Minimum wage saga continues..

WE refer to the letters written by Samsuddin Bardan of the Malaysian Employers Federation (The Star, Sept 30), the Secretariat, National Wages Consultative Council (The Star, Oct 2) and Peter Raiappan (The Star, Oct 27) on the issue of minimum wage.

Come January, most of us will be concerned as to whether the minimum wages as previously announced by the Government will be enforced on our service industry e.g. security guards, waiters in hotels and restaurants or other workers in similar industries that require them to work 24 hours, including Sundays and public holidays.

In the case of security guards, it must be noted that most of these guards work 30 days a month as opposed to most regular employees who work 26 days.

The guards in particular will have to work the extra four days to claim the four days overtime payment (in addition to the daily four-hour overtime) to obtain that extra cash for a take-home salary of more than RM1,000 a month.

The security service employers are indeed in a dilemma.

Besides the overtime payment, the security companies will have to fork out additional expenditure such as the “post allowance” to the guards particularly for those assignments which are located in isolated places, transport allowance to guards for the use of their own transport, and not to mention the “attendance allowance” as an incentive to compel the guards to avoid unnecessary absenteeism. There are also cases where a “laundry allowance” is given to ensure that the guards are in their most presentable uniforms while on duty.

All this amounts to additional unavoidable costs to the security companies.

We, the security operators, are most concerned about the take-home salary of the guards and not just the basic salary of RM900 a month (less EPF and Socso deductions).

This is precisely why we encourage the security guards to work 12 hours (with four hours overtime payment daily) for them to earn the extra cash. Even the Nepalese guards that we employ work the 12 hour shift for the same reason.

We believe that even if we compel the guards to work for only eight hours a day, I am sure they will find some other part-time job to earn the extra cash during their time off.

This may not be healthy as they will most likely be too tired to effectively perform their duties as security guards in their regular assignments.

This may even result in them skipping work, which is worse.

Security guards are posted everywhere in the country. They are not stationed in one place like the factory workers.

Some people may not be too concerned about security but the role of these guards should not be taken for granted.

They are important in our society to prevent crime amidst the worrying level of crime in the country lately.

We are indeed in a dilemma whether we can continue to sustain our security service industry in the face of the above-mentioned escalating operating costs if the Government insists on proceeding with the minimum wage of RM900 requirement.

We therefore, urge the Government to exclude the security service industry and other similar industries from the implementation of this RM900 minimum wages scheme due to the extra costs to be incurred from the additional four hours of daily overtime work.

They also work during public holidays and Sundays.

These will incur extra double overtime which in return their take home pay is more than RM900.

We hope the Government to consider our appeal seriously to postpone the implementation of the new salary scheme which is due on Jan 1.

It is for the good of the security service industry and for the economy in general.

By DATUK RAHMAT ISMAIL Hon Life President (International) Asian Professional Security Association - The Star Nov  28, 2012

Related posts:

Rightways: Malaysia's minimum wage saga continues 

 Malaysia's minimum wage, and its implications

Malaysia's Minimum wage's benefits and effects
Are Malaysian Employment Laws Challenging?
What's minimum wage in Malaysia?
 

Malaysia's minimum wage saga continues

AFTER all the debate between proponents and opposers and the accompanying fanfare which dragged on for years, the Human Resources Minister finally issued an order in July 2012, declaring that Minimum Wages need to be paid from January 2013.

While the intention was to ensure that all employees will be paid a certain minimum salary, RM900 in peninsular Malaysia, the way in which the order was worded has created problems and headaches for employers, not so much for those who are not paying the minimum wage of RM900 currently, but for employers whose current remuneration package for employees is far above that of RM900.

The blame for this rests squarely on the formulators of the law and the order.

This is further compounded by the recent issuance of so called “Guidelines – method of implementation of the Minimum Wages Order 2012”.

The National Wages Consultative Council Act, (the Act) under which the Minimum Wage Order has been promulgated, states that “wages” has the same meaning as that found in the Employment Act 1955.

