- 员工被发现在面试表格里填写假资料。当她被问及是否曾经被解雇，以及是否曾与前雇主发生任何纠纷时，员工皆没有如实回答。
- 随后雇主得知该员工于五年前被前雇主解雇，并曾在工业法庭申请获得前雇主的赔偿。
- 员工之后因提供虚假资料而被解雇，她到劳资关系部要求复职。随后在劳资关系部的调解会议上，公司答应恢复她的职务。然而在她应该上班的那天，她以雇用合同中增加了一些她未同意的条款为由，拒绝上班。
- 员工表示在雇用合同中提及在试用期期间，公司将每两个月对她的表现进行评估。
- 工业法院指出，雇主确实有必要定期定期评估试用员工。法庭认为这不属于新加的条款，而是公司的职责来评估试用期的员工。 因此员工无权以这理由来拒绝复职。
- 法庭也表示，该员工在求职申请表格上签署了一份声明，说明她所提供的信息是正确的，并且如果发现任何所提供的信息是虚假的，雇主有权解雇她，因此员工的解雇是合理的。
*详细的案情和判决，请阅读以下的英文版的文章。
- An applicant for the post of Human Resource and Admin Manager filled up a form in which these questions were asked and answered:
“Have you been discharged from employment for whatever reason?
Claimant’s answer: No.
Have you been involved in any trade dispute with previous employers or made reference to the Ministry of Labour or Industrial Relations Court for a Decision/Award? YES/NO (If yes, please specify).
Claimant’s answer: No.
- Subsequently, the employer came to know that the Manager had been dismissed five years ago and had filed a claim for A consent award was recorded in that case.
- The Manager was dismissed for giving misleading information. She claimed reinstatement and at the conciliation meeting held by the Department of Industrial Relations, she was offered reinstatement by the Company.
- However, on the date she was supposed to report for duty, she did not turn up on the grounds that the letter of reinstatement that she had received included new terms which she had not agreed. The term she was referring to stated that her performance would be monitored and assessed every two months during her probation period.
- The Industrial Court noted that case law makes it mandatory for an employer to appraise a probationary employee on a regular basis. The Court said, “Thus, the company is correct to state that carrying out periodic or bimonthly assessments on the claimant’s performance during her probation is not an additional term to her contract of employment. It is the inherent duty of the Company do so. Therefore, the rejection by the claimant of the offer of reinstatement made by the respondent to the claimant is wrong in law.”
- The Court held that the Manager had signed a declaration on her employment application form that the information she had given was correct and the employer had the right to dismiss her if any of the information was found to be false, which it clearly was.
- The dismissal of the employee was upheld.
Source:
- Employee Misconduct, CLJ Publication
- Jaspal Kaur Ajit Singh v. Leonfast Sdn Bhd [2018] 4 ILR 360.
==============================
*如果您需要聘请律师处理法律事务，您可以联系我们。
*如果您需要法律咨询(付费)，您可以联系我们。
*我们的律师楼拥有超过15年的执业经验。我们处理民事纠纷 (打官司/法庭诉讼)、商业纠纷、追讨债务、遗产分配、立遗嘱、离婚、抚养权、赡养费、产业分配、领养小孩、拟商业合约、拟买卖合约、银行贷款、法律咨询、法律顾问、等法律事务。全马的案件，我们皆都处理。
*We have more than 15 years of experience in the legal profession. We handle matters such as commercial disputes, civil litigation, debt recovery, probate & letter of administration, will, divorce, children custody, maintenance/alimony, adoption, distribution of matrimonial assets, drafting commercial agreement, drafting sale and purchase agreement, process loan documentations, legal consultation, legal advisory, miscellaneous legal works.
*Wilson Kuek是“法律与你同行 Law & Justice”面子书群组的创办人。“法律与你同行”是马来西亚最大的法律平台。我们每天为无数的平民百姓免费解除各类的法律困扰。
*浏览我们律师楼的法律文章: www.kuekong.com
*浏览我们律师楼的法律文章: www.kuekongklg.com
*订阅我们的YouTube: http://bit.ly/lawnjustice
*加入 我们的“法律与你同行”FB 群组: http://bit.ly/fblawnjustice
*Like 我们的“法律与你同行” FB Page: http://bit.ly/lawnjusticefbpage
*加入我们的网络论坛: www.queco.org
*Kuek, Ong & Associates. Advocates & Solicitors. No.86-1, Jalan Mahagoni 1, Bandar Botanic, 41200 Klang, Selangor Darul Ehsan. Klang Lawyer. 巴生(吧生)律师楼。#Kuek, Ong & Associates #Kuek Ong & Associates #Kuek Ong Associates #郭汪律师事务所 #郭汪律师楼
#Chinese Lawyer in Malaysia #Malaysia Lawyer #Klang Lawyer #KL Lawyer #divorce lawyer #马来西亚华人律师 #懂华文的律师 #懂华语的律师 #巴生律师 #吧生律师 #KL律师 #吉隆坡律师 #民事诉讼律师 #打官司的律师 #打离婚案的律师 #离婚律师
#Employee Makes False Declaration on Job Application #面试表格 #填写假资料 #解雇 #termination #dismissal #dismissed
