Mahkamah tangguh rundingan bantuan perayaan NUBE-MCBA sementara rayuan diputuskan

The High Court in Kuala Lumpur has delayed a directive requiring the Malaya Commercial Banks Association (MCBA) and the National Union of Bank Workers (NUBE) to resume discussions on providing festive bonuses to employees, pending the outcome of MCBA's appeal to the Court of Appeal. Kuala Lumpur High Court Judge Norliza Othman granted the request for delay after determining that MCBA may face significant losses that would be difficult to recover if the bonus payments were not made.

She stated that the Court of Appeal's decision would directly impact the dispute between the two parties, as if MCBA succeeds, the matter would need to be re-discussed in the Company Court. The core issue in the delay request concerns the fundamental aspects of the dispute between the two parties, including the payment of festive bonuses and the 20-year collective agreement between the parties.

NUBE had previously demanded equal annual festive bonus payments for eligible B40 and M40 category members. MCBA had paid the bonus in 2023 but refused to continue it in 2024. The dispute was subsequently referred to the Ministry of Human Resources, which then appealed to the Company Court. NUBE also challenged the referral of the dispute regarding the 20-year collective agreement, arguing that both parties should use the alternative dispute resolution mechanism under Article 4(5) of their collective agreement.

On February 13, the High Court granted NUBE's request for a review of the case, nullifying two references made by the Minister and directing both parties to resume discussions using the agreed-upon mechanism. MCBA and the Minister subsequently filed an appeal, prompting NUBE to request the delay of the High Court's decision pending the appeal.

The delay request was scheduled for February 22 of the following year. In her judgment, Judge Norliza noted that a delay order requires "special circumstances," while the merit or likelihood of success of the appeal is not a factor to be considered at this stage. She also rejected NUBE's argument that the bonus issue is solely a financial matter.

"If the money were paid, there is a risk it could not be fully recovered from each member should the Court of Appeal rule in favor of the union that they are not required to make the payment," she said. Norliza added that NUBE would not suffer a loss if the union wins the appeal, as both parties could still resume discussions. She said that the consideration of the interests of both parties clearly supported granting the delay order.

MCBA was represented by N Sivabalah, E Reena, Hua Zhi Loon, and Peter Halach Santiago, while the Attorney-General, Acting Registrar of Companies, and the Company Court's President represented the Minister, the Deputy Secretary-General of the Company Court, and the Company Court. NUBE was represented by Ravi Nekoo and M Arvin Kumar.