SPCAAM adviser Callistus Antony D’Angelus said while flexible work arrangements such as working from home and flexible hours are not easily legislated, legal provisions for accommodation due to circumstances such as elderly care, disability, and childcare have not kept pace with global progress.
“The abuse of foreign workers, depression of wage levels and suppression of trade union activities are a symptom of an overall failed architecture,” he said in a statement.
“Merely regurgitating provisions of the law is not something that policymakers or ministers should be doing. They should instead be constantly challenging the adequacy of the system to progress with the times.
“There has been a lot more awareness of mental health and its impact at the workplace, as an example, and local laws need to progress with time.”
D’Angelus was responding to human resources minister Steven Sim’s announcement yesterday that workers can apply for flexible working arrangements concerning their hours, days, and location of work under Sections 60P and 60Q of the Employment Act 1955.
According to Section 60P (1), employees have the right to request for a flexible working arrangement to vary the hours of work, days of work or place of work in relation to their employment, subject to Part XII or anything contained in the contract of service.
The Act also states that under Section 60Q (1), employees should make an application for flexible working arrangements under Section 60P in writing, and in the form and manner as may be determined by the director-general of labour.
In a post on X, Sim said such requests for flexible working arrangements must be submitted to employers, who are required to provide feedback within 60 days. If rejected, employers must provide the reasons.
However, D’Angelus said it was still the “prerogative of the employer, almost entirely, to approve or conversely disapprove such applications”.
“The biggest problem with the unity government at this point is that despite the promise of reform, it continues to pander to the interests of big business.
“Unless there is a fundamental shift philosophically and policy-wise in this regard, we cannot expect change that would benefit the common people of Malaysia,” he said.