+
--/14
ник
Put forward by Mr. Peter CK. Chan to
скай
Mi Royle at meeting of Urban Comail nambark,
Comments on the Proposed Amendments to Trade Union Registration Ordinance
Reply
12/3/70. in writing formused.
1. Whilst it is agreed that the proposed amendments will give greater protection
to #bexxxianxomakaxxxgainst trade unions in excluding bad elements from acting as
their officers, simplifying the procedure on registration etc., there are points which
merits further considerations :-
2.
The inclusion of clerks and other persons into the term of employee may have
the result of imposing on persons who do not enjoy the benefit and fights of a union members
obligations contained in the Ordinance. Inquiries should be made of trade unions whether
such persons would be accepted as members.
3.
The disbarment of persons convicted for an offence involving violence or against
public order from becoming an officer of a trade union may be unfair in some cases. For
example, some persons might have under the existing law been convicted of an offence
relating to picketing who did so for no other purpose than to pursue the interest of the
other members of the union. Such persons are not only fit but are desirable that they
be permitted to act as officers of the union. Offences committed as a result of Akg/
A picketing or other acts of the like nature should be excluded.
4. The exclusion of "residence" from Sec. 46 & 47 is not justified. This is not
excluded from the English Act and there is no reason why this should be done in H.K.
No one or members of his family need be protected from "peaceful picketing