- 公司也质问另一名与此接待员在电话交谈的男员工。此男员工说，他身为主管接听很多电话，全部都是与业务有关的。他否认在工作时间，长时间地在电话私聊。公司也解雇这名男员工。公司考量了2个因素: (1) 公司的开支因为电话费用而增加; 和 (2) 他们在工作时间里电话聊天，导致公司的生产力下降。
- 公司的调查显示一些通电话通话时间维持10分钟而另一些维持1个小时40分钟。 公司经理曾在此男员工正在电话聊天时走过，并清楚听到此接待员就是电话里的聊天对象。
- A receptionist made frequent telephone calls to another employee in the same company during working hours. The management spoke to her on two occasions about the matter.
- She denied making the calls. A show cause letter was issued which alleged that she had been making these personal calls over a period of five months. A domestic inquiry was held at which the receptionist was found guilty and she was then dismissed.
- The employer also spoke to the person receiving the calls from the receptionist. He said that as a supervisor in the company he received many calls, all on business-related matters. He denied receiving numerous long personal incoming phone calls during working hours. He was also dismissed as the employer considered the two factors: (1) the cost to the company as a result of the increase in telephone bills and (2) the loss of productivity as their conversations were during working hours.
- The Company’s investigation showed that some of the phone calls were for a duration of ten minutes but there were others which lasted one hour and 40 minutes. Their manager also did a walk-by of the supervisor while he was on the phone and the manager could hear the voice of the receptionist on the other end.
- The two employees then confessed to making the calls to each other and offered to pay for the cost of the phone calls they had made which total more than RM4,000. They later retracted this offer and were dismissed.
- The Industrial Court found that there was sufficient evidence that the two employees were guilty of the misconduct with which they were charged. It also examined the issue of whether the misconduct was sufficiently serious to deserve dismissal. The telephone records showed that on one particular day, they had been on the phone to each other for a total of six hours and 32 minutes which the Court said would have disrupted their duties.
- The dismissal was upheld.
- Employee Misconduct, CLJ Publication
- Noor Eliza Abd Halil & Anor v. BD Agriculture (Malaysia) Sdn Bhd  2 ILR 602
*加入 我们的“法律与你同行”FB 群组: http://bit.ly/fblawnjustice
*Like 我们的“法律与你同行” FB Page: http://bit.ly/lawnjusticefbpage
*Wilson Kuek是“法律与你同行 Law & Justice”面子书群组的创办人。“法律与你同行”是马来西亚最大的法律平台。我们为无数的平民百姓免费解除了各类的法律困扰。
*Kuek, Ong & Associates. Advocates & Solicitors. No.86-1, Jalan Mahagoni 1, Bandar Botanic, 41200 Klang, Selangor Darul Ehsan. Klang Lawyer. 巴生(吧生)律师楼。
*We have more than 15 years of experience in the legal profession. We handle matters such as commercial disputes, civil litigation, debt recovery, probate & letter of administration, will, divorce, children custody, maintenance/alimony, adoption, distribution of matrimonial assets, drafting commercial agreement, drafting sale and purchase agreement, process loan documentations, legal consultation, legal advisory, miscellaneous legal works.
#马来西亚华人律师 #Chinese Lawyer in Malaysia #Malaysia Lawyer #巴生律师 #吧生律师 #Klang Lawyer #KL律师 #吉隆坡律师 #KL Lawyer #懂华文的律师
#Kuek, Ong & Associates #Kuek Ong & Associates #Kuek Ong Associates #郭汪律师事务所 #郭汪律师楼