A Malaysian job seeker recently found themselves confused after a company presented basic employment requirements such as EPF and SOCSO as part of its “benefits”, sparking a wider debate online about what truly qualifies as a perk.
The situation came to light after screenshots of a conversation with the company were shared, showing a short list of “benefits” that included EPF, SOCSO, alternate Saturdays, and MC claims.
While it may appear standard at first glance, many netizens quickly pointed out that most of these are not perks, but fundamental employee entitlements.
According to the individual who shared the post, the job listing did not clearly state any benefits or even working hours at the beginning.
It was only during the interview that they decided to ask what the company could offer employees.
They claimed the response was vague, with the employer saying details would be included in the offer letter.
However, even after receiving the letter, the information remained minimal.
Apart from mentioning that medical claims were allowed and that annual leave was set at eight days for the first two years, there were reportedly no additional perks provided.
The revelation quickly drew reactions from other Malaysians, many of whom stressed that EPF and SOCSO are mandatory contributions required by law, and should not be framed as benefits.
Some also pointed out that listing “alternate Saturday” as a benefit was questionable, as it still implies employees are required to work on certain weekends.
The discussion soon expanded into a broader conversation about job transparency, with users sharing that companies should be clearer and more upfront when advertising roles.
Several also highlighted that genuine benefits typically include things like allowances, bonuses, flexible working arrangements, or additional leave, rather than basic obligations.
For many, the incident served as a reminder that job seekers should always clarify what is being offered and carefully review their offer letters before accepting a role.
