Appeals court affirms company’s right to retrench 4 engineers

 

The Court of Appeal ordered the four appellants to pay RM3,000 each in costs to their former employer.

PUTRAJAYA: 

The Court of Appeal has affirmed a High Court ruling that an engineering consultancy firm was right in retrenching four engineers following the rationalisation of the LRT3 project in 2018.

Justice M Nantha Balan said it was the prerogative of MMSB Consult Sdn Bhd as to which employee it wanted to release and retain.

Justices Azman Abdullah and Azmi Ariffin were also on the bench yesterday to hear and dismiss the appeals by Yap Chin Wah, Lee Khurn Ying, Nazly Nasir and Chairil Bahari Ibrahim.

The bench also ordered the four to pay RM3,000 each in costs to the company.

Lawyers T Thavalingam and Aida Yasmin Cheree represented the company while Amir Sharipuddin and Ruzaini Zulkifli acted for the four appellants.

MMSB Consult was previously appointed by Prasarana Malaysia Berhad to work on the LRT3 project.

At the material time, MRCB-George Kent Sdn Bhd (MRCB-GK) was appointed as the project delivery partner responsible for the management and supervision of the project. The LRT3’s ultimate owner was the government.

The four engineers were employed on a fixed-term contract.

Following the 14th general election (GE14) in May 2018, the new Pakatan Harapan government implemented a review of all large-scale projects, including the LRT3.

MRCB-GK had instructed MMSB Consult and all other subcontractors involved to conduct a review.

On July 12, 2018, the finance ministry announced the project would continue but there would be significant changes to reduce its cost. MMSB Consult then conducted a review of its staffing needs and terminated the employment of the four men.

The four had contended that there was no genuine redundancy underlying the decision to terminate their services. They said the company was also not undergoing any financial difficulties to warrant their retrenchment.

On April 22, 2021, the Industrial Court ruled that their dismissal was without just cause and ordered the company to pay them a total of RM619,000 in back wages.

The company later filed a judicial review on the Industrial Court’s award on grounds it was irrational and unreasonable.

Early this year, High Court judge Ahmad Kamal Shahid allowed the company’s application for a judicial review, saying the Industrial Court misdirected itself in determining a genuine redundancy in staff had arisen.

He said the Industrial Court also committed a serious error of fact by determining that it was incumbent upon the employer to take separate steps to address the employees’ performance.

Poor performance was never the basis for the dismissal of the appellants. - FMT