Friday 8 November 2013

Union in Renesas still not recognized, Union President next Industrial Court date 12-13 February 2014

Recognition of the UNION

Apparently, the secret ballot is yet to be conducted. There have been several meetings concerning the list of employees eligible to vote during the secret ballot process. 

Background -  

18/1/2010 - 1st application for Recognition 
17/8/2010 - 2nd application for Recognition (Company claimed non-receipt)
8/10/2010 - 3rd Application for Recognition - inaction on the part of the DGIR for many months despite repeated demands by the UNION, and finally on 12/8/2011, the UNION had a picket in front of the Ministry of Human Resources. The DGIR then informed the UNION that the said relevant documents had been misplaced, and the blame was put on the Deputy DGIR responsible, who allegedly has since then been removed from that position. The DGIR  then asked the Union to submit yet  another  claim for recognition.

[Now, we take it from the 4th application which was made on 8/9/2011, as earlier application efforts irrelevant]

8/9/2011 - 4th and Current Application for Recognition

RENESAS’s now challenged the validity of the registration of EIEUWR(the UNION) itself, and the qualification of the UNION’s General Secretary, one Bruno Gentil Pereira. When the Minister rejected this objection on 9/4/2012, RENESAS proceeded to filed a High Court case to challenge the Minister’s decision on 8/5/2012, whereby on 28/6/2012, the High Court dismissed the RENESAS’s  application.

After the High Court dismissal, there was NO court order preventing the DGIR in proceeding with the process leading to the secret ballot.


28/6/2012 - High Court dismissed the RENESAS’s  application
5/12/2012 - Court of Appeal unanimously dismissed RENESAS's appeal
1/7/2013 - Federal Court dismisses RENESAS's appeal
 
10 months later, the 'secret ballot' is yet to be conducted. When the employer refuses to accept the Union's claim for recognition, then a secret ballot will be conducted whereby the Union needs to be able to get 50% + 1 of total number of workers entitled to vote - not the total number of workers who actually voted during the 'secret ballot'.This means that if there are 1,000 workers eligible to vote, the Union must get at least 501 workers to come and vote for the Union. Those who do not turn up to vote which may also by reason of the employer's doing would be considered for the Union.
 
Remember that in the midst of this struggle to get a recognized Union, who would then be able to enter into negotiations with the Employer and come up with a Collective Bargaining Agreement, the leader of the workers in RENESAS who also was/is the President of the Electronic Industry Employees Union Western Region, Peninsular Malaysia (EIEUWR)/ Kesatuan Sekerja Industri Elektronik Wilayah Barat Semenjung  Malaysia(KSIEWBSM) was terminated on 26/8/2011. Wan Noorulazhar bin Mohd Hanafiah claims that he was wrongfully dismissed, and his next upcoming court date at the Industrial Court is on 12 and 13 February 2014 at the Industrial Court No. 12.
 
 
 
 
 
 

Tuesday 9 July 2013

RENESAS - Attending Meeting preparing for 'secret ballot' - now hope is that it happens soonest and workers are represented by a recognised union - then CBA

UPDATE

RENESAS turns up at meeting on 9/7/2013 at the Industrial Relations Department for meeting with the UNION with regard the process towards a 'secret ballot'. There is allegedly some dispute of the list of workers listed as qualified to vote in the 'secret ballot'.

These meeting should have started after the High Court dismissed the RENESAS’s  application in June 2012 - and today, more than a year later, we still have not had the 'secret ballot' which really should have been done not later than three(3) months after RENESAS refused to accord recognition to the Union in September 2011, if not for that High Court case.[Remember, this Union have been trying to get recognition of the employer since January 2010]
"...After the High Court dismissed Renesas application on 28/6/2012, there was no court order stopping the Director General for Industrial Relations [DGIR] from proceeding with the secret ballot but the DGIR procrastinated.

After much protestation by the Union, the DGIR finally started the process by writing to Renesas to submit Form B, as required by law, on about 14/12/2012. Renesas did not comply and a second letter  was sent by the DGIR  on 14/1/2013. Renesas again did not comply, and now it is believed that  a third letter has been sent by the DGIR...."
Frustrated at the delay, on 14/3/2013, EIUWR and the workers of Renesas again had a protest picket at Putrajaya.
It is alleged that the DGIR also had to threatened to take legal action against the company. Then, finally RENESAS submitted Form B - which also contains the list of qualified workers who shall be entitled to vote in the secret ballot.

