Dismissal of picketing bank workers lawful, says Federal Court

PUTRAJAYA: The Federal Court has held that the dismissal of nine sacked Bank Bumiputra Commerce Bhd employees for participating in an unlawful picket was fair as it constituted grave misconduct.

Federal Court judge Justice Hasan Lah said that their dismissal by the bank, now known as CIMB, was fair and was proportionate to the misconduct committed.

National Union of Bank Employees (NUBE) general secretary J. Solomon was one of the nine sacked in 2004 for unlawful picketing by the bank,.

In a written judgment dated Oct 20, Justice Hasan said that the panel agreed with the observation made by the Court of Appeal.

"The appellants must have been aware that dismissal would have been the inevitable punishment. There was no merit in the appellants contention that their dismissal was actuated by discriminative practice," he said in the 27-page judgment.

He also said that there was no fixed rule of law to suggest that it was unreasonable to dismiss employees with unblemished records for a single instance of insolence.

"It depends on the nature of the misconduct," he said.

Justice Hasan said that the nine participated in an unlawful picket in the lobby and the banking hall of the BCB building in Jalan Tun Perak.

"They barged through the side entrance door despite attempts by security personnel to prevent them from doing so. They entered the bank's business premises with picket materials.

"They carried placard and balloons, noisily distracting customers and colleagues. The balloons were released in the banking hall," he said.

He said this was clearly a wilful disobedience on the part of the nine appellants.

"Their action brought the bank into disrepute among customers and other employees," he said, adding that a high standard of care and conduct was expected of an employee in the banking industry.

The Federal Court had on March 7, 2012 granted leave to nine appellants to appeal on a question of law whether the Industrial Court was required to consider whether the punishment of dismissal was warranted and proportionate to the findings of misconduct by the employer.

All nine, who were active NUBE members, were confirmed bank employees prior to their dismissal on April 27, 2004.

The Industrial Court, in its award dated Oct 27, 2009, upheld the dismissal of all the appellants, saying that a deterrent sentence was necessary as it affected the bank's goodwill.

The appellants filed an application for a Judicial Review to quash the award but it was dismissed by the High Court in 2010 with costs.

The Court of Appeal had also later unanimously dismissed their appeal with costs.