Malaysia is one of Asia's biggest employers of foreign labour. But recently, cases of deaths, abuse and forced labour have come to light. What is going on? Who is protecting these migrant workers?
This is the outcome of the Social Security Organisation’s decision not to appeal against the findings of three government doctors and three Socso doctors who had examined the workers.
<P>Human Resources Minister Datuk Seri Dr Fong Chan Onn said Socso
would no longer challenge the doctors’ findings at the Socso Appellate Medical
Board.</P><P>"We do not want to compound the workers’ misery,"
he said.</P><P>There have been growing complaints that the majority of cases of
workers filing for benefits had been dismissed. Only three out of 10 cases were
successful in 2004.</P><P>Socso usually appealed against the findings at the Appellate
Medical Board, which has the powers of a Sessions Court.</P><P>There have been
cases of Socso going to the High Court if its appeals were rejected by the Appellate
Medical Board.</P><P>Fong said he had discussions with the ministry’s legal
adviser and was told that the appeals were made to "set legal precedents".</P><P>The
decision will benefit thousands of workers whose applications for compensation
were rejected annually by the Appellate Medical Board.</P><P>Social security experts
and the Malaysian Trades Union Congress have, on numerous occasions, questioned
Socso’s decision to appeal against such cases.</P><P>A social security consultant
with the International Labour Organisation, Paguman Singh, said Socso should not
challenge such cases as the aggrieved worker would have been adequately assessed.</P><P>"It
does not make sense to selectively appeal against a decision made by six government
doctors. Why should Socso pay lawyers thousands of ringgit to appeal a case?"
asked Paguman, a former Socso director.</P><P>Paguman said Socso should not doubt
the professionalism of the six doctors as they had been trained in the Guidelines
on Assessment of Traumatic Injuries, Occupational Disease and Invalidity.</P><P>"The
appeal by Socso should only be limited to cases where there is gross negligence
on the part of a medical board."</P><P>Quoting figures from Socso’s
2004 annual report, Paguman said only three out of 10 cases of applications for
invalidity benefits were successful.</P><P>(Socso gets an average of 20,000 claims
under its compensation schemes annually.)</P><P>Paguman said before the Socso
Act 1969 was enforced, employees who were maimed in accidents could sue their
employers.</P><P>"But now, employees can’t even sue their employer if
their cases are thrown out by Socso."</P><P>MTUC secretary-general G. Rajasekaran
said many genuine cases had been thrown out by appellate medical board members
who did not have the skills to assess the condition of claimants.</P><P>"The
situation has got from bad to worse, especially in the past four to five years
when Socso employed in-house doctors.</P><P>"Only yesterday, a group of individuals
helped carry a worker into my office saying that his claims were rejected by Socso."</P><P>On
another note, Fong said Socso had no plans to increase the contribution rate for
both workers and employers.</P><P>The 2.25 per cent rate — 1.75 per cent
contributed by bosses and 0.5 per cent by workers — has remained unchanged
since Socso’s inception in 1969.</P><P>Socso collects an average of RM1.5
billion a year and has an accumulated amount of RM13 billion with 4.8 million
active subscribers.</P><P>Last year, it paid out claims and pensions totalling
almost RM1 billion, compared with RM890 million in 2005. Asked about a previous
proposal from unions that Socso refunds a certain percentage of the contributions
to employees if they had not made any claims during their employment, Fong said
this was not possible.</P>
<P><I>Source: http://www.nst.com.my/Current_News/nst/Sunday/National/20070311104435/Article/index_html</I></P>
Address: Wisma MTUC,10-5, Jalan USJ 9/5T, 47620 Subang Jaya,Selangor | Tel: 03-80242953 | Fax: 03-80243225 | Email: sgmtuc@gmail.com.com