But, then  RENESAS allegedly failed to attend meetings called by the DGIR, their reason was allegedly that all should wait until the Federal Court decided on the company's appeal.
After the High Court dismissed their application, RENESAS appealed to the Court of Appeal who also unanimously dismissed the case on 5/12/2012. And, they appealed to the Federal Court, who also unanimously on 1/7/2013,  dismissed the appeal.

RENESAS can at ANY time show that they respect the freedom of association, and accord recognition to the UNION - that would improve the image and public perception of RENESAS - it will be a company seen to be respecting worker and human rights. There will then be no need for a 'secret ballot'.

A bad company can delay and delay this right of recognition of the Union - hence no Collective Bargaining Agreement.





Tuesday 2 July 2013

Wan Noorulazhar's Wrongful Dismissal Case - Mediation fails, next mention on 2/8/2013

UPDATE:

The wrongful dismissal case of Wan Noorulazhar bin Mohd Hanafiah came up for an attempt at mediation at the Industrial Court in Kuala Lumpur today(2/7/2013), but alas the attempt was unsuccessful.


The Industrial Court Chairman then fixed the case for mention on 2/8/2013. It has now been almost TWO(2) years since Wan Noorulazhar has allegedly been wrongfully dismissed.

The problem now with the Industrial Court is that even if the Industrial Court comes to a decision that Wan Noorulazhar has been wrongfully dismissed, the chances are slim that the court will order RENESAS to reinstate him without loss of benefits. The alternative order would be 'compensation in lieu of reinstatement', and the Industrial Relations Act now limits this to not more than twenty four(24) months backwages and then there is a lot of other deductions. 

[Before the Act was amended, compensation in lieu of reinstatement was backwages(and other increments/bonuses that a worker would have got if not dismissed) from the date of wrongful dismissal until the date of the Industrial Court judgment - this was fair. The amendment has also made wrongful dismissal cases of workers earning small income less attractive to lawyers resulting in difficulty getting lawyers.

RENESAS is still not willing to reinstate him. We hope that they will change their mind, reinstate immediately Wan Noorulazhar and also immediately recognize the UNION. Recognition of the UNION is necessary before the Union can begin negotiating and getting a Collective Bargaining Agreement with RENESAS.

Wan Noorulazhar bin Mohd Hanafiah, an employee of RENESAS who is the President of the UNION was dismissed on 26/8/2011 by RENESAS whereby the alleged misconduct, was that his actions were ‘contrary to explicit company policies’. He allegedly made statements about treatment of workers in a closed Facebook Group, whose members were fellow workers. The alleged misconduct It had nothing to do with his work performance. The wrongful dismissal case is now before the Industrial court.
Wan Noorulazhar bin Mohd Hanafiah is also the President of the Electronic Industry Employees Union Western Region, Peninsular Malaysia (EIEUWR)/ Kesatuan Sekerja Industri Elektronik Wilayah Barat Semenjung Malaysia(KSIEWBSM).


RENESAS appeal to Federal Court dismissed unanimously - hence the reason for RENESAS procrastination in the union recognition process is no more

RENESAS appeal dismissed unanimously by the Federal Court - hopefully the secret ballot would be conducted soonest, and the Union be accorded recognition

RENESAS Semiconductor KL Sdn Bhd (formerly known as NEC Semiconductors (Malaysia) Sdn Bhd] have denied workers recognition of their union, the Electronic Industry Employees Union Western Region, Peninsular Malaysia (EIEUWR)/ Kesatuan Sekerja Industri Elektronik Wilayah Barat Semenjung Malaysia(KSIEWBSM)]. The first application for recognition was on 18/1/2010. The 4th claim was on 8/9/2011. 

RENESAS’s now challenged the validity of the registration of EIEUWR(the UNION) itself, and the qualification of the UNION’s General Secretary, one Bruno Gentil Pereira. When the Minister rejected this objection on 9/4/2012, RENESAS proceeded to filed a High Court case to challenge the Minister’s decision on 8/5/2012, whereby on 28/6/2012, the High Court dismissed the RENESAS’s  application. RENESAS then appealed to the Court of Appeal who also unanimously dismissed the case on 5/12/2012. And, now on 1/7/2013, the Federal Court also dismissed the case.
[See earlier post: 87 Groups :- RENESAS MUST IMMEDIATELY ACCORD RECOGNITION TO THE UNION AND REINSTATE WAN NOORULAZHAR]

Picture of the workers at the Federal Court



Now, even though there has been no order after 28/6/2012 stopping the Director General of Industrial Relations(DGIR) from proceeding with the process of secret ballot to determine that more than 50% of the workers are for the Union, the  DGIR had procrastinated. 

