RWC Webreport: Forum on the Future of Work 2025

This session was moderated by Richard Wee, the Managing Partner at RWC alongside Victor Gan, the Head Consultant at E2 Workforce Consulting.

Victor was asked: As technology advances rapidly, are Malaysian talent strategies, legal frameworks, and governance mechanisms evolving at the same pace?

Victor answered in the negative. Victor explained that the Employment Act 1955 sets out the minimum statutory terms and conditions for the employees, and it is supported by the Employment Regulations 1957. However, some regulatory requirements, such as issuing pay slips in hardcopy, and keeping physical employees’ files, are outdated. Victor inferred that while technology advances rapidly, the legal frameworks have not evolved at the same pace. Richard agreed with Victor’s viewpoint.

Victor was asked: AI in hiring: is it the future of talent acquisition — and what legal and ethical considerations must employers be aware of?

Victor acknowledged that AI is increasingly becoming central to hiring practices, offering efficiency by automating the initial candidate screening. However, Victor warned of significant legal and ethical concerns, particularly around algorithmic bias. AI may perpetuate discriminatory hiring patterns if they are trained on biased data. For example, only selecting candidates of a certain age, gender, or race. Victor emphasised that while Malaysia lacks strong anti-discrimination laws, employers should implement internal checks in hiring process. Richard stressed that universal principles must be applied to AI outputs to avoid unjust outcomes. Human oversight is necessary to ensure that AI systems are fair, equitable, and do not discriminate against any individual. 

Victor was asked: Employee surveillance — whether for location tracking, productivity, or remote work – what’s permitted under Malaysian law, particularly the PDPA?

Victor explained that employee surveillance could include keystroke monitoring, location tracking, and selfies for attendance. Consent is the key consideration under the PDPA. Victor was of the opinion that if the employees consent to the monitoring and it is done within working hours using company assets, such surveillance is generally permissible. Victor believed that a reasonable standard should be applied. The employers should only monitor within the boundaries of work time and scope.

Richard acknowledged the need to strike a balance between an employer’s need for monitoring and an employee’s right to privacy. Richard also believed that the employees’ data and behavioural algorithms might become valuable assets in the future.

Victor was asked: Gig work in Malaysia: A progressive workforce model or a potential legal grey area?

Victor saw gig work as a progressive and flexible workforce model, enabling the employers to access talent without long-term commitments, while giving the workers more autonomy. However, Victor acknowledged that there might exist a potential legal grey area, as it might be used by the employers to avoid providing statutory benefits such as EPF contributions. Victor noted that the Gig Workers Bill is currently tabled in the Parliament. Victor believed that it will provide greater legal clarity once it is gazetted and in force.

Similarly, Richard also saw gig work as a growing and progressive model, particularly among younger workers who prioritise freedom and flexibility. Last but not least, Richard raised taxation and payment issues, particularly for cross-border work as emerging legal grey areas.

The second panel session featured Darren Lai, Partner at RWC, and Cassandra Peter, Consultant at E2 Workforce Consulting.

Darren hoped the session would explore how ESG is becoming more relevant, especially with the younger workforce entering the job market and the workplace evolving for the future. He explained ESG as:

“E is for protecting the environment, ensuring sustainability, S is social, fair and just treatment of others, and embracing diversity and equality, whereas G stands for governance and is about ethical management of companies.”

Darren explained that ESG originally gained attention due to governance failures in corporations. He noted that:

“ESG is becoming increasingly important not only for MNCs, but also for SMEs.”

Kicking off the discussion, Cassandra was asked: Why does ESG matter in the talent equation?

Cassandra responded that ESG must be woven into the organisation’s culture and not treated as a standalone policy. It influences hiring, retention, workplace culture, and employee engagement. It plays a part in every single area of employment—hiring, retention, policies, culture. She emphasised that younger job seekers look for companies whose values align with their own. ESG branding alone is insufficient — employees want proof. If organisations don’t live up to their ESG claims, they risk losing talent and damaging their reputation.

From an employment perspective, ESG is particularly significant in the social component. This is where DEI (Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion) comes in, along with governance structures like policies and codes of conduct. She likened ESG’s influence in employment to a jigsaw puzzle.

Darren added that while ESG isn’t law, it aligns with legal frameworks, such as laws on occupational safety, sexual harassment, and anti-discrimination under Malaysia’s Employment Act.

Responding to Darren’s follow-up on ESG’s role in branding, Cassandra stressed that ESG defines company culture and influences talent decisions.

“If you don’t brand yourself through ESG, you’re not attracting the right talent.”

She noted that in today’s candidate-driven job market, it is no longer enough for companies to offer competitive salaries. Talented individuals, especially from younger generations, are seeking out employers whose values align with their own.Skills get you through the door, but values help you stay in an organisation. Companies that fail to show these values risk poor retention, negative reviews, and brand damage.

In discussing the importance of genuine implementation, both panelists emphasised that policies alone aren’t enough. What truly matters is how these values are experienced day to day. Diversity or harassment policies mean little if complaints aren’t taken seriously. Similarly, promoting mental health must go beyond promises, with real initiatives like counselling, wellness leave, or manageable workloads.

Darren acknowledged that not all industries can offer blanket flexibility. In legal practice, court deadlines and client needs limit work-from-home options. However, a case-by-case, humane approach remains key. “You can have a hybrid policy but also a clause that allows flexibility based on individual circumstances — working mothers, caregivers, those with accessibility needs.”

The panel also discussed ESG compliance across supply chains. For example, a German company with strict ESG policies may require Malaysian suppliers to comply as well. Even if local firms don’t adopt ESG voluntarily, they may be compelled by international partners or industry standards.

The session closed with a powerful message: ESG is not about paperwork — it’s about people and culture. As Darren concluded, “ESG must be lived, not just printed”. When every employee embodies these values in their daily actions, companies shift from being policy-driven to becoming truly purpose-driven organisations.