In the course of my work I came into contact with an assortment of estate managers of various races. In the early days after Merdeka the Government introduced the Malayanisation scheme where non citizens in management positions were to be phased out on expiration of their work permits. There was one particular expatriate from England who earned the wrath of the Asian managers. He was a tough task master and allegedly bullied the younger Asian managers whose performance was not up to mark. Every manager who came to my office for some official work would complain of this arrogant expatriate manager. I had not seen this particular manager before though I had heard of him as a tough task master. There arose an occasion for that particular expatriate to call at my office when one of his employees was dismissed and filed a claim for wages in lieu of notice which the manager dismissed. Usually when an estate worker files a claim at the Employment Office, the employers organization known as MAPA would handle the case while the employee would be represented by his union the National Union of Plantation Workers (NUPW). Both representatives were from their Kuala Lumpur offices and depending on their relationship they often travelled together for hearings in one car. This was a welcome thing for Officers hearing the claim as often negotiations for a settlement commenced and concluded along the journey. All that was left for the Hearing Officer to do, would be to record a consent judgment over a cup of tea at the office canteen.
But in the case at hand the expatriate was so irritated with the attitude of the complainant, he wished to attend to the case himself against the advice of his local managers. A hearing date was set up for the hearing of the case. All Labour Offices throughout the country had special rooms known as the “Labour Courts.” These were set up under the Employment Act 1955 and claims for wages due to employees were heard by Gazetted Officers in a court setting. The “Labour Court” was not a court as defined by the Courts of Judicature Act. It was an informal setting aimed at providing easy remedy for employees who felt they were short changed. Cases were usually set for hearing at 10.00am. A discussion between the parties is carried out preceding the enquiry to narrow down the areas of agreement and disagreement when all parties were seated awaiting the arrival of the Hearing Officer. When the Hearing Officer entered the Hearing Room known as the “Labor Court” he was incensed to view the expatriate being too comfortable with one knee over the other and shaking his left foot while seated in that position. The
hearing officer beckoned the counsels of both parties to come to the bench. He told both parties that he was adjourning the hearing for ten minutes and counsels should teach their charges the proper method to sit in Court - saying that the Hearing Officer gave a ten minute recess and proceeded to his room. The expatriate manager felt ashamed to be slighted by this puny looking Asian and got up to assault him. However his counsel held his arm and restrained him.
The expatriate could not take this insult. He advised his counsel to settle the matter on the best possible terms and stormed out muttering to himself. Everyone present was happy at the turn of events. Counsels on both sides got their fees without having to slog for it; the employee got his dues though he did not have to prove his claim. The hearing Officer had one claim struck off from his long list of outstanding claims. This was a case which could possibly have ended in an appeal to the High Court, no matter how he decided. All parties - including the hearing officer adjourned to the office canteen next door to celebrate the occasion. The only obvious absentee was the expatriate manager who was reported to be licking his emotional wounds at the Company Club’s Pub.
All content (c) Ganapathy Ramasamy, mynameisgana@blogspot.com

Comments
Post a Comment