After about 5-6 months, the DGIR started writing to RENESAS for the company to submit Form B, a required Form before the secret ballot can happen. The company procrastinated, advancing reasons that there was the Federal Court case pending - but there was no court order stopping the process towards recognition. It is alleged that the DGIR also had to threathen to take legal action against the company.

Finally, RENESAS  submitted the required Form B - but has allegedly failed to attend meetings called by the DGIR. 

Now, on 1st July 2013, the Federal Court has unanimously dismissed RENESAS's appeal - and hopefully the secret ballot is conducted soonest, and the workers at RENESAS finally get union recognition.
[In Brief:- Union recognition must be obtained before the Union can begin negotiating Collective Bargaining Agreements. In Malaysia, the first step is to REGISTER the Union. Then the Registered Union would need to apply to the employer, in this case RENESAS, and RENESAS could immediately accord recognition. But if the employer does not accord recognition, then there would be a need for a secret ballot to determine that more that 50% of the workers want the Union - then the Union would be accorded recognition.]

Saturday 8 June 2013

Relevant Malaysian Law About Claiming Union Recognition



In Malaysia, Trade Unions are governed by the Trade Union Act and the Industrial Relations Act 1967 (REVISED 1976), Act 177. The Claim for Recognition is governed by the Industrial Relations Act, and the relevanr provisions are as follows:-

Section 9 Claim for recognition
(1) No trade union of workmen the majority of whose membership consists of workmen who are not employed in any of the following capacities that is to say-
(a) managerial capacity;
(b) executive capacity;
(c) confidential capacity; or
(d) security capacity,
may seek recognition or serve an invitation under section 13 in respect of workmen employed in any of the above mentioned capacities.

(1A) Any dispute arising at any time, whether before or after recognition has been accorded, as to whether any workman or workmen are employed in a managerial, executive, confidential or security capacity may be referred to the Director General by a trade union of workmen or by an employer or by a trade union of employers.

(1B) The Director General, upon receipt of a reference under subsection (1A), may take such steps or make such enquiries as he may consider necessary or expedient to resolve the matter.

(1C) Where the matter is not resolved under subsection (1B) the Director General shall notify the Minister.

(1D) Upon receipt of the notification under subsection (1C), the Minister shall give his decision as to whether any workman or workmen are employed in a managerial, executive, confidential or security capacity and communicate in writing the decision to the trade union of workmen, to the employer and to the trade union of employers concerned.

(2) Subject to subsection (1), a trade union of workmen may serve on an employer or on a trade union of employers in writing in the prescribed form a claim for recognition in respect of the workmen or any class of workmen employed by such employer or by the members of such trade union of employers.

(3) An employer or a trade union of employers upon whom a claim for recognition has been served shall, within twenty-one days after the service of the claim-
(a) accord recognition; or
(b) if recognition is not accorded, notify the trade union of workmen concerned in writing the grounds for not according recognition; or

(3A) Upon according recognition to the trade union of workmen concerned under paragraph (3)(a), the employer or the trade union of employers concerned shall notify the Director General.

(4) Where the trade union of workmen concerned receives a notification under paragraph (3)(b), or where the employer or trade union of employers concerned fails to comply with subsection (3), the trade union of workmen may, within fourteen days-
(a) of the receipt of the notification; or
(b) after the twenty-one day period in subsection (3) has lapsed,
report the matter in writing to the Director General, failing which the claim for recognition shall be deemed to have been withdrawn.

(4A) Upon receipt of a report under subsection (4), the Director General may take such steps or make such enquiries to ascertain-
(a) the competence of the trade union of workmen concerned to represent any workmen or class of workmen in respect of whom the recognition is sought to be accorded; and
(b) by way of secret ballot, the percentage of the workmen or class of workmen, in respect of whom recognition is being sought, who are members of the trade union of workmen making the claim.

