Malaysia – Norazri Bin Abdul Rahman v Malaysian Airline System Berhad.

Norazri Bin Abdul Rahman v Malaysian Airline System Berhad1

 

We submitted at the Industrial Court that the hearing of the matter can proceed ex-parte even when the claimant himself had failed to attend the hearing date. In most circumstances, the Industrial Court has proceeded to hear the matter when it is the company who was absent and not the claimant. The Industrial Court agreed with us and proceeded to hear the company’s witnesses.

 

The Claimant was a Flight Steward for the Company and was dismissed for the following reasons:

 

1. a)  Failure and / or refusal to attend to appointment on three separate occasions.

2. b)  Excessive medical leaves.

 

The Claimant alleged that he was affected by “santau” although no such evidence was ever produced by the Claimant. The Claimant’s action in failing/refusing to attend the three separate appointments which were reasonable instructions by the Company was tantamount to willful insubordination by the Claimant and would justify summary termination. It was also in evidence that the Claimant’s failure to attend work had resulted in the Company having to find a last- minute replacement which resulted in flight delays and additional operation costs such as airline parking fees.

 

Based on the evidence adduced by the Company, the Industrial Court held that the Claimant’s dismissal in the circumstances was with just cause and excuse.

 

Aidi Shamsul Bin Arshad v Malaysian Airline System Berhad2

 

The Claimant in this matter was a driver for the Company and whilst on duty he had knocked down a fellow colleague which resulted in the death of the latter. The company submitted that the Claimant at the time of the incident was driving above the speed limit on the tarmac which was 25 km/h. The Claimant alleged that he was not driving above the speed limit, that the vehicle’s speedometer and brakes were not working and that the deceased had all of a sudden crossed the tarmac.