NEWS

Sinsay Brand Manufacturing Factory Worker Physically Assaulted and Dismissed Without Compensation

CoverLogo
15 Views

By Yoon Sat - Dec 28, 2024

A female factory worker was physically assaulted and forcibly removed from an office by the factory’s female owner who is a Chinese national at the Golden Colour Fashion (Myanmar) factory in Insein Township, Yangon Region. The factory, located in Industrial Zone (3) on Mya Taung Wun Gyi U Hmo Road, produces clothing under the Sinsay brand. 

While the worker has filed a complaint with relevant authorities, it has been reported that she was dismissed from her position without any form of compensation during the investigation process.

"She was physically assaulted. She was grabbed and forcibly dragged out of the office while being told she couldn’t work at her factory anymore. Despite there being CCTV footage and eyewitnesses, the factory management claimed the CCTV was malfunctioning and failed to provide the footage as evidence. The authorities have not yet provided a clear resolution, though they have promised to issue a letter for legal action if the worker pursues the case in court," said a source close to the worker.

Regarding the incident, the Department of Labour stated that while the matter legally requires effective action, the officer themself cannot file a case directly. Therefore, the employer can only be instructed to pledge not to repeat such actions in the future as part of a mediation effort. They may file a complaint at the police station under other provisions if the worker is dissatisfied. In such cases, the department will summon the involved parties for three hearings and issue the necessary documents for further proceedings.

The incident of Chinese national owner of Golden Colour Fashion (Myanmar) grabbing the worker's arm and forcibly dragging her out of the office was reported to the Insein Township Department of Labour and a hearing was held on December 23, 2024.

Despite the employer's actions involving the physical force used on the worker in the office, the Insein Township Department of Labour Assistant Director stated that decisive action against the employer was not possible. They explained that they could pursue the matter further by filing a complaint at the police station if the worker remained dissatisfied with the mediation. In that case, the department would issue the necessary documents to assist in the legal proceedings.

The worker had been employed as a clerk in Department Line-11 since June 17, 2022. She went to the HR office to submit attendance records on December 20, 2024, at approximately 8:00 AM, While searching for a paper punch on the desks, as it was not readily available, Manager Ma-- yelled at her, saying, “Don’t come looking for anything near us. Ask for what you need from outside.” The worker responded, stating that she had always worked this way before and that there were no such specific rules in place. In reply, the manager harshly said, “This is the rule I’ve established. You are not staying in your place, and you’re saying such things. I will set the rules however I like, whenever I like. I have the authority. You’re behaving as if you don’t know your place. If you don’t like it, leave the job.”

Following this, the Chinese employer was called to the scene. The employer spoke loudly in Chinese, and the interpreter translated it as, “This is my factory. Leave immediately.” The employer then physically grabbed and dragged the worker out of the office, forcing her outside, according to the worker.

The employer later claimed that the CCTV system was malfunctioning and therefore could not provide evidence of the incident. Additionally, they denied any wrongdoing and issued a dismissal letter to the worker without offering any compensation or severance. The employer warned the worker that legal action would be taken if she posted anything about the incident on social media that could harm the factory's reputation.

STUM (Solidarity of Trade Unions, Myanmar) stated that the employer’s treatment of the worker, including this type of behavior, is considered a violation of Article 17(a) of the EC Contract and Annex-K, Article 12. It also constitutes physical misconduct and an attack on the worker’s dignity, amounting to abusive behavior against women

 


Related posts

Cover
Sunrise Myanmar Fashion Garment Factory Continues Labor Rights Violations Despite Inspection by Deputy Minister of Labour
Feb 10, 2025
Cover
Workers Dismissed for Refusing Overtime at Myanmar Huasheng Kefu Fashion Factory
Feb 10, 2025
Cover
Worries Over Safety While Commuting Due to Arrests and Disappearances
Feb 10, 2025
Cover
Daily Overtime Until 9 PM Without Transport Arrangement Causing Hardships for Workers
Feb 10, 2025
Cover
Threats of Withholding Wages if Workers Cannot Work on Employer-Designated Substitution Days
Feb 10, 2025
Cover
The Deputy Minister of Labor Says Support Will Be Provided to Form Labor Organizations Step by Step in Accordance with Domestic Labor Organization Laws
Feb 08, 2025
Cover
Confusion Arises Between Employers and Workers Over New Year Public Holiday Announcements
Feb 08, 2025
Cover
Only Two Sundays Off Per Month with Overtime Work, Yet Wages Remain Unpaid, Causing Hardships
Feb 08, 2025