2 -
such extreme steps so easily gather momentum, is being explored. On May 22nd for instance, the B.B.C. in their 'Panorama' programme, dealt with the riots in Hong Kong, and used filmed reports from the colony. They showed the factory where the
iginal dispute started that led to the riots and this factory was described by James Mossman as being a 'sweatshop'.
For my own part, I can only deal with the workers in the textile and garment industries. From my own observations in the colony, and from the regular reports of our representative in Hongkong have emerged the following facts:-
1. Many textile workers actually work on 359 days each year.
2. When I questioned the Commissioner of Labour (Mr. Wakefield) about
this, he replied that he saw no reason why anyone should not work if they wished to work.
3. Women and young persons in the garment industry work a 10 hours day
with a permitted overtime of 100 hours per year. This is more than any other country in the Free World.
4. Many violations of the law relating to the employment of women and young persons take place, but as the penalties cre so ridiculously low, they do not act as a deterrent, for the simple reason that employers can violate the law with financial profit to himself. Thus the law itself is in disrepute.
5. During 1966, two strikes occurred at the East Asia Textiles Ltd., the
first one being caused by the employer dismissing workers for trying to form a branch of the union. This reason was changed as soon as the full implications of his action was realised. The second strike was caused by the employer dismissing a worker for absenting himself from work, due to sickness, for just one day, in spite of the fact that this worker had worked for 359 days each year for six successive years. In the agreed settlement, the workers returned to work on the condition that if talks on the question of 10 dismessed workers reached no agreement, both sides would accept the decision of the Commissioner of Labour on the issue. No agreement was reached, and the Commissioner of Labour made a decision in favour of the re-instatement of the 10 dismissed workers. The employer then exhibitted his contempt for the Commissioner of Labour by refusing to honour his previous undertaking. I have not heard of any action being taken by the Commisioner of Labour to restore his prestige.
6.
7.
8.
This shows that there are certain employers in the colony who have no respect for those in authority.
In a situation where there is no respect for the law, and where employers can flout the decision of such an eminent person as the Commissioner of Labour, it is abundantly clear that any effort to build a responsible trade union movement will be doomed to failure. This means that the workers, having no vote, no effective representation and no hope of obtaining justice, either have to endure existing conditions or rebel.
./...
Page 45Page 46