4 August 2025
Please click HERE to download the full article in PDF.
INTRODUCTION
In a rare and decisive move, the Industrial Court has ruled to strip a union of its recognition, effectively grounding its ability to represent employees in collective bargaining. The case of Maswings Sdn Bhd v Airlines Workers’ Union Sarawak shines a spotlight on a critical yet often overlooked aspect of industrial relations, what happens when a union no longer has members to represent? This case serves as a reminder that without active membership, a union’s voice at the negotiating table may fall silent.
BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE
Maswings Sdn Bhd, a regional airline operating primarily in Sabah and Sarawak, had in 2010 granted recognition to the Airlines Workers’ Union Sarawak (AWUS) to represent its Sarawak-based cabin crew. This recognition led to multiple rounds of collective bargaining and the successful conclusion of collective agreements, the last of which was valid from 1 November 2018 to 31 October 2021. As both parties entered into negotiations for a new agreement in early 2023, the Company discovered that none of its Sarawak-based cabin crew were members of the Union at the material time.
Upon receiving confirmations from all 28 Sarawak-based cabin crew members that they were either never members or no longer wished to be associated with the Union, Maswings took the position that AWUS no longer had the requisite standing to negotiate a new collective agreement. When the Union insisted otherwise, Maswings lodged a trade dispute under section 18 of the Industrial Relations Act 1967. As no settlement was reached, the matter was referred to the Industrial Court for adjudication.
ISSUE BEFORE THE COURT
The central issue before the Court was whether the Airlines Workers’ Union Sarawak retained the legal standing to represent the cabin crew of Maswings based in Sarawak in collective bargaining, despite having no current members among that category of employees.
THE COURT’S DECISION
The Industrial Court found that at the time of negotiations in 2023, none of the Company’s Sarawak-based cabin crew were members of AWUS. The Union had not only failed to demonstrate that it retained any members from that group but had also formally withdrawn from the case before the hearing date. The hearing proceeded ex parte, and the Company’s unchallenged testimony was accepted in full.
In delivering its decision, the Court ruled that the Union no longer had locus standi to participate in collective bargaining or to enter into any new collective agreement with Maswings. The recognition previously accorded to the Union in 2010 was held to be no longer valid. Accordingly, the Company’s decision to cease negotiations was found to be bona fide and in line with applicable legal principles.
The Court’s reasoning was grounded in both the Union’s own constitutional rules and established industrial case law. Under Rule 4 of the Union’s constitution, any member who fails to pay subscription fees for three months ceases to be a member and forfeits all rights, including the right to be represented. Evidence from Maswings showed that all 28 Sarawak-based cabin crew were either never members, had ceased paying dues, or had renounced their association with the Union.
The Court also referenced previous decisions such as Kesatuan Pekerja-Pekerja Perusahaan Membuat Tekstil Dan Pakaian Johor v Winbright (M) Sdn Bhd[1] and Paper and Paper Products Manufacturing Employees’ Union v Ornapaper Industry (M) Sdn Bhd[2], both of which established that a union must have current employees of a company as members to retain standing in collective bargaining.
Given the absence of members and the Union’s failure to contest the Company’s evidence, the Court concluded that the Union’s recognition had lapsed and it no longer had legal capacity to act on behalf of the employees.
KEY TAKEAWAYS
This case underscores the importance of maintaining active and verifiable membership within a recognised category of employees. For union leaders, it is a clear reminder that recognition is not a permanent right, it must be backed by actual membership among the employees the union purports to represent. Unions must regularly update their membership records, ensure compliance with their own rules on subscriptions, and stay meaningfully engaged with their members. A failure to do so may result in a complete loss of bargaining power.
For employers, the decision affirms that it is within their rights to question a union’s locus standi if there are valid grounds to believe that the union no longer represents any employees within the recognised category. Employers may take proactive steps, such as verifying membership status directly with employees, to protect against entering into invalid collective agreements. Ultimately, both unions and employers share a responsibility to ensure that collective bargaining is conducted in good faith and within the bounds of lawful representation.
Authors:
[1] [2020] 1 ILR 56
[2] [2020] 3 ILR 88
Please email your details to look@zulrafique.com.my if you would like to subscribe to our Knowledge Centre.
Let’s Connect!
➭ LINKEDIN: Zul Rafique & Partners
➭ INSTAGRAM: @zrplaw