PETALING JAYA: Tasek Corporation Berhad's former general manager of plant operations, Loo Wan Leong, was awarded RM537,200 in compensation by the Industrial Court in Ipoh.
The court found that Tasek had effectively driven Leong out of his employment three years prior.
According to an FMT report, court chairman Zulhelmy Hasan concluded that Loo had proven, on a balance of probabilities, that his firing was not justified.
In his 38-page ruling published earlier this month, Zulhelmy said, "Through the chain of events and narrative evidence, it is abundantly clear that the company's sole intention was to drive the claimant out of employment by forcing him to resign without just cause or excuse."
He said that Loo's termination constituted a "termination simpliciter", meaning that the business was unable to offer a legitimate explanation for Loo's removal.
According to what the court heard, Loo was called to a meeting on Aug 6, 2021, where he was put under pressure to quit by group chief operating officer Lian Ka Siew and group human resources senior manager Yuza Aslinna Yeop Ariff.
In lieu of notice, the employer offered Loo two to three months' salary, threatening disciplinary action if he declined.
After Loo refused, the company placed him on leave effective from Aug 9, 2021. Two days later, Loo volunteered to step down through an email to Yuza, provided he was paid eight months' salary in return, but he received no reply.
On Aug 20, the company offered him two months' salary as compensation, which Zulhelmy deemed "ludicrous".
Loo returned to work on Aug 24, but was instructed to remain on leave after being denied access.
On Aug 30, he sent an email to the company to formally state that he had been unfairly dismissed.
The court also determined that Loo had only received salary payment up to Aug 9.
"It is abundantly clear that the company had unilaterally terminated the claimant from his employment," it said.
According to Zulhelmy, the corporation attempted to give the impression that Loo had quit of his own volition in order to avoid facing disciplinary action.
He said that the threat of disciplinary action against Loo for alleged misbehaviour and subpar work seemed to be an afterthought, designed as a defence against the allegation in the absence of any supporting evidence.
Zulhelmy said that neither the meeting on Aug 6 nor any subsequent correspondence between the firm and Loo referenced the purported disciplinary action.
He said, "If the claimant's purported mismanagement or misconduct was evident to the company, the company should have adduced it in a show-cause letter and thereafter initiated a domestic inquiry."
The award specified that there had been no formal charges of misbehaviour or subpar performance, no show-cause letter, no warning, and no domestic inquiry.
Finding that reinstatement was unwarranted in this case, the court granted Loo a settlement of RM158,000, corresponding to a monthly salary of RM19,750 for each of his eight years of employment.
In addition, he was awarded RM379,200 in back pay, which was divided into 24 months of salary after deducting 20 per cent for earnings made after being fired.