Sabah bosses see red over enforcement of housing standard for workers

 

Sabah employers said instead of relying on the emergency powers, the government can use the existing Prevention and Control of Infectious Disease Act 1988 to take action on staff living quarters. (Bernama pic)

KOTA KINABALU: The Sabah Employers Association (SEA) has questioned the rationale behind the government’s decision to enforce the Workers’ Minimum Standards of Housing and Amenities Act 1990 (Act 446) in the state.

The association said it was “astounded” with the announcement by human resources minister M Saravanan, believing that this will raise more questions than answers within Sabah in particular.

It said there was a multitude of reasons why Act 446 had not been endorsed to date by Sabah’s state assembly.

“The main struggle is formulating an Act that can cater equitably to Sabah’s differing scenarios in various industries,” the association said in a statement here today.

These industries range from plantations to manufacturing and construction.

“This is why consultations are still ongoing with all stakeholders in the state before finalising an Act that can apply for Sabah.

“To enforce Act 446 now is tantamount to putting the cart before the horse, in a hurried manner.”

Saravanan had previously said the law will now be enforced in Sabah and Sarawak following an amendment to the Act. There were previously no laws related to employee housing in Sabah and Sarawak.

“This is just for the duration of the emergency. We will have discussions with the states to see how effective the Act is,” he said.

The amendment will also allow the director-general of the Labour Department for Peninsular Malaysia to issue instructions to property owners to replace, alter or repair accommodations that do not comply with Act 446.

The director-general now also has the power to immediately transfer employees from “overcrowded and uninhabitable” premises to temporary accommodations set up by the department.

In addition, the human resource ministry is collaborating with the tourism, arts and culture ministry to prepare a list of temporary accommodation for workers transferred from accommodations that do not meet requirements under Act 446.

SEA said one notable example that the Act will not work in Sabah is the proposal to provide land to each worker for their own vegetable gardening.

The association said this clearly cannot apply or make sense to urban-based workers.

“Another example is to allow dependents of workers, such as parents, grandparents, brothers and sisters, to be offered housing, too.

“It is clear the objective of enforcing Act 446 is to counter the rising trend of Covid-19 infections among workers living together.

“But the human resources ministry and relevant agencies are already empowered under the Prevention and Control of Infectious Disease Act 1988 to conduct inspections, and take necessary remedial, if not punitive action, against non-compliant employers,” it said.

SEA also said enforcing Act 446 through the emergency and subsequently bypassing Sabah’s state legislature was not only haphazard but also redundant.

“It is akin to starting something without an end. What happens when the emergency is dissolved in future?

“The enforcement exercise and after-effects will be left in limbo as it is only valid as long as the emergency applies,” the association said.

As such, SEA urged the human resources ministry not to reinvent the wheel but take a look again at powers in the existing Prevention and Control of Infectious Disease Act 1988 for necessary action on staff living quarters.

It said to have zeal in combating infections is to be encouraged but to be over-zealous, without a proper study of underlying issues, “can however be impudent”. - FMT