Employment regulation Legal Notices were discussed for two years - GWU
The General Workers Union yesterday urged the government to re-introduce new employment regulations that were suspended following uproar by employers.
Four Legal Notices were published last week, revising rules on vacation leave and payslips.
The revised system allowed annual leave allotment to continue to accrue even when employees were on maternity, sickness or injury leave and even when on unpaid leave.
The new regulations stated that, once granted, leave could not be revoked under any circumstances whatsoever.
They also said that employers could only utilise up to 12 working days from the annual leave entitlement for the shutdown period.
Another Legal Notice said employers would be bound to give employees an itemised payslip either before or on the date when wages are due. The itemised payslip must contain, among other things, the total wages paid, the number of normal and overtime hours worked and the respective pay rates for Sundays or public holidays if applicable, the annual leave and sick leave balance to date for that calendar year and any breakdown of any bonuses, allowances and commissions received.
On Tuesday evening, the government said it was suspending the Legal Notices and discuss them with the social partners.
The General Workers Union disagreed with the suspension. It said that, contrary to the impression being given, these legal notices were discussed over the past two years in meetings of the Employment and Relations Board.
The GWU and other unions presented proposals for the employment law reform to improve working conditions and address anomalies. It pointed out that some of the provisions in the legal notices had already been included in collective agreements.
It was therefore logical to extend these rights and conditions to workers who were not represented by a union, the GWU said.
It said it could not understand how anyone could be against giving employees a detailed payslip on their payday. And why should unused leave not be carried forward to the following year?
There are cases where employees have their leave cancelled by their employer and are then not allowed to carry it forward to the following year.
The GWU said that while employees have duties and obligations towards their employers, the employers have to respect their employees and be honest with them.
Employees rightly expect to be part of the country’s economic success, it said.
Moviment Graffitti said it was “disappointed” that regulations were retracted by government.
“It is shameful that employers’ associations are opposing these common-sense regulations aimed at ensuring the very basic workers’ right to days of rest and to information about one’s pay,” the organisation said in a statement.
“Many workers in Malta are suffering from low pay and bad conditions of work. Employers have consistently vetoed any effort to improve the conditions of workers and have even opposed, successfully, a raise in Malta’s meagre minimum wage, Moviment Graffitti said.
“Regulations ensuring certainty for workers with regards to their days of rest, and the provision of clear information about their pay, are the very bare minimum for safeguarding workers’ rights. The fact that employers’ associations are forcefully opposing even these very basic provisions goes to show their disregard for their workers, without whom they would not be making a cent of their profits.”
Moviment Graffitti called for the regulations to be “immediately reinstated after their retraction yesterday evening. The Labour Government ought to prioritise workers’ interests and should not bend to the will of a lobby group that is seeking to maximise profits at the cost of the workers’ basic wellbeing.”
Employment lawyers welcome suspension
The Malta Employment Lawyers Association notes “the latest in a series of miss-steps” in the enactment and implementation of Employment Laws in Malta and welcomed the ‘suspension’ of the legal notices.
The association said it looked forward to the official repeal of the latter, “not least because they were enacted by stealth on the eve of the Santa Maria festivities but also because they each raise fundamental legal questions that must be addressed prior to their publication.”
“Taken within the context of the difficulties already faced by all stakeholders in this area, MELA has time and again offered its services to Government to facilitate a holistic overview of employment laws and has also put forth proposals for a much-needed overhaul of the Industrial Tribunal, which have not been given much weight further to their submission. MELA regrets that also on this occasion, the Government failed to consult with any key stakeholders and has now had to hastily roll-back its piecemeal attempt at patching up some laws.”
MELA said it looks forward to participating in consultations on the law and augurs that positive headway to real progress will be made sooner rather than later.