“Wages” as defined in the Employment Act 1955 means basic wages and all other payments in cash payable to an employee for work done in respect of his contract of service but does not include the listed exclusions.

However, the Act has also provided a definition for “minimum wages”, to mean, the basic wages to be or as determined under the order made by the Minister under Section 23.

Section 24(2) of the Act goes further to state that where the basic wages in an employment contract is lower than the minimum wage rate as specified in the Minimum Wages Order the minimum wage rate (RM900) shall be substituted for the ‘basic wage’ in the employment contract.

There are many employers, who for a variety of reasons, provide a low basic wage but top up the remuneration package with a variety of other payments such as commissions, allowances, service charge, shift allowance and other payment in cash.

In many instances, the calculation of the additional payments are based on the current “basic wage”.

At the end of each month, these employees earn much more than the minimum RM900.

Often employers fix a low basic wage but pay high rates for other payments, the calculation of which, as mentioned earlier, is sometimes linked to the basic wage. They do so to encourage productivity.

They are not short paying their employees but that is how the wage payments are structured in the country with each industry having its own peculiar structure.

Many instances can be cited where employees paid as much as RM1,500 or even more per month.

The Minimum Wages Order requires that the “basic wage” be now moved up to RM900.

The introduction of minimum wages was never intended to affect these good employers but to compel the ones who pay below RM900 to raise the wages of their employees to a minimum level of RM900 per month.

The Minimum Wages Order in Para 6, however, goes on to suggest that employers and employees and where trade unions exist, could go about and re-negotiate a restructuring of wages before the coming into force of the order.

How on earth are employers, who do not have a union, going to go about this renegotiating with their employees? What if they disagree?

Would any employee or trade union in the right frame of mind agree to raise his current basic (which is lower than RM900) to the new figure of RM900 (thereby helping the employer to conform with the requirement of the Minimum Wages Order) and permit all the other benefits that he is receiving (which is related to the basic) to be lowered so that the end result is that he is placed at a position, (in terms of total remuneration received at the end of the month ) no different than the original amount that he is currently receiving?

The Minimum Wages Order has indeed created confusion in the labour market and that is putting it very mildly. Fortunately, the order comes into force only in January 2013, giving time for corrective measures.

In an attempt to provide some clarity and explanation to this confused state of affairs, the National Wages Consultative Council exercising the powers provided under Section 4(2) of the Act has decided that apart from the matters contained in the Minimum Wages Order 1212 it shall issue some guideline relating to the method of implementation of the order.

Nowhere in Section 4(1) (which refers to the functions of the council) are powers given to it to elaborate, explain, modify or issue guidelines relating to the method of implementing the Minimum Wages Order issued by the Minister under Section 23(1).

If at all the council wants to make any recommendations it could exercise the provision under Section 22(1)(e).

In such an instance it has to make its recommendations to the Government through the Minister.

The Minister, if he agrees with the recommendation, can then issue an order as provided for under Section 22(1). .

Clearly, the drafting of the Minimum Wages Order could have been done much more professionally bearing in mind the objective of the introduction of the minimum wage law.

It is still not too late to remedy the situation and help relieve the unnecessary turmoil the vast majority of employers are now facing.

Up till now so much management time has been lost trying to find answers to the hundreds of questions raised by law abiding employers in the different industries for which no one in the ministry has been able to provide clear-cut answers.

Needless to say, any law enacted must be simple, well drafted, easy to understand and achieve what it is set out to do.

If it creates problems, especially for those who ought not to be affected by it, then something is fundamentally wrong with it.

PETER RAIAPPAN Kuala Lumpur

Related posts:
 Malaysia's minimum wage, and its implications
Malaysia's Minimum wage's benefits and effects
Are Malaysian Employment Laws Challenging?
What's minimum wage in Malaysia?

What’s minimum wage in Malaysia?

