HR minister biased in bank festive aid dispute, court rules

2026-03-17 - 08:04

The High Court said the then human resources minister had broken the trust placed in his office by getting involved in the dispute and supporting the Malayan Commercial Banks’ Association. KUALA LUMPUR: The High Court here has ruled that the human resources minister failed to take a neutral position when he intervened in a trade dispute between commercial banks and a workers’ union over Hari Raya festive aid payments about two years ago. Justice Aliza Sulaiman said that by doing so, the minister had stepped into the dispute and appeared to support the Malayan Commercial Banks’ Association’s proposal on the ex-gratia festive aid payment for 2024. “The minister’s conduct demonstrated clear bias, as he improperly aligned his office with the association, thereby compromising the role of the ministry as a neutral arbiter,” she said in allowing a judicial review application by the National Union of Bank Employees. Aliza said she had scrutinised circulars and statements, particularly those issued by Hong Leong Bank, Maybank and United Overseas Bank. She found that although the minister denied any “secret meeting” with the association, he had evidently engaged with it to discuss the festive aid issue while the matter was undergoing conciliation at the industrial relations department. In her judgment, Aliza said the minister had broken the trust placed in his office by getting involved in the dispute and supporting the association. “The minister subverted the statutory process designed for impartial resolution and violated the objectives of the Industrial Relations Act 1967,” she said. She added that the minister had demonstrated bias and that his decision to refer the trade dispute to the Industrial Court was tainted by unreasonableness. The dispute over festive aid followed unsuccessful conciliation efforts by the industrial relations department in February and March 2024, leading to the case’s referral on April 16 the same year. The union filed the judicial review to challenge whether the minister’s referral to the Industrial Court complied with Section 26(3) of the Industrial Relations Act, which requires the minister to first consider available internal mechanisms. The union had sought a one-month payment for 2024, consistent with previous years, but the association refused, prompting industrial action. The association then referred the matter for conciliation with the department. However, the minister is said to have met with association representatives, following which the association agreed to pay a half-month bonus. Lawyers N Sivabalah and Chua Kim Lin appeared for the association, while Ravi Nekoo and Arvin Kumar Mohan represented the union. Ravi said the minister and the association has filed an appeal.