Latest news with #employmentlaw
Free Malaysia Today
8 hours ago
- Business
- Free Malaysia Today
Ex-VP of GLC awarded RM1.3mil for wrongful dismissal
The Kuala Lumpur Industrial Court awarded RM1.3 million to Syed Agil Syed Hashim for wrongful dismissal by Malaysian Bioeconomy Development Corporation. (Facebook pic) PETALING JAYA : A government-linked company has been ordered by the Kuala Lumpur Industrial Court to pay RM1.3 million in compensation to its former vice-president for wrongful dismissal. The Malaysian Bioeconomy Development Corporation Sdn Bhd is the government's lead development agency for the bio-based industry in Malaysia. Its termination of claimant Syed Agil Syed Hashim's employment was initially upheld by another industrial court in 2023. However, the Kuala Lumpur High Court quashed that award in January and ordered that a new chairman preside over the case for the sole purpose of determining the quantum of compensation payable. Court chairman Pravin Kaur Jessy, who took over the case, noted that the High Court had in its ruling made a finding that the claimant was dismissed without just cause of excuse in 2020, after 14 years of service. Syed Agil, who started his job in 2006 with a basic salary of RM14,000 a month, was earning RM39,600 when asked to leave in 2020. 'By virtue of this finding, it necessarily follows that the claimant's employment was not on a fixed-term basis but was permanent in nature. 'This court therefore accepts that the claimant was in continuous and permanent employment for a period of 14 years, until his dismissal on September 30, 2020,' Pravin said in the award handed down on June 19. She also noted that her sole task, as ordered by the High Court, was to assess the appropriate compensation payable in lieu of reinstatement and back wages. Pravin said the claimant was entitled to 14 months' wages as compensation in lieu amounting to RM554,400, based on his final drawn basic salary. For back wages, she awarded 24 months' salary, amounting to RM760,320, after a 20% deduction for post-dismissal earnings. The total award comes to RM1,314,720. She also ordered the company to settle all statutory contributions to the relevant authorities within 30 days of the award. Nur Zur'Ain Mat Ramlee appeared for the claimant, while Abdul Aziz Hamzah represented the company.
The Guardian
3 days ago
- Politics
- The Guardian
Antoinette Lattouf wins unlawful termination case against the ABC as federal court delivers judgment
The ABC breached the Fair Work Act when it removed casual broadcaster Antoinette Lattouf from a Sydney radio program because of a social media post about Gaza, justice Darryl Rangiah has found in a federal court judgment. Rangiah upheld Lattouf's claim heard in the federal court in February that she was unlawfully terminated in December 2023 when her on-air shifts were cut short three days into a five-day stint hosting Sydney Mornings. 'The respondent, the Australian Broadcasting Corporation (the ABC) contravened s772(1) of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) (the FWA) by terminating the employment of the applicant, Antoinette Lattouf, for reasons including that she held a political opinion opposing the Israeli military campaign in Gaza,' Rangiah wrote in the judgment. The court ordered that the ABC pay Lattouf compensation of $70,000. . Lattouf was removed after she shared an Instagram post from Human Rights Watch that said Israel had used starvation as a 'weapon of war' in Gaza. Her case argued that she was the subject of a pro-Israel lobbying campaign, the purpose of which was to remove her from air because of her social media support of Palestinian human rights. Sign up for Guardian Australia's breaking news email However, the ABC said she was removed for not following a 'direction' not to post about the war while working for the ABC. Sign up to Breaking News Australia Get the most important news as it breaks after newsletter promotion Justice Rangiah found Lattouf was 'merely provided with advice that it would be best not to post anything controversial about the war' and was not given a direction not to post. More details to follow
Irish Times
4 days ago
- Business
- Irish Times
Bord Gáis engineer unfairly dismissed over side work allegations wins €5,000