(4B) For the purposes of carrying out his functions under subsection (1B) or (4A) the Director General-
 (a) shall have the power to require the trade union of workmen, the employer, or the trade union of employers concerned to furnish such information as he may consider necessary or relevant within the period specified in the requirement;
(b) may refer to the Director General of Trade Unions for him to ascertain the competence of the trade union of workmen concerned to represent any workmen or class of workmen in respect of whom recognition is sought to be accorded, and the performance of duties and functions by the Director General of Trade Unions under this paragraph shall be deemed to be a performance of his duties and functions under the written law relating to the registration of trade unions; and
(c) may enter any place of employment where any workmen in respect of whom a claim for recognition is sought to be accorded are being employed to examine any records or documents or to conduct secret ballot.

(4C) Upon ascertaining the matter under subsection (4A), the Director General shall notify the Minister.

(5) Upon receipt of a notification under subsection (4C) the Minister shall give his decision thereon; where the Minister decides that recognition is to be accorded, such recognition shall be deemed to be accorded by the employer or trade union of employers concerned, as the case may be, as from such date as the Minister may specify.

(6) A decision of the Minister under subsection (1D) or (5) shall be final and shall not be questioned in any court.

Then we have to look at the INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS REGULATIONS 2009, which dealt with greater detail the procedure when it comes to claiming recognition, in Particular Part II - RECOGNITION OF TRADE UNIONS


Section 3 – Claim for Recognition
(1) Any claim for recognition by a trade union of workmen under subsection 9(2) of the Act shall be substantially in Form A and shall be signed by a responsible officer of such trade union.
(2) The purpose of a claim for recognition is to enable the trade union of workmen to commence collective bargaining with the employer or trade union of employers as provided under subsection 13(1) of the Act.
(3) The original of form A together with a copy of the rules of such trade union shall be served-
(a) on the employer or trade union of employers, as the case may be, at their registered address or principal place of business by AR registered post or courier; or
(b) personally on a responsible officer of such employer or trade union of employers.
(4) An acknowledgment of service from the responsible officer in Form A-1 shall be sufficient proof of the service of Form A on him.
(5) A copy of the said form A together with a copy of the rules of such trade union shall at the same time be sent to the Director General.

Section 4 -   Notification for according recognition
Upon according recognition under subsection 9(3A) of the Act, the employer or trade union of employers shall, within twenty-one days, notify the Director General of such recognition.

Section 5  Ascertaining the service of Form A
(1) Where a trade union of workmen makes a report to the Director General within fourteen days under subsection 9(4) of the Act, the Director General may take such necessary steps where practicable within fourteen days to determine whether form A has been served according to subregulation 3(3) on the employer or trade union of employers concerned.



(2) Where the Director General is satisfied that form A has not been served according to subregulation 3(3), the claim for recognition is deemed to have lapsed and the trade union of workmen concerned may serve a new Form A on the employer or trade union of employers concerned.

Section 6  Ascertaining competency and membership of trade union
Where the Director General is satisfied that form A has been properly served, the Director General may, without delay-



    (a) refer the issue on competency of the trade union concerned to the Director General of Trade Unions for him to ascertain, where practicable within sixty days from the date of reference; and



    (b) direct the employer or the trade union of employers, as the case may be, to furnish him, within fourteen days from the receipt of the direction or any other period specified in the direction, particulars of the workmen in respect of whom the claim for recognition is made and who are in the employment of the employer, or the respective employers who are members of the trade union of employers, as the case may be, as on the date of claim, substantially in Form B signed by a responsible officer.

Section 7  Convening meeting for secret ballot
(1) Upon receipt of Form B, the Director General shall, by notice in writing, convene a meeting for the purpose of conducting a secret ballot under paragraph 9(4A)(b) of the Act, between the trade union of workmen making the claim for recognition and the employer or the trade union of employers concerned.



(2) In the event that no agreement is reached between the trade union of workmen making the claim for recognition and the employer or the trade union of employers concerned regarding the particulars of the workmen in Form B, the Director General shall decide on the final list as in Appendix A1 of Form B.

Section 8  Employer and trade union to assist Director General
(1) Where the Director General has given direction under paragraph 6(b) or served a notice under regulation 7, the employer or trade union of employers, and the trade union of workmen concerned shall furnish the Director General with such information as he may require and shall give every assistance to the Director General to enable him to conduct the secret ballot expeditiously.



