PETALING JAYA: The controversial amendment to the Trade Unions Act 1959 which abolished restrictions on forming such bodies has not gone down well with unions.
While human resources minister V Sivakumar hopes the amendment will create “healthy, mature and progressive” unions, its critics contend that the ease with which new unions can be formed poses a significant risk.
FMT takes a closer look at the amendment, unions, and why they feel that putting up a unified front is the best way to protect the rights and interests of workers in Malaysia.
What roles do unions play?
Unions provide a collective voice for workers and play a key part in collective bargaining, in which they negotiate with employers on behalf of their members to secure better wages, benefits, and working conditions.
They also strive to protect workers from arbitrary firings or unfair treatment by pushing for better job security measures, which can include provisions in contracts that outline conditions under which employees can be terminated.
Apart from negotiating safety protocols and standards with employers, unions offer legal assistance to members who may face workplace issues. Some unions also provide training and professional development opportunities for their members.
What is the recent amendment about?
On Oct 10, the Dewan Rakyat passed an amendment to the Trade Unions Act 1959 aimed at eliminating restrictions on the formation of trade unions.
Sivakumar said the amendment would allow the formation of multiple trade unions in any establishment, trade, occupation, or industry.
He also said the amendment was in line with the principle of freedom of association, whereby employees are free to establish or join any trade union of their choice.
Why the controversy?
The concern is the multiplicity of unions. A group of unions known as the Coalition against Multiplicity of Unions (Camu) has consistently expressed its opposition to the amendment, saying the multiplicity of unions “defeats the very concept of the unity of workers”.
Camu chairman Rudy Rusly said the amendment would “greatly harm” the solidarity of unions and weaken their bargaining power, adding that a 2017 Federal Court decision had ruled that the multiplicity of unions creates disharmony.
Rudy also highlighted the risk of “puppet unions” which could serve as proxies to employers or other parties.
“Freedom of association is not aimed at promoting multiplicity of unions for the same group of workers as it weakens bargaining power and leads to disunity among workers.
“The principle of freedom of association is aimed at curbing the power of employers and the government to stop workers from joining a union, and in doing so strengthening the bargaining power and social protection of workers.”
How will the amendment affect collective bargaining?
National Union of Bank Employees assistant general secretary A Karuna said unions would fight each other for the power to negotiate with employers in the collective bargaining process.
“Irresponsible employers could also pitch unions against each other, leading to a rise in anti-union actions,” she said.
She added that employers might also apply favouritism by recognising a preferred union, thus delaying collective bargaining.
Workers will be disadvantaged in the long term and find themselves at the mercy of employers.
How will this affect workers?
National Union of Drink Industry Workers spokesman Abdul Jabbar Mohamad Nor agreed that having a multiplicity of unions to represent the same workers in an industry can weaken their collective bargaining power.
He said since only one union has the right to bargain with employers, this will create unhealthy competition and conflict among unions – both of which are against workers’ interests.
“Prolonged disputes can affect collective bargaining and risk salary increments, right at a time when workers are facing increasing cost of living pressure,” he said. - FMT
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.