I AM puzzled by the statement by Penang Deputy Chief Minister II P. Ramasamy, who called for the Malaysian Trades Union Congress (MTUC) to be given greater freedom to engage with the state and employers on labour matters in the country.

While MTUC wants to engage with these stakeholders “in a just and fair manner”, he said, the National Labour Advisory Council (NLAC), under which the congress falls, does not appear to be a suitable platform.

“By limiting the role of MTUC to one of consultation, NLAC has the tendency to push legislation that might not be in the interest of labour.”

The fundamental question that Ramasamy should consider is whether the Human Resources Ministry has violated the International Labour Organisation (ILO) Convention 144 on Tripartite Consultation. In its 2000 general survey on the matter, the ILO committee of experts on the application of conventions and recommendations specified that consultation implies more than merely sharing information, without implying a joint decision-making process.

This is different from “negotiation”, which implies that the objective of the different parties is to reach an agreement. The consultations required under the terms of the convention are intended to assist the competent authority in making a decision, rather than to lead to an agreement.

This is how NLAC functions. There has been various consultations on the amendment to the Industrial Relations Act (IRA), as the Human Resources Ministry has stated, in accordance with the spirit of ILO’s Convention 144.The fact remains that the competent authority resides in the legitimately elected government.

Sometimes, I wonder, if the Ministry is to wait for an endorsement instead of consultations on every single issue, whether by the Malaysian Employers’ Federation or MTUC, how will it be effective in serving the common good? MTUC represents only a certain percentage of the workforce. In spite of this, there is a split within itself. The objective stand taken by the labour law reform coalition and Sarawak MTUC leadership shows that MTUC does not represent the entire spectrum of workers in the country.

The question is, what are the issues that do not serve the interest of labour in the latest amendment to IRA? It is obvious in his article that Ramasamy has not highlighted the pertinent issues in the amendment that he perceives as being against the interest of workers.

The amendment, in taking away ministerial powers to decide cases in the industrial court, and workers could be represented by anyone besides lawyers, and that the establishment of trade unions will no longer be confined to trade, industry or occupation, has positive implications for the development of industrial relations in the country. Does this not empower MTUC and other unions? What is detrimental to the workers in this new amendment?

Or, is Ramasamy merely echoing the opinions of the elite in MTUC? A country like Vietnam has rectified 24 ILO conventions, while Malaysia has only rectified 18. So, are we going to keep waiting for the endorsement of elite groups instead of taking step to increase the standards of labour?

The term “empowerment” in the age of the digital economy cannot be confined to a particular organisation, such as MTUC. It has to broadened. This is the reason why the efforts by the ministry to free up unions are significant.

The fact is the Ramasamy tends to pick on issues related to the Human Resources Ministry without consulting his own comrade in DAP, the human resources minister himself, is something to reflect on. Or, is the DAP leadership unable to discipline its own members who try to undermine each other? Is there a hidden agenda? Only time will tell.

An objective assessment of the latest amendment to IRA would be far more credible and expected of a professor, instead of playing the game of politics to undermine the good work done. The law of the universe does not allow for full perfection before something good moves on.

While the amendment might not be comprehensive enough to the eyes of certain unionists, the fact remains that such amendments would not have been possible if Barisan Nasional was still in power. – November 1, 2019.

* Ronald Benjamin is secretary of the Association for Community and Dialogue.

* This is the opinion of the writer or publication and does not necessarily represent the views of The Malaysian Insight. Article may be edited for brevity and clarity.