I REFER to the Minimum Wages Order which the Human Resources Minister made by notification in the Gazette on July 16.

Although the said Order comes into operation on Jan 1, it is frustrating and appalling that it does not define what components can constitute “wages” to make up the minimum wage of RM900 for Peninsula Malaysia and RM800 for Sabah, Sarawak and the Federal Territory of Labuan.

Throughout the Order, the term “wages” is used repeatedly without denoting clearly and explicitly whether the term refers to merely basic pay and/or includes fixed and regular allowances paid to employees e.g. shift allowances, attendance allowances, meal allowances, overtime meal allowances, laundry allowances, competency allowances, etc.

To add to the ambiguity, the illustration in Section 4 of the Order, introduces yet another undefined term “current basic wage”.

Is this meant to suggest that only basic wage can be part of the minimum wage?
While I understand that it is only an illustration, this does not help for purposes of clarity.
The National Wages Consultative Council Act 2011, under which the said Order was made, defines wages as having the same meaning assigned to it in section 2 of the Employment Act 1955.

The definition of wages under the Employment Act 1955 is “wages refer to basic wages and all other payments in cash payable to an employee for work done in respect of his contract of service.”

It excludes five types of payments which are mostly clearly defined. The definition of wages in the Employment Act 1955 is by no means a clear science.

Debate rages in the Labour Court even now, some 50 plus years after the Act was made law, as to what amounts to wages or not.

If one refers to paragraph three of the First Schedule of the Employment Act 1955, it states: “For the purposes of this Schedule wages means wages as defined in section 2 but shall not include any payment by way of commission, subsistence allowance and overtime payment”.

This means that under section 2 of the Employment Act 1955, commissions are part of wages. And since “wages” in the said Order refers to the definition of wages in section 2 of the Employment Act 1955, it follows that commissions are part of wages to make up the minimum wage.

Say if I hire a salesman and pay him a basic of RM500. In some months, when sales are good, he earns commissions in excess of RM400, and therefore his wages are more than RM900.

In other months, when sales are bad, his commissions are below RM400 and thus his wages are below RM900. It follows then that for the months where sales are good, I as an employer have not flouted the said Order whereas in the other months, I am in breach of the said Order.

Am I as an employer expected to watch the commission trend of each of my salesmen?

Imagine a car dealer who has 50 dealerships each hiring 20 salesmen. How am I to track this?

I do not underestimate the complexity of the issue of what components should or should not be part of wages.

I will be the first to agree that it is not an easy subject. However, if we are inclined to come up with a minimum wage with such uncertainty revolving around the word “wages”, surely the fixing of a minimum wage is to put the proverbial cart before the horse.

Let me remind the learned folks at the Human Resources Ministry and the Attorney-General’s Chambers that all these ambiguities are not doing any good to the employers or the employees; neither is it going to assist in its smooth implementation.

Unless a holistic and precise approach is made to the question of what constitutes “wages”, this very attempt to introduce a new regulation on minimum wages appears to be hurried through for political expediency and far removed from the concept of a high income society.\

FRUSTRATED HR PRACTITIONER
Kuala Lumpur

Related posts:
Malaysia's Minimum wage’s benefits and effects 
Malaysia's minimum wage, and its implications 
Are Malaysian Employment Laws Challenging?

Are Malaysian Employment Laws Challenging?

Are Malaysian employment laws and policies in keeping with the new models or do they still carry signs of the traditional master-servant model and archaic gender stereotypes?
 
WE hear of female civil servants taking optional retirement but that is because the Public Service Commission allows for that.

And when they go, they get a pension.

But to be forced to retire in the private sector before your male colleagues? That goes against the grain and, surely, Article 8 of the Federal Constitution which guarantees gender equality.

And yet that is the case for female workers in some industries in the private sector.

In June 2001, the Guppy Plastics Industries' new employee handbook stipulated that the retirement age for its female and male workers was 50 and 55 respectively. Apparently, women are prone to medical problems after 50.

