47 ex-highway staff file suit, allege fraud by LLM and Plus

Some 47 former staff of the Malaysian Highway Authority (LLM) have filed a suit against LLM and the company they were absorbed into with the launch of Projek Lebuhraya Usahasama Bhd (Plus).

They are claiming fraud to their employment benefits following their transfer to Plus, which took over the administration of the North-South Expressway.

The plaintiffs, led by Zul Ali, filed the suit at the High Court in Kuala Lumpur on April 30, through the firm of M/s Taqrir Akramin & Co. Today was the first case management on the matter before deputy registrar Norhatini Abd Hamid.

According to lawyer Muhamad Syahrul Nizam Mohd Rabi for the former and current workers, the court has instructed LLM and Plus to file their defence by June 14, while the plaintiffs have to file their reply by June 28.

"The case management has been fixed for July 6, before Judicial Commissioner Faizah Jamaluddin," he said.

Syahrul said LLM was represented by Mohamad Ikram Abdul Aziz while no one appeared for Plus.

The plaintiffs’ statement of claim states that sometime in 1988, they were instructed to resign or leave LLM and join Plus, without allegedly knowing the terms of their employment with Plus.

Not told terms of their contract

They further pleaded undue influence with regard to having to sign their contracts with Plus, without knowing the terms of the contract of their employment.

Undue influence is where the person or employer has taken advantage of a position of power over another person.

The 47 plaintiffs further claimed that as a result of joining Plus, they lost their retirement benefits or contributions, entitlement to allowances, retirement benefit schemes or contribution to the Employees Provident Fund, pension and other benefits.

They claimed that LLM and Plus violated their statutory duty and also violated the basic fundamental rights based of the workers on the Terma-terma dan Syarat-syarat untukkakitangan bukan ekskutif LLM (Scheme B) (Terms and Conditions for LLM non-executive staff).

It is understood that the terms listed under Scheme B were hidden from their knowledge over their employment years.

As a result, they said, it has been a violation of their rights as they were deprived of receiving employment benefits that included retirement pension.

The workers claimed they are entitled to receive pensions and other benefits, and that the defendants are under the statutory duty to pay or offer the benefits to them.

They are therefore seeking several declarations and among others, it is to receive pensions.

Furthermore, they are seeking a declaration that they are entitled to get pension benefits without any reduction in their EPF.

They also want the court to assess individually their entitlement to the general damages, special damages and exemplary damages.

In addition, the plaintiffs are also seeking a declaration that there was undue influence in the implementation of the Terms and Conditions for the LLM non-executive staff. -Mkini