An engineer has won over €5,000 for unfair dismissal after being sacked by Bord Gáis over claims he was offering to do cash work on the side for its customers. Kieran O'Leary, who was sacked from his €60,000-a-year job as a service engineer for Bord Gáis in January 2024, had told the Workplace Relations Commission (WRC) there was 'no evidence' he accepted cash from a woman who later complained about him. Bord Gáis human resources manager Graham Bailey had claimed there were 'multiple instances' of Mr O'Leary 'offering to carry out work in a personal capacity for vulnerable female customers', Mr Bailey said. The company's position was that Mr O'Leary had breached a competition clause in his contract of employment. READ MORE The WRC was told Bord Gáis had received complaints from three customers who had been visited by Mr O'Leary on dates in 2022 and 2023. Giving evidence, Mr O'Leary said that he was called out to a property in April 2022 where the lady of the house had asked about having showers and taps fitted. 'She asked if I did. I said I did, I came back out of work hours to give her a price for that, but the job never went ahead,' he said. He said the customer later complained to his line manager, who called him to a meeting and asked him to explain a 'printout'. 'I told him I'd offered to fit a shower and taps for this customer. He explained it wasn't something I was supposed to do. I thought my contract stated I wasn't to work in direct competition with Bord Gáis,' he said. 'At that point I'd been given the understanding of what the contract meant. That was the last time I ever offered my services,' he said. His position was that the complaint had been resolved informally by his employer. Mr O'Leary said that he was asked a year later to explain why a customer had 'alleged she had paid me an amount of money for a part I'd fitted'. 'When I went to this job, everything was done by the book ... everything in that house was charged for and fitted by Bord Gáis,' he said. He said that on a second visit to the property in February 2023, he realised the customer's boiler was missing a 'grommet'. 'That grommet renders the boiler dangerous. You wouldn't be able to leave the boiler on, because it wouldn't be sealed,' Mr O'Leary said. 'I was pretty sure I had one of them at home,' he said – adding that he went home, fetched it and installed it. He said this was to 'save' the customer the difficulty of having her boiler turned off for the two weeks he said it would take to order the part in. Mr O'Leary produced a small black item around the size of a wine bottle cork in a plastic package from his pocket and held it up for the hearing, and told the hearing it was an example of the part he fitted. 'That grommet would be somewhere between one pound and five pounds to order,' he said. Next, in March 2023, Mr O'Leary said a difficulty arose with another customer as there was a casing around her boiler. He said his employer had 'always instructed that we shouldn't remove a casing' and she replied that 'everyone else did'. 'We got over that. I probably was a bit rude,' he said. He said he noticed there was a difficulty with a circuit board on the customer's boiler of a type that was carried as stock in his van, which he brought in and fitted. Again, a complaint followed, he said. 'They stated that I firstly fitted a second-hand part, which was later disproved by the inspector; [then] that I'd offered to do it for cash. I'm not sure how I'd be able to do it any cheaper than Bord Gáis,' he said. He told the WRC that the boxes for parts kept as van stock 'always get damaged'. He said he opened the sealed bag inside the box in front of the customer. 'She alleged she gave me €150. There's absolutely no evidence to say that happened. There's nothing to show I've ever done anything than my job that I was supposed to do with Bord Gáis,' Mr O'Leary said. The complainant explained that the April 2022 matter was then 're-tabled' by the company during an investigation meeting in July 2023. He said he made it 'clear' this had already been 'dealt with' by his line manager but that his concerns were 'palmed off'. The tribunal heard the investigation was paused when Mr O'Leary went on sick leave. 'I'd had a nervous breakdown,' he said. He also took issue with the fact that a formal grievance he raised about the investigation process did not proceed when he was later certified fit to participate, but that the disciplinary process did go ahead. Adjudicator Dónal Moore wrote in his decision that customer complaints had to be 'treated with some caution in making a serious decision on a person's livelihood'. Mr Moore said there was 'an issue as to how much weight can be given to these', but concluded there was 'no logical reason' that customers would fabricate similar complaints and concluded there was a case to be answered. The adjudicator found Mr O'Leary's use of his own parts 'does not appear to be warranted regardless of its well-meaning or intention' and that the claimant bore some fault in this regard. However, Mr Moore said it was 'not appropriate' that the 2022 complaint – which he said 'never led anywhere' – was 'conflated' with the 2023 complaints. He upheld Mr O'Leary's complaint and awarded him compensation of €5,289.08 under the Unfair Dismissals Act 1977.