Tan: The argument that female workers lose their ability at 50 is not backed by scientific fact.

The fact that the Federal Constitution was amended a month later to include gender in Article 8's equality provision and that Malaysia is a signatory to the United Nation's Convention on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women (Cedaw) before that was of no consequence to them or the Court of Appeal.

On March 21 this year, the second highest court in the country dismissed an appeal by eight female employees against their forced retirement from Guppy in July 2001, saying the plastics company had merely followed its handbook and early retirement for female workers was industry practice.

The fact that other industries also have similar retirement policies is a matter for concern. Apart from a clear case of gender bias, some could, like Guppy had done, re-employ the terminated workers on a contract basis, depriving them of benefits they would have got otherwise.

The women are not giving up, though. They are applying for leave to appeal in the Federal Court.

Lawyer Honey Tan says the Guppy case reinforces the male and female stereotypes. “The argument that female workers lose their ability at 50 is not backed by scientific fact,” she says.

“If age was a bona fide occupational qualification, then both male and female workers should retire at the same time.”

Should our employment laws remain in the dark ages, leaving a worker with social security that is nebulous at best?

Tan will be raising the Guppy case and other cases of sex discrimination at the workplace for discussion and debate at a conference on “Challenges in Employment Law: Proposals for Reform” on July 2.

The one-day conference is organised by the Malaysian Chapter of the International Society of Labour and Social Security Law (MSLSSL) and Current Law Journal.

Roy: There is a great need to create public awareness of labour laws and social security.

 

Participants will hear from Susila Sithamparam, Industrial Court president, Lawasia Committee on Labour Law chair Bernard Banks, Human Resources Ministry officials, unionists, lawyers, employers and an Industrial Court chairman.

The other topics that will be debated are minimum wage, contract labour and labour claims under Section 69 of the Employment Act.

“There is a great need to create public awareness of labour laws and social security,” says conference organising chairman Datuk Roy Rajasingham.

As such, the Malaysian chapter of the international society was set up in 2011 to promote the study of labour and social security laws here and at the international level, adds Roy, who is also MSLSSL vice-president.

“It seeks to provide lawyers, labour practitioners and others working in the fields of labour and social security law with a forum for discussion and debate.”

Membership is open to all who, because of their scholarly work or judicial or professional activities, are interested in furthering the aims and purposes of the society.

Besides them, the Malaysian Employers Federation (MEF), Malaysian Trades Union Congress (MTUC), Human Resources Ministry, Employees Provident Fund and Social Security Organisation are entitled to nominate one representative each to be a member.

Conference participants can expect to look at proposals for reform in the changing field of social security, employment, and human resources management.

One of the long-time bones of contention has been whether to introduce a minimum wage.

Recently, the Government ended that dispute by announcing a minimum wage for the private sector but whether this is the best thing for workers here and Malaysia's competitiveness remains to be seen.

Lo: The matter of what constitutes minimum wage has to be resolved.

“Even though the rate has been announced, the matter of what constitutes minimum wage has to be resolved,” says Andrew Lo, who will be speaking on the topic.

“Does it include, for example, shift allowance, service charge, overtime payment, performance bonus? How about accommodation, transport and meals provided by employers?” says Lo, chief executive officer of the Sarawak Bank Employees Union.

Also speaking is MEF executive director Shamsuddin Bardan and participants can expect a robust discussion on who benefits most.

For example, would a minimum wage increase the standard of living for the poor and increase domestic consumption, which is the engine of economic growth?

Or would it destroy jobs?

Lo notes that some employers are already claiming that up to four million jobs are at risk and 200,000 businesses may close.

As such, he speculates, some companies may adopt more capital intensive and efficient production systems and reduce the number of workers needed.

MSLSSL president Datuk Dr Cyrus Das says it would be good for all stakeholders to remember that a minimum wage is tied to a “living wage”.

