Mrs. L. M. Jeger, MP.
- 7
-
3rd November, 1967.
Bue
Itme
because it is outside the ambit of my administration. Moreover it is not my duty to explain to any worker the conditions specified in his relevant travel
document",
This attitude you may consider surprising because the permit is the only proof that a worker can produce that is official confirmation of permission being granted to take the post. Moreover another consider- ation arose, in order to conform with the Ordinance it was necessary for us to ensure the contract now contained this information. Therefore on 23rd August we wrote requesting permission for the contract to be altered in order to conform with Part 11 5(2)(1) and 10(b) of the Ordinance.
On 16th and 23rd August, 1966., we again wrote concerning the actions of certain servants and again requested a contract fair to both parties. Once again, putting considerations forward.
The Commissioner's reply dated 14th September, '66., states he agrees that the contract in its present form gives greater protection, and states that this can be clearly seen by International Labour Organisation Convention No. 64., and quotes Articles 12 and 13 to justify this reason- ing.
May I draw your attention once again that the Conventions are not ovdinance law, they are embraced by the Ordinance. giver them legal effect
In his letter, the Commissioner did not quote Section (2). of Article 12, but I consider that it is important.
Article 12. (2).
A contract shall be subject to termination by agreement between the parties under conditions to be pre- scribed by the regulations, which shall include provisions
Cont'd/......