Associated Press
4 days ago
- Business
- Associated Press
Workplace Realities Evolve as Employees Push for Fairness, Flexibility, and Legal Protection
06/23/2025, New York City, New York // KISS PR Brand Story PressWire // As remote work, AI integration, and shifting power dynamics reshape the American workplace, a new era of employee consciousness is emerging—one marked by heightened awareness of rights, protections, and employer accountability. From Silicon Valley to small-town storefronts, workers are increasingly asserting themselves in matters of scheduling, compensation, and treatment. And as workplace disputes rise, so too does the demand for legal clarity. Firms specializing in employment law are seeing a surge in consultations as employees seek to understand their rights in a landscape that looks far different than it did five years ago. 'Employees are more empowered than ever before,' says Janet Liu, a Los Angeles-based labor advocate. 'But that empowerment means little if people don't know what the law actually says.' This legal awakening comes amid growing public scrutiny of workplace conditions—from misclassified contractors to retaliation claims. In California especially, where labor protections are some of the nation's strongest, employees are turning to counsel not just reactively, but proactively. 'People aren't just calling us after they've been fired anymore,' says an attorney at a boutique employment firm in L.A. 'They're asking, 'Can my employer legally do this?' before signing contracts or accepting severance.' At the same time, employers are having to rethink internal practices to avoid reputational damage and legal liability. With social media amplifying workplace stories overnight, companies are racing to revise handbooks, strengthen HR protocols, and train leadership on compliance. As economic uncertainty lingers and workplace standards continue to evolve, one thing remains clear: understanding employment law is no longer just a concern for HR departments—it's becoming essential knowledge for workers at every level. Original Source of the original story >> Workplace Realities Evolve as Employees Push for Fairness, Flexibility, and Legal Protection
Yahoo
7 days ago
- Business
- Yahoo
CHAUDHRI: How businesses can stay ahead of workplace issues
My origin story as a business owner started in 2021 when I launched my own firm – Workly Law. With some savings I created a website, registered a business number and opened a trust account. I rented a very small private office in a co-working space. I was also a very new mom operating on my then seven-month-old child's erratic sleep schedule. Then, I hired my first employee; a sharp lawyer, newly called to the bar. Even though I was an employment lawyer myself, I had a lot to learn about how to grow my business while also creating a workplace that could retain talent and grow. I drafted my own employment contracts and then considered my own workplace policies. How would I manage sick time, remote work requests and vacations? Also, there were a slew of mandatory policies I had to roll out just to be legally compliant. CHAUDHRI: Terminations can be hard to fight – even for the powerful CHAUDHRI: Multinational corporations beware – one size does not fit all CHAUDHRI: Alleging cause requires hard evidence I recall this period as one of mild frenzy. We had to grow our footprint in the marketplace, retain new clients and hire lawyers. Any business owner will agree that creating a good workplace is not something that springs up organically. It's more like a finicky rose bush. It needs watering, tending to, and sometimes a little pruning. Do this with discipline and something starts to blossom. As time goes on, I have supported more and more employers to help navigate the legal challenges in their workplaces. This year, with my team, we created a 2025 employer guide. Our guide breaks down key employer obligations like the following: Changes to the Employment Standards Act – On a very regular basis, the Ontario Employment Standards Act is updated with new legal obligations that employers are required to comply with on an immediate basis. Our guide sets a framework for what employers need to do to be legally compliant in 2025. The right way to manage a sick leave – The law has changed on what documentation employers can seek to support an employee medical leave. We have set out best practices for employers to follow. The legal implications of remote work – Employers are increasingly interested in how to return employees to the office while retaining as much of your workforce as possible. Key clauses you need in every employment agreement – From strong termination clauses to confidentiality agreements, our guide lays out what every employer should consider when hiring a new employee. It has been a challenge but also a thrilling experience to put what I've learned as an employment lawyer and a business owner into a document that can help other businesses. Like anything, it will evolve as I learn more and as the world of employment law evolves. Being a business owner is a high privilege, but it is one that is steeped obligation. Business owners are the guardians of the livelihoods of their workers. We have to try, as best we can, to get it right. Have a workplace problem? Maybe I can help! Email me at sunira@ and your question may be featured in a future column. The content of this article is general information only and is not legal advice.
