Take note: Provide answer in paragraph neatly and do not give me the answer in point form. Elaborate the answer clearly according to the marks given. Refer to the Malaysian law while answering. Do not just copy paste from internet. If you cannot follow my instructions then please do not answer my question. Let other intelligent expert to answer it.

Salman is an administrative assistance in Hildemar Sdn Bhd. He takes home a monthly salary of RM1687. Recently Salman was accused of fighting with his colleague at work. Musa claimed that Salman shoved him to the ground and threw a thick work file at him when Musa scolded Salman for not completing his assigned task which consequently delayed Musas own work.

After doing some preliminary investigation, the company decided that they have prima facie evidence that a misconduct did happened. The HR department then issued a show cause letter to Salman which Salman replied but the company found his answer to be unsatisfactory.

Subsequently the company decide to convene a domestic inquiry against Salman. The HR department sent a notice of inquiry to him and asked him to turn up for the inquiry on the date, time and at the venue specified in the notice.

Salmans case was investigated by his supervisor, Prabhakaran. Herlinda, a senior manager in the Administration Department was appointed as Chairman of the Board of Inquiry. Before the domestic inquiry commence, Herlinda called both Salman and Musa into her office to hear their side of the story. Herlinda was of the opinion that the information that she got from the parties would help her get a clearer picture and hopefully settle the matter more speedily.

On the day of the domestic inquiry, Salman who was very worried about the DI got distracted while riding his motorcycle and consequently got into an accident that required him to be rushed to the Emergency Ward for treatment. Salman managed to inform the company about his condition and consequently his inability to attend the DI.

The company nevertheless decided to continue with the inquiry even without Salmans presence. After the domestic inquiry was conducted, Salman was found guilty by the Board and was dismissed from his job. Salman who was not satisfied with how the inquiry process was carried out filed a complaint for unjust dismissal under Section 20 of the IRA 1967.

Questions:

1. In the case, Salman was issued with a show-cause letter. Based on the facts given above, assuming that you are the HR officer in Hildemar Sdn Bhd, draft a legally correct show-cause letter. You may make any reasonable assumption to help you come up with a proper letter. (8 MARKS)

2. In this case, the company did not suspend Salman pending investigation. If you were the companys management, would you do the same or would you choose to suspend him? Explain. ( 6 MARKS)

3. Based on the relevant laws and decided case, advice Salman whether the company had adhered to the proper procedure in carrying out the domestic inquiry and consequently whether Salmans dismissal is justified. (12 MARKS)

(TOTAL: 20 MARKS