“Every society that prescribes to social justice must accept a minimum wage structure and employment. You can't pay a worker RM300 and expect him to survive on that today.”

Another major concern currently is the over-dependence on contract labour and foreign labour.

Dr Das says contract labour should not be introduced for the local workforce as that would mean bypassing trade union membership by workers, who would otherwise be eligible to join a trade union.

“The mechanism of trade union membership and terms of employment guaranteed by a collective agreement are generally regarded as minimum safeguards to an industrial workforce,” he adds.

Dr Das: You can’t pay a worker RM300 and expect him to survive on that today.

Lo, who is also MTUC Sarawak secretary-general, claims that the supply of foreign workers is controlled by syndicates and is a multi-million industry.

“Employment agents are exploiting foreign workers as they charge more than what the workers would have earned during their employment contract.”

One of the recent amendments to employment law is that which allows labour supply companies to source and employ foreign workers and farm them out to work for a fee.

“The problem arises when these labour contractors abscond, leaving their workers unpaid. The company where the employees have been working will deny responsibility as they are not the employer, leaving employees high and dry,” Lo says.

This amendment and others were greeted with protest and concern but were passed by Parliament anyway, ostensibly to facilitate the easier registration of labour contractors.

The question now, says Lo, is whether the amendments will ensure greater accountability and protection for workers or would they be legalising an undesirable practice.

He adds that the conference will look into whether a Royal Commission would be appropriate to provide an independent, in-depth inquiry to assist the Government in formulating a robust, effective, enforceable, and sustainable foreign labour policy.

By SHAILA KOSHY koshy@thestar.com.my

> Register before June 11 for an early bird fee. For conference details, contact 03-4270 5400 or e-mail priority@cljlaw.com

Malaysia's Minimum wage’s benefits and effects

Minimum wage’s benefits are plenty

I HAVE been waiting for a reason to talk about a pizza delivery man I met in a lobby of an condominium while waiting for a lift to arrive. It was in the evening and he was delivering pizza to one of the residents. I struck a conversation about his job, his salary and his aspirations, and got enough from the chat to get his views that the decent salary he was making was insufficient.

The young man claimed he was making RM2,200 a month whizzing through traffic, despite the weather, to send piping-hot pizzas to customers from between 10am and midnight.

He said that after sending back money to his parents in Pahang and paying for his lodging and expenses to live in Kuala Lumpur, the salary was just not enough. Furthermore, the job was wearing him down and he wants to do something else, but is finding it hard to get a new skill with the demands of his current job and the obligations he has.

His story will resonate with many others who are struggling to make ends meet, and whatever little assistance they get will surely be welcome. That small bit of help though came for millions of Malaysians by way of a new minimum wage the Government announced on April 30.

Workers in Peninsular Malaysia were promised a floor wage of RM900 a month and those in Sabah, Sarawak and Labuan RM800 a month. The minimum wage will take effect six months from the time the law is gazetted to allow industries to make adjustments to comply with the new law. Non-professional services companies with fewer than five employees will be given a further six months to make their adjustments.

The higher minimum wage will benefit a reported over three million private-sector employees and the net effect economists have calculated is a negligible increase in unemployment and a small drop in investments.

Economic growth and the investments that will take place and the promise of new jobs will be more than enough to offset those small impediments.

One drawback many can expect is higher prices. You can bet employers will pass on the higher staff costs to customers, but the quantum should be kept in check given the competition that exists in business.

The benefits, though are plenty.

The higher wage that almost a third of the workforce will benefit from will be a boost to the economy, which in recent years has been driven by consumption.

The higher wages will also manifest in other benefits for workers. A higher base salary will mean higher contributions to the Employees Provident Fund (EPF) and the extra will go some way to shore up the retirement savings of many Malaysians.

Companies will see an increase in their payments to the EPF, but with productivity having risen 6.7% per year over the past 10 years and companies making a lot more money than before judging by profits announced by listed companies and tax collection by the Government, they can afford to pay a little more for their workers without diving into bankruptcy.

