TO / : / ALL MEMBERS.
Updates on Collective Agreement (CA)2005-2008
5/8/2005The dispute on the new Collective Agreement (CA), which covers for the period from 1/3/2005 to 28/2/2008, was reported to the Director General of Industrial Relations (DGIR) Department in Putrajaya.
In September 2005, the (file) dispute was transferred from DGIR Putrajaya to DGIR, Kuala Lumpur.
7/10/2005
The Director General of IR Department, Kuala Lumpur instructed both parties (i.e. Bank and A.M.C.O.) to meet for an amicable settlement.
However, the progress was hindered by 3 key factors: -
The distribution of monthly incentive, coupled with the on-going problems faced by FE/CSO since the implementation of FE/CSO Incentive Plan in FY 2003/2004.
The method of calculation (i.e. raw score) and distribution of bonus (i.e. bell-curve or forced ranking) in the implementation of the PRR-Bonus scheme.
The proposal for new CA 2005/2008 by Union emphasised on improving the living standards of Bank’s officers. As such, the Union viewed that the bank’s offer for a salary adjustment @ 5% is inadequate in view of:
(a) The higher pre-tax profit of RM3.49 billion in 2005, an increase of 4% from RM3.358 billion recorded in 2004.
(b) Inflationary pressures triggered by the 3-time fuel price increase are expected to strongly impact the Consumer Price Index (CPI).
11/10/2005
The dispute on CA remained unresolved (at the DGIR level). Therefore, the Director General of IR Department, Kuala Lumpur recommended that a “joint reference” by both parties to refer the disputed CA to Industrial Court for final decision. Both parties (i.e. Bank and A.M.C.O.) have agreed to the suggestion from DGIR.
A.M.C.O. and the Bank acknowledged that there are some implementation issues relating to the implementation of PRR-Bonus and FE/CSO Incentive Plans.
A.M.C.O. feels strongly about the need for more concerted effort, namely from the Bank, to resolve the essential issues/problems which hindered the conclusion of the new CA. Otherwise the negotiation for new CA 2005/2008 would continue to remained in a deadlock.
Our checking with DGIR revealed that it normally takes about 6 to 8 months for a disputed CA to reach the Industrial Court and then another 12 to 24 months for the court to hear and hand down its award.
While waiting for a hearing date to be fixed by the Industrial Court, there are also signs of better monetary benefits which are likely to be enjoyed by A.M.C.O.’s members in view of the recent industrial court’s awards to ABOM and Sarawak Bank Employees’ Union.
Summary of the court’s awards are as follows:
Award No.1
Am Finance Berhad v. Sarawak Bank Employees’ Union
Industrial Court Award:No 551of 2005.
Salary adjustment:9%
Other benefits:
Housing loan - min of RM160, 000 for each employee;
Dental extraction & filling - Max RM210 per annum;
Medical examination - for employees have attained age of 45;
Child care subsidy - RM600 per annum - for employee with children of 7 years and below shall be reimbursed;
Delivery charges - female employee can reimburse for an annum per confinement in respect of two confinements;
Examination leave - up to 7 days.
Emergency leave -
Birth of legal child - per pregnancy - 3 days.
Death of a member of employee’s immediate family – 3 days.
Award No.2
Association of Bank Officers’ Malaysia (ABOM) V. MCBA
Industrial Court Award: No 1876 of 2005.
Date of reference:7.5.2003
Date of hearing:16.1.2004 & 17.5.2004
Salary adjustment:8%
Other benefits:
Rest day allowance for the first 3 ½ hours: RM50;
Work in excess of 3 ½ hours but not exceeding 7 hours of work: RM100;
2-shift & 3 shift cycle allowance: RM185 & RM200;
Transport allowance: 70 sen;
Maternity expenses up to a maximum of RM1,200;
Child care subsidy of RM600 per annum;
Insurance -RM150,000;
Retirement -“Officers to retire upon completion of the 55th birthday”
New Systems & Technology -RM150
Temporary Officers -“Union are to be consulted in the event the employment of temporary officers or part-time
exceed six (6) months.
Existing benefits -“Officers that are already enjoying more favourable terms should not have such benefits taken
away from them”.
In view of the above said developments, A.M.C.O. had urged the Bank to be more considerate towards the need of its Officers to improve their living standards because nothing can improve living standards more than having a better take home pay, which can be used to raise a family well.
Please advise other members within your working areas.
Thank you.
Yours truly,
For and on Behalf of the EXCO,
JIMMY TONG YEE SHEN
GENERAL SECRETARY