43/1.
6-
Vacation Leave Arrangements for Local Officers (32)
Mr. Lai confirmed that his association did not agree to the draft E.R. which had been discussed at the May G.P. Committee meeting as in no circumstances could they agree that local officers should be required to give 9 months notice of vacation leave. Mr. Lai considered that three months should be the maximum notice required of local officers and in support of this view he pointed out that this was the maximum notice required for resignation. His association further considered that officers who were denied leave for service reasons should be allowed to accumulate leave beyond the present maximum of 180 days. Mr. Clinton replied that as expatriate officers were required to give 9 months notice for their leave, which averaged 5/6 months, it appeared equitable to require the same notice from local officers who wanted 5 months leave, as departments would have the same arrangements to make to cover officer's duties whether they were local or expatriate. On accumulation limits, Mr. Henderson said this had been discussed at G.P. level when he had explained the difficulty of granting any general concession to accumulate leave beyond the maximum other than that exceptionally allowed for officers who were denied leave because of the 1967 disturbances. Mr. Lai agreed there were difficulties as different departments had different standards for refusing leave on grounds of exigencies of the service, He added that doctors appeared to be the worst off in this respect and suggested Government should define what was meant by exigencies of the service in order that all departments would employ the same standards for considering leave applications. Mr. Henderson said this could be looked into.
43/2.
Some discussion followed during which Mr. Lai proposed that the amount of notice required from local officers should be the same as the amount of leave required up to, say, 4 months, beyond which a longer period of notice could be stipulated. He thought this would satisfy most of his members as local officers very rarely took more than four months leave at one time. Mr. Clinton thought this proposal had the merit of logic and simplicity and worth considering; he suggested it be discussed further at G.P. level. He further asked Mr. Lai if he would be so good as to put in writing any firm proposals he might have on standardising the meaning of "exigencies of the service" and the circumstances in which accumulation of leave beyond the maximum limit should be permitted.
44/1. Review of 1968 Agreement (33)
Mr. Clinton said the four amendments proposed by the staff side in their letter of 11th June had been considered.
/The first