With a third of the workforce soon enjoying a higher base salary, the increased income will go some way to satisfy the requirement of banks under the new responsible lending guidelines.

Under the new loan criteria, banks will look at the basic salary and decide whether a person can afford a loan. With higher salaries, maybe that will be enough for low salaried people to qualify for a loan to get the small car or home they need.

The minimum wage will help those in need. It might help those like the pizza delivery man if the minimum salary together with allowances are fixed. It is a start that many Malaysians will be thankful.

● Deputy news editor Jagdev Singh Sidhu needs to get a lucky charm ahead of this weekend's FA Cup final.

Minimum wage effects manageable

Effects of the minimum wage policy are expected to be manageable and unlikely to have a significant impact on companies, with rubber glove manufacturers seen to be the hardest hit, analysts said.

UOB KayHian Research head Vincent Khoo said there will be no significant wage rise for most listed companies, especially given the flexibility for the floor wage to include allowances and benefits, hence no wage restructuring is required.

"However, small and medium enterprises in particular, may still be impacted by higher overtime and there may be an upward cascade effect for some listed companies."

In terms of sector, he said glove manufacturing remains the most impacted but the effect should be significantly softened with the incorporation of some allowances into wage calculations.

"Minimum wages would lower industry profits by as much as over 10% as a significant portion of the industry's staff force earn only RM600 to RM700 a month before allowances and benefits."

Consumer companies emerge as the winner as overall demand for fast-moving consumer goods should improve with higher disposable income among low-wage earners.

"We expect manufacturers to raise product prices during the implementation grace period to maintain profitability," Khoo said.

Affin Investment Bank economist Alan Tan said: "The direct effect of a minimum wage increase will result in increases in the relative prices of goods produced. However, even if minimum wages were to lift prices (especially in low-wage industries), we expect the inflationary impact to be manageable, as the minimum wage is set at a relatively low level, which will not raise production costs and overall price level significantly.

"Overall, we expect the broader economic effects of minimum wage in the country on company profits, prices, and inflation, to be manageable and unlikely to have a significant impact on the economy."

However, CIMB Research said higher wages will release pent-up consumption, albeit with some inflationary impact.

"Our view is that an appropriate minimum wage could over time achieve a big push, which is moving the low-wage, low-consumption and informal labour market to a high-wage, high-consumption and formal labour market."

For rubber glove makers, HwangDBS Vickers Research said staff costs would increase by 17-22% while earnings could fall by 5-19% .

"We expect the additional staff costs to be passed to customers over time, but in the immediate term, we expect earnings and margins to be dampened."

It said Hartalega Holdings Bhd is the least affected while Top Glove Corp Bhd would be most affected.

"Based on our estimates, Hartalega's salary costs could rise by RM10 million a year, an increase of 17% and this would lower the 2013 estimated net profit by 5%. For Top Glove, staff costs could rise as much as RM39 million (an increase of 22%), denting 2013 earnings by 19%. Meanwhile, we estimate Kossan Rubber Industries Bhd's annual salary costs to increase by RM18 million (a rise of 17%) and net profit to fall by 13%."

However, it said that if fixed allowances or cash payments are allowed in the calculation for minimum wages, the impact will be softened.

It maintained a hold on Top Glove at a target price of RM4.80 and Hartalega (RM7.70) and Kossan (RM3.30).

Affin Investment Bank said rubber glove makers have indicated that they will most likely reduce or re-categorise certain allowances to help offset the increase in their workers' basic salary.

Ee Ann Nee
sunbiz@thesundaily.com

Glove makers to gain from wage rule in long run

PETALING JAYA: While the new minimum wage will dent glove makers’ earnings in the near term, it is expected to be beneficial for the industry in the long run, CIMB Research said.

“It will encourage glove makers to reduce their use of low-skilled labour and improve their manufacturing processes by using more advanced technology and methods.