(2) No person, employer or trade union shall in any way obstruct the taking of a secret ballot.

Section 9  Notice for secret ballot
(1) Where the Director General of Trade Unions has ascertained the competency of the trade union of workmen concerned he shall notify the Director General.



(2) Upon receipt of the notification that the trade union of workmen concerned is competent, the Director General shall fix the date for the taking of a secret ballot which date shall where practicable be within thirty days from the date of the notification.



(3) Where the date for the taking of a secret ballot has been determined, the Director General shall issue a notice in Form C to the trade union of workmen, employer or trade union of employers concerned.

(4) The employer or trade union of employers shall cause copies of the notice for secret ballot to be fixed at a conspicuous place in the premise of the employers concerned as determined by the Director General for seven consecutive days immediately preceding the day of the taking of the secret ballot.



(5) No person shall remove, deface or destroy the notice for secret ballot until after the completion of the secret ballot.

Section 10  Persons entitled to vote
All workmen or any class of workmen as in Appendix A1 of Form B shall be entitled to vote in a secret ballot.

Section 11  Formula to ascertain percentage of membership
(1) The percentage of membership shall be calculated bases on the following formula:



Number of Votes Indicating Membership           X  100%

Number of workmen entitled to vote 


(2) The strength of the membership shall be determined on a simple majority vote basis.

Section 12  Notification of result
The Director General shall as soon as the result of the secret ballot is ascertained communicate such result to the trade union of workmen, employer or trade union of employers concerned in Form D.

Section 13  Decision of Minister
(1) A decision of the Minister under subsection 9(1D) of the Act as to who are the workmen employed in a managerial, executive, confidential or security capacity shall be substantially in Form E.



(2) A decision of the Minister under subsection 9(5) of the Act whether a trade union of workmen be accorded recognition or not be accorded recognition shall be substantially in Form F.


FORM B – This is a Form that the Employer is supposed to fill and deliver. It contains
A - Material particulars of all workmen on the date of the claim, and
A1 – being the list of all workmen eligible to vote (now the 2nd list has to be approved by the Union, if dispute then it will be settled by the Director General
-          The contents of thi table is my own understanding and simplification

Thursday 16 May 2013

Malaysian electronics manufacturer Renesas Semiconductor criticised for union busting

87 civil society organisations from Malyasia and abroad are calling on Renesas Semiconductor KL Sdn Bhd (formerly known as NEC Semiconductors (Malaysia) Sdn Bhd] to stop obstructing or delaying, and immediately accord recognition to the union. It has been more than 3 years since the Electronic Industry Employees Union Western Region Peninsular Malaysia (EIEUWR) first applied in January 2010 for recognition by Renesas. Renesas must stop its delaying tactics so that workers at Renesas can at last begin to enjoy the benefits of collective bargaining agreement.

In Malaysia, after being registered, recognition by the employer is needed before the UNION can start negotiating and enter into any Collective Bargaining Agreement with the employer company. The UNION has to submit a claim for recognition, and within 21 days, the company can accord recognition or not. If not, then the Director General of Industrial Relations (DGIR) steps in and start the process of conducting   a secret ballot to ensure that more than  5o% plus one of the qualified workers is for the union – then the union is accorded recognition, and thereafter can effectively represent the workers. 

Even though  about 70% (1,300) of Renesas ’s workers eligible to be members of the  union were already members of EIEUWR when the first application was made by the UNION to the company for recognition, Renesas did not accord recognition and after more than 3 years and Renesas still refuses to recognize the UNION.

On 18 January 2010, EIEUWR submitted the 1st application for recognition to Renesas . The company responded that there was a pro-tem in-house union, which was unregistered, also seeking recognition. The Director General of Industrial Relations (DGIR) rejected this reason. Then, Renesas claimed  that they did not receive the claim for recognition, when the application had been hand delivered personally by Wan Noorulazhar, the Union President, and Renesas acknowledged receipt. The DGIR later asked the Union to send again their claim for recognition.

The 2nd claim for recognition was submitted on 17/8/2010, this time by acknowledged receipt registered post, and again Renesas claimed they did not receive it, and the UNION also did not receive back the duly signed acknowledged receipt card from the postal services.

