Court chairman Eswary Maree concurred with the findings of a disciplinary inquiry conducted by Amanah Ikhtiar Malaysia into nine sexual harassment acts committed in the first six months of 2019.

The services of the claimant, who had served the company at its various branches in Pahang for 26 years, were terminated in January 2020 following a three-day inquiry held the previous month.

The claimant was found to have misconducted himself by attempting to play “footsie” with his victims, and by touching their cheeks, brushing their hair, placing his hands on their buttocks, rubbing their shoulders, stalking them and intentionally blocking their path.

“This court finds that even though the claimant denied the charges preferred against him, the fact remains there is no evidence to support his denial,” she said.

Eswary said the company had given the claimant a chance to atone for his actions after the first act of misconduct by issuing him a stern warning and transferring him to a different branch.

“However, the claimant did not repent and still abused his position as officer in charge in repeating sexual harassment against female subordinates,” she said in a 24-page award delivered on Aug 22.

In 2016, a previous domestic inquiry had found him guilty of four acts of sexual harassment against a female employee and three charges of delaying cash collection deposits, after the company rejected the explanation he gave for his conduct.

Eswary said that as a branch manager, the claimant should have ensured a safe environment for his subordinates. Instead, he made the working environment toxic through his obnoxious and intolerable behaviour, she said.

She said the company had taken into consideration the claimant’s long service, but at the same time was obliged to take into account his grave and continual misconduct and the welfare of other employees.

“The company has a duty to uphold justice towards the victims, who were also employees of the company at the material time. The claimant’s misconduct had gravely affected the victims, resulting in one of them requesting to resign and the other asking to be transferred out,” she said.

Police report against manager

Eswary said the claimant had questioned a police report made by the victims, which, he said, contradicted the report they had made to the company.

However, the court said the victims had explained during the DI that, on the advice of the investigating officer, the police report was only made in respect of verbal harassment as the victims were reluctant to proceed with criminal charges.

Eswary also noted from the testimony of one of the victims that the police had wanted to open a criminal case against the manager for physical sexual harassment so that they could remand him.

“However, the victim said she took into consideration the plight of the claimant’s wife and his child. She said she also took into account the manager’s self-respect and did not want him arrested,” she said.

She said the company had successfully proved on the balance of probabilities the appropriateness of its action against the claimant.

“Under the circumstances, it is the considered view of this court that it is unreasonable to expect the company to have continued his employment.”