“Also, we believe that wage inflation will make the smaller glovemakers less competitive and catalyse consolidation in the sector. This will strengthen the positions of the large glove makers, favouring those with more efficient processes such as Hartalega (Holdings Bhd),” the brokerage said in a note to clients.

On Monday, Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak announced the details of the country’s wage floor for the private sector, with the monthly benchmark set at RM900 for Peninsular Malaysia and RM800 for Sabah, Sarawak and Labuan.

This translates to an hourly rate of RM4.33 and RM3.85 respectively.

Some analysts say the new minimum wage rule may encourage glove makers to reduce their use of low-skilled labour and improve their manufacturing processes by using more advanced technology and methods.

The policy applies to all workers in the private sector, save for those in domestic services, but it will only take effect six months after the Minimum Wages Order is gazetted.

The law, which will be reviewed every two years, affords some flexibility to employers as they can absorb a certain amount of allowances and fixed cash payments in calculating the new wages.

According to CIMB Research’s forecasts, the minimum wage could shave some 1% to 7% off glove makers’ financial year 2013 core net profit, but the brokerage has kept its “neutral” rating for the sector and estimates for the companies under its coverage as they may yet find ways to mitigate the impact of higher staff costs.

Other research houses have also maintained their ratings pending further clarification from the companies and the actual gazetting of the law.

Among the glove makers, Hartalega is the least affected by the setting of a wage floor due to its highly automated production facilities and high margins relative to its peers.

“We believe Hartalega will emerge the strongest from the higher wages as its operations are already lean and management is working hard to further automate its manufacturing process.

“With the highest margins (lowest post-tax cost base), technologically advanced manufacturing process and an aggressive eight-year expansion plan, Hartalega has the most wiggle room in the sector to price gloves competitively and gain market share,” CIMB Research said.

Management was aggressively working on further automating the stripping and packaging portions of its manufacturing process to reduce the use of low-skilled labour and optimise operating expenditure, it added.

CIMB Research said Top Glove Corp Bhd would be the hardest hit as a result of low margins and an oversupply for its gloves that could take two to three years to work off.

“We believe it would be challenging for management to pass on the cost of the minimum wage to customers. This would put further pressure on margins and Top Glove’s high-volume low-price model.”

Top Glove shares have reflected this, with the counter losing 13 sen, or 2.72%, to RM4.65, making it one of the day’s top losers.

In contrast, Kossan Rubber Industries Bhd and Supermax Corp Bhd dipped one and two sen respectively to RM3.24 and RM1.87 yesterday, while Hartalega was unchanged at RM7.80.

For Supermax, CIMB Research said the manufacturer was ramping up nitrile production to 53% of capacity by financial year 2013. This could help curb rising staff costs, the brokerage added, as the cash cost of producing nitrile gloves was 20% lower than natural rubber.

Kossan, meanwhile, is poised to tap on the growth in China, where glove usage is a mere two gloves per person per annum versus 50 in Europe and 96 in the United States. Kossan entered the market in financial year 2012 via its 53%-owned Cleanera HK Ltd.

Moving forward, HwangDBS Vickers Research expects the additional staff costs to be passed on to customers over time.

Affin Investment Bank, in a report, also noted that Top Glove had previously said it would likely pass on 80% to 90% of the higher costs by increasing prices, which could prompt other glove makers to do the same. - The Star Business

Related post:
Malaysia's minimum wage, and its implications 

Malaysia's minimum wage, and its implications

Dramatic rise in wages poses upside risk to inflation
  
NOMURA RESEARCH

RECENT news suggests that Prime Minister Najib is likely to announce setting a minimum wage on Labour Day (May 1). This is authorised under the National Wages Consultative Council Act of 2011 passed by parliament in July last year.

Because of the looming general elections, the announcement is likely to be construed as politically motivated, but there are also important economic consequences of a legislated minimum wage requirement.

