upcoming shutdown adds to the labour turmoil in the parcel market, as Canada Post remains at loggerheads with 55,000 workers amid strained negotiations and an overtime ban imposed by the union last month. Unifor represents over 2,000 DHL truck drivers, couriers and warehouse and call centre employees across Canada. -- With files from Christopher Reynolds This report by The Canadian Press was first published June 18, 2025.
Yahoo
18-06-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Union slams package company DHL's ask for federal strike intervention
OTTAWA — Unifor sent a letter to Prime Minister Mark Carney and cabinet ministers this week decrying a request from package company DHL to intervene in a strike. That request was made by DHL in a letter last week that was shared on the union's website. The letter said the change that takes effect on June 20 to federal labour law banning replacement workers during strikes threatens to "severely undermine" DHL's operational capabilities. It said the cessation of its operations would lead to the loss of around 2,800 jobs and asks that the government intervene to allow DHL Express to continue operating while it negotiates with the union. The letter said the company saw "similar interventions" during the ongoing strike at Canada Post and that it thinks such action is warranted in its case given that it provides "essential logistics services to Canadians." Unifor national president Lana Payne argued in the letter to Carney that DHL locked out its workers and forced members to respond with strike action. She said the company is asking for a "free pass" to avoid having to comply with anti-scab legislation which sets a "dangerous precedent." She said the use of "scabs" leads to longer disputes, contributes to higher conflict at picket lines, jeopardizes workplace safety and "removes the employer incentive to negotiate and settle fair contracts." With the two sides at an impasse, DHL Express Canada has said it will shut down operations across the country. DHL said it will halt parcel deliveries starting June 20, the day federal legislation banning replacement workers takes full effect. The upcoming shutdown adds to the labour turmoil in the parcel market, as Canada Post remains at loggerheads with 55,000 workers amid strained negotiations and an overtime ban imposed by the union last month. Unifor represents over 2,000 DHL truck drivers, couriers and warehouse and call centre employees across Canada. — With files from Christopher Reynolds This report by The Canadian Press was first published June 18, 2025. Catherine Morrison, The Canadian Press