The 3rd claim for recognition was submitted to Renesas on 8/10/2010, and this time using the National Courier Poslaju. After receipt of the UNION’s  letter, Renesas send it back to Poslaju asking that the letter be returned  to the UNION. Poslaju provided a letter confirming this. Renesas could not deny receipt this time, and rightfully the DGIR should have done the needful which was to the conduct of a ‘secret ballot’. But, there was inaction on the part of the DGIR for many months despite repeated demands by the UNION, and finally on 12/8/2011, the UNION had a picket in front of the Ministry of Human Resources. The DGIR then informed the UNION that the said relevant documents had been misplaced, and the blame was put on the Deputy DGIR responsible, who allegedly has since then been removed from that position. The DGIR  then asked the Union to submit yet  another  claim for recognition.

The 4th claim for recognition was made on 8/9/2011. Renesas ’s now challenged the validity of the registration of EIEUWR(the UNION) itself, and the qualification of the UNION’s General Secretary, one Bruno Gentil Pereira. When the Minister rejected this objection on 9/4/2012, Renesas proceeded to filed a High Court case to challenge the Minister’s decision on 8/5/2012, whereby on 28/6/2012, the High Court dismissed the Renesas ’s  application. Renesas then appealed to the Court of Appeal who also unanimously dismissed the case on 5 December 2012.

After the High Court dismissed Renesas application on 28/6/2012, there was no court order stopping the DGIR from proceeding with the secret ballot but the DGIR did not do anything.

After much protestation by the Union, the DGIR finally started the process by writing to Renesas to submit Form B, as required by law, on about 14/12/2012. Renesas did not comply and a second letter  was sent by the DGIR  on 14/1/2013. Renesas again did not comply, and now it is believed that  a third letter has been sent by the DGIR.

When, and if the day finally comes for the ‘secret ballot’, the workers entitled to vote would be the workers as of the date the claim was submitted, being 8/9/2011 but with the existence of short-term contracts, many of the pro-union workers may  no more be employees of Renesas , and this will prejudice the UNION, who still will have to show that it has the support of at least  50% plus one of the number of qualified employees as per the list of qualified employees on 8/9/2011. The tactic of delaying the secret ballot works in favour of the employer, and prejudices the UNION.

Wan Noorulazhar bin Mohd Hanafiah, an employee of Renesas who is the President of the UNION was dismissed on 26/8/2011 by Renesas whereby the alleged misconduct, was that his actions were ‘contrary to explicit company policies’. He allegedly made statements about treatment of workers in a closed Facebook Group, whose members were fellow workers. The alleged misconduct It had nothing to do with his work performance. The wrongful dismissal case is now before the Industrial court.

The current trend at the Industrial Courts when it makes a finding the worker has been wrongfully dismissed by the employer is not to order reinstatement, but to rather order compensation.  If not reinstated, workers of Renesas would be deprived of a leader. Renesas can at any time reinstate  Wan Noorulazhar bin Mohd Hanafiah  without  loss of benefits. 

On 14/3/2013, EIUWR and the workers of Renesas again had a protest picket at Putrajaya.
We call on Renesas Semiconductor KL Sdn  Bhd to immediately accord recognition to Electronic Industry Employees Union Western Region (EIEUWR), and  immediately reinstate Wan Noorulazhar bin Mohd Hanafiah and all other worker leaders terminated.