The minimum wage is likely to be set anywhere between RM800 to RM1,000 per month. If we assume RM1,000, this would imply a significant 17% rise in the wages of unskilled workers, which according to Malaysia's Employers Federation 2010 Salary Survey, are earning an average RM852 a month.

To put this in perspective, it compares with the average increase of wages in the manufacturing sector of only 6% per year.

This poses an upside risk to inflation, in our view. First, overall labour productivity growth, which has been slowing in the last few years to an average of 2.7% (versus 5.3% pre-1998), is likely to substantially lag the potential increase in minimum wages, resulting in a rise in unit labour costs.

Second, while one could argue that the legislation only affects a certain segment of the employed sector, in 2010 the share of private wage earners earning RM1,000 or below comprise nearly 50% of total employment, according to the Malaysian Institute of Economic Research.

Given the significant share, this is also likely to affect wage negotiations among higher skilled workers, and could stoke higher wage expectations.

As is common in other countries (e.g. Indonesia), minimum wages can be perceived as a wage-setting mechanism (which sets a floor to actual wages) rather than just a safety net for low-wage workers.

Finally, given the current strength in domestic demand (indeed Bank Negara's annual report suggests that domestic demand “will continue to be the anchor for growth,”) firms are likely to pass on rising input costs, fueling CPI inflation.

There are also longer-term concerns:

● Minimum wages could introduce rigidities into the labour market that may ultimately structurally raise unemployment rates. We think part of the reason Malaysian unemployment rates recovered quickly during the 2008/09 global financial crisis is that wage flexibility allowed downward adjustment in wages rather than employment losses during the downturn. Indeed, wages fell more sharply in 2008/09 than in the previous recession, and the unemployment rate recovered to pre-crisis levels more quickly and stayed there until now. The legislated minimum wages could reduce some of that flexibility.

● This could also hurt external competitiveness, which, as we have argued before, is facing some pressures that are not due to an appreciating real exchange rate. If a minimum wage of RM1,000 is set, Malaysia's labour costs will be nearly twice the regional average and will be the highest in South-East Asia except Singapore.

We understand that the Government is fully aware of these concerns and has pledged to address them by a broader set of structural reforms under Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak 's New Economic Model and the 10th Malaysia Plan unveiled in 2010.

The problem, however, is implementation has been slow so far and without more meaningful progress, these concerns will likely persist. One key argument of the proponents of the minimum wage is that this is supposed to complement these reforms by imposing a hard constraint on firms to improve productivity and reduce their reliance on low-skilled, low-wage foreign workers.

The risk is the reforms lag the minimum wage implementation, and hence the argument fails to hold, while external competitiveness could suffer.

The extent of the impact will still depend on the level of the minimum wage set, and the enforcement among firms.

While the latter remains to be seen, for the former, we can draw on some findings from academic literature to gauge the optimal level of the minimum wage, i.e. whether it is high enough to improve living standards of wage workers but low enough to keep competitive pressures under control.

A study by the World Bank suggests that a useful rule of thumb for developing economies is that the minimum wage at the national level should be no more than 40% of average wages.

By this benchmark, a minimum wage set at RM1,000 for Malaysia seems appropriate on average, though there is considerable variation across sectors. For instance, it is around 41% of the current average in the manufacturing sector, but about 75% of the rubber sector.

In terms of the near-term monetary policy implications, although headline inflation eased for the fourth consecutive month in February to 2.2% year-on-year from 2.7% in January, we see risks to our current policy rate forecast of a total 50 basis points cut in the second half of 2012.

We think the risk of Bank Negara remaining on hold for the rest of 2012 has already increased given that in its recently released annual report, the central bank continued to assess that “at the current level (3%) of the overnight policy rate, monetary conditions remain supportive of economic activity.”

Minimum wages implemented in May could provide additional upside risks to inflation, when fiscal policy is highly expansionary and commodity prices are elevated.

Related post:
Malaysia's Minimum wage's benefits and effects