Imposing Penalty for Medical Leave
Another concerning policy involves the imposition of a monetary penalty on employees who take medical leave. It’s important to note that medical leave is a statutory entitlement provided to employees under Section 60 F of the EA. This sick leave entitlement is granted either after examination at the expense of the employer by, (a) a registered medical practitioner duly appointed by the employer; or (b) by any other registered medical practitioner or by a medical officer.
Imposing Penalty for Unpaid Leave
An alarming policy was the imposition of monetary penalties on employees who took unpaid leave.
Unpaid leave, while not explicitly governed by legislation, typically follows the general principle of “no work, no pay”. In other words, if an employee does not work, they will not receive compensation for that period. However, it’s crucial to note that if an employee’s application for unpaid leave was approved by the employer, the employee should not face any repercussions for taking such leave.
Penalising employees for approved unpaid leave undermines the trust and understanding between the employer and the employee. Moreover, it contradicts the employer’s acknowledgment of the employee’s need for time off and their agreement to the arrangement. Such actions raise ethical and legal concerns regarding fair treatment and contractual obligations. Employers should honour approved leave arrangements and refrain from imposing unjust penalties.
Potential Legal Actions
Human Resources Minister, Steven Sim Chee Keong, highlighted that affected employees have the option to lodge a complaint with the Department of Labour for further action. This recourse is provided under Section 69 of the EA, which empowers the Director-General to investigate and adjudicate disputes between employees and employers regarding wages or any other payments stipulated in the employment contract or under the EA’s provisions or subsidiary legislation.
Interestingly, if the employer is found to have violated the EA, they may be imposed with penalties. The EA prescribes a general penalty, wherein offences not specified within the EA carry a fine not exceeding RM50,000.
Ethical Considerations
Employers should carefully consider the financial impact of monetary penalties on employees, particularly those with lower incomes or facing financial hardships, being mindful of the potential burden on their financial stability and overall well-being.
Employers should also carefully assess the potential impact of monetary penalties on employee morale and trust. It’s essential to prioritise maintaining positive relationships with employees and refrain from actions that could erode motivation or loyalty.
Conclusion
The controversy surrounding these employment policies emphasises the broader imperative for employers to uphold safe and equitable workplaces. Compliance with employment laws governing wages, statutory entitlements, and working conditions is paramount.
Furthermore, the implementation of fair and transparent performance management systems is essential. These systems should afford employees regular feedback, avenues for improvement, and acknowledgment of their contributions.
In navigating these responsibilities, employers should seek guidance to create policies that prioritise employee welfare while ensuring business sustainability.
If you have any queries, please contact Associate, Summer Chong Yue Han (yhc@lh-ag.com), or her team Partner, Shariffullah Majeed (sha@lh-ag.com).