Court upholds senior manager’s sacking over conflicts of interest

2026-03-26 - 00:41

The Industrial Court has ruled that Telekom Malaysia was entitled to dismiss senior manager Noressah Abu Samah after finding her guilty of 12 out of 15 misconduct charges. (Facebook pic) KUALA LUMPUR The Industrial Court has upheld Telekom Malaysia Bhd’s decision to dismiss a senior manager over multiple acts of misconduct, including conflicts of interest involving her family members. Court chairman Chow Siew Lin said the company had proven that the former head of its Unifi contact centre operation, Noressah Abu Samah, had acted against the company’s interest by favouring her close relatives in eight work-related cases. A TM domestic inquiry, which found the claimant guilty of 15 instances of misconduct, had recommended her sacking. Besides eight conflict of interest-related acts, she was also found to have used the company’s corporate credit card for a private stay in a top hotel in Kuala Lumpur. The remaining six accusations involved actions that violated Covid-19 restrictions the company had put in place during the pandemic period. “Following the inquiry, Noressah submitted representations to the director-general of industrial relations, leading to her case being referred to the Industrial Court for adjudication on whether the company had wrongfully terminated her employment.” Noressah joined TM as an accounts executive in 2006 but was sacked in 2021 when she was the centre’s head, earning a last-drawn monthly salary of RM15,030. In dismissing her case, Chow found that TM had proven 12 of the 15 accusations against her, ruling against the company on three charges. “The claimant’s proven acts of misconduct, taken together, are serious,” the court chairman said in the award handed down on March 9. Chow said that apart from competence and diligence, honesty and integrity were key characteristics any employee should possess. “This is more so for someone holding a senior position like the claimant. Being the head of the Unifi contact centre operation with a huge number of subordinates under her supervision, she held a role of greater duty and heightened responsibility.” Chow said the claimant’s acts could not be accepted and condoned as she had breached the trust and confidence that the company had placed in her. On the claimant’s plea that she had enjoyed long years of unblemished service, Chow said it did not shield her from dismissal. On the contrary, she said the claimant’s 15-year service with TM showed that she had to be aware of the company’s policies, terms of employment and its need for strict compliance. “If all employees are allowed to merely fall back on their past clean record to vindicate themselves, this would seriously undermine the enforcement of discipline and proper conduct within the company’s establishment,” Chow added. Therefore, she said, the punishment of dismissal was proportionate to the severity of the claimant’s acts of misconduct. Subramaniam Anjan and Muzammil Abdul Halim appeared for the company. Fadzil Noor Alias, Zainurin Dom and Kamal Bahrin Nali represented the claimant.