Full list of organisations that subscribed to the call:
  • ALIRAN
  • Andhra Pradesh State Domestic Workers' Union, India
  • Asia Monitor Resource Centre(AMRC)
  • Asia  Pacific  Forum on Women , Law and Development ( APWLD)
  • Asia Floor Wage Alliance- SEA Office
  • Building and Wood Workers International Asia Pacific Regional Office (BWI APRO)
  • Center for Migrant Advocacy ,Philippines
  • Centre for Human Rights and Development (CHRD) Sri Lanka
  • Center for Orang  Asli Concerns (COAC)
  • CIMS- Centre for Indian Migrant Studies
  • Clean Clothes Campaign
  • Committee for Asian Women, Bangkok
  • Community Action Network (CAN), Malaysia
  • Confederation of Free Trade Unions of India
  • Dignity International
  • GoodElectronics
  • GoodElectronics Thailand (GET)
  • Hope Workers' Center, Taiwan
  • Hsinchu Catholic Diocese Migrants and Immigrants Service Center (HMISC), Taiwan
  • Human Rights Ambassador for Salem-News.com
  • IDWN( International  Domestic Workers’  Network)
  • IMA Research Foundation, Bangladesh
  • International Campaign for Responsible Technology, US
  • International League of Peoples' Struggle – Canada
  • Legal Support for Children and Women (LSCW), Cambodia
  • LIPS (Lembaga Informasi Perburuhan Sedane/Sedane Labour Resource Centre) Indonesia
  • MADPET (Malaysians Against Death Penalty and Torture)
  • Malaysian Physicians for Social Responsibility
  • MAP Foundation, Thailand
  • Maquiladora Health & Safety Support Network, Berkeley, CA  USA
  • Migrant Care
  • Migrant Forum in Asia (MFA)
  • Migrant Forum India (MF India)
  • Migrant Forum Lanka (MFL)
  • Migrants Rights Council India
  • Myanmar Ethnic Rohingya Human Rights Organization Malaysia (MERHROM)
  • NAMM (Network of Action for Migrants in Malaysia)
  • NDWM -  National Domestic Workers' Movement, India
  • NLD-LA (National League for Democracy-Liberated Areas), Malaysia
  • Pakistan Rural Workers Social Welfare Organization (PRWSWO)
  • Parti Rakyat Malaysia(PRM)
  • People & Planet, UK
  • Persatuan Masyarakat Selangor & Wilayah Persekutuan (PERMAS)
  • PINAY Quebec
  • Progressive Labor Union of Domestic Workers- Hong Kong
  • PSWS (Persatuan Sahabat Wanita Selangor)
  • Pusat KOMAS (KOMAS)
  • Refugee and Migratory Movements Research Unit (RMMRU), Bangladesh
  • SALT (School of Acting Justly Loving Tenderly and Walking Humbly)
  • SBMI (Serikat Buruh Migran Indonesia)
  • Solidarity of Cavite Workers (SCW), Philippines
  • State Enterprises Workers' Relations Confederation (SERC), Thailand
  • State Railway Workers' Union of Thailand (SRU), Thailand
  • SUARAM (Suara Rakyat Malaysia)
  • Tenaganita, Malaysia
  • The Alliance of Progressive Labor - Hong Kong
  • Tourism Employees Association of Maldives
  • Women's Rehabilitation Center (WOREC) Nepal
  • Workers Assistance Center, Inc, Philippines
  • Workers Hub For Change (WH4C)
  • Women Workers Lead
  • Writer Alliance for Media Independence (WAMI)
  • Youth For Peace/Peace Institute of Cambodia (YFP/PIC)
  • Malaysian Unions
  • Kesatuan Sekerja Industri Elektronik Wilayah Timur Semenanjung Malaysia (KSIEWTSM)
  • Kesatuan Sekerja Industri Elektronik Wilayah Selatan Semenanjung Malaysia
  • Kesatuan Sekerja Pekerja Industri Elektronik Wilayah Utara
  • Kesatuan Pekerja-Pekerja MHS Aviation Berhad
  • Kesatuan Pekerja-Pekerja Polyplastics Asia Pacific
  • Paper & Paper Products Manufacturing Employees' Union Of Malaysia (PPPMEU)
  • TNBJOU (TNB Junior Officers Union), Malaysia
  • Malayan Technical Services Union (MTSU)
  • NUBE (National Union of Banking Employees), Malaysia
  • Association of Maybank Executive
  • Kesatuan Kebangsaan Pekerja Pekerja Perusahaan Alat Alat Pengangkutan Dan Sekutu(NUTEAIW)
  • Kesatuan Pekerja-Pekerja Dalam Perkhidmatan Perubatan Dan Kesihatan Swasta-[Union Of Employees In Private Medical And Health Services]
  • Kesatuan Eksekutif Canon Opto (Malaysia) Sdn Bhd
  • Kesatuan Pekerja-Pekerja Perusahaan Otomobil Nasional Sdn.Bhd.
  • Electrical Industry Workers' Union (EIWU)
  • Kesatuan Pekerja Pekerja Fujikura Federal Cables Sdn Bhd
  • Kesatuan Pekerja Pekerja Kelab Semenanjung Malaysia
  • Kesatuan Eksekutif Airod (KEA)
  • UNI Global Union-Malaysia
  • MTUC Pahang
  • MTUC Penang Division
  • MTUC Bahagian Melaka
  • Kongres Kesatuan Sekerja Cawangan Pulau Pinang
  • MTUC Selangor & Wilayah Persekutuan