Incorporating Employment (Amendment) Act 2022
<--
-->
jQuery Carousel
Member Login

  User ID
  Password
 
Forgot Password
   

MEF Academy Events
 17[Kuching] Get It Right - Mastering the Application of Labour Ordinance (Sarawak Chap. 76) & The Rules 17-18 April 2024 (8.30 AM – 5.00 PM)
 17[FULL][SBF] Effective English Language Communication Skills in WorkplaceSession 1: 17, 18 and 19 April 2024; Session 2: 24, 25 and 26 April 2024
 17[SBF] Microsoft Excel - Intermediate17-18 April 2024 (9.00 AM – 5.00 PM)
 17PENYELIA EFEKTIF, PEKERJA BERJAYA17 April 2024 (9.00 AM – 5.00 PM)
 17[IT] Power Query: Transforming Your Work Processes in Microsoft Excel 17 April 2024; 20 May 2024 (9.00 AM – 5.00 PM)
 19[SBF] Microsoft Excel - Advanced19 April 2024 (9.00 AM – 5.00 PM)
 23[Kuantan] Workplace Communication and Conflict Resolution Skills23-24 April 2024 (9.00 AM – 5.00 PM)
 23Handling Misconduct Relating To Absenteeism23 April 2024 (9.00 AM – 5.00 PM)
 23HR FOR BEGINNERS23 April 2024 (9.00 AM – 5.00 PM)
 24[KK] GET IT RIGHT - MASTERING THE APPLICATION OF LABOUR ORDINANCE (SABAH CHAP. 67) & THE RULES 24-25 April 2024 (9.00 AM – 5.00 PM)
 26Business Communication Series: Online Presentation Skills26 April 2024 (9.00 AM – 5.00 PM)
 29Business Communication Series: Presentation Skills (Intermediate Level)29–30 April 2024
 

Selected Industrial Court Awards
Search Industrial Court Awards
Company/Claimant/Tags          


Award No:3/2014
  
Company:Misc Berhad
  
Claimant:  Zulhilmi Bin Fauzi 
 
  
Case  
  
​The employee was employed as a General Purpose Caterer and Clause 15 of his Letter of Appointment subjected him to random drug or alcohol test by the company.
In Dec 2010, the employee together with some other crew members were subjected to drug test and the results were positive.
 
The company issued him his termination letter and dismissed him. The employee responded to the termination letter appealing his case and sought reinstatement, but his appeal was rejected.
 
Issues:

1. Whether the employee was against the company’s policies when he tested positive for drugs?

2. Whether the employee was aware of company’s drug and alcohol policy?

3. Whether it had been serious misconduct?

4. Whether the dismissal was with just cause and excuse?

The employee contended that that his dismissal had been without just cause and excuse.

He claimed that he had not used any drugs at the material time and the collection of urine sample by the company did not comply with standard operating procedures and was therefore questionable.
 
  
Held   
  
​It was crystal clear that the Drug and Alcohol Policy of the employee’s Letter of Appointment requires the crew members including the employee to undergo random drug/alcohol test.
 
In the event the crew members were tested positive for prohibited drugs or alcohol, it shall result in immediate dismissal.
 
Having been tested positive for drugs, the misconduct of the employee was a minor misconduct. It was also clear that the employee had breached the regulation and policy of the company.
 
Dismissal was with just cause and excuse.
  
 
Tags/Keywords
drugs, dismissal, misconduct
  
/Side Banners/Thumbnail_TaxSeminar2024.jpg
/Side Banners/Membership-with-a-Click.jpg
/Side Banners/TalentCorp_170x55.jpg
/Side Banners/KWSP_170x104.jpg
/Side Banners/ace_170x153.jpg
/Side Banners/cape_170x50.jpg
/Side Banners/ioe_170x95.jpg
/Side Banners/ilo_170x90.jpg

   ©  Copyright 2023 Malaysian Employers Federation  |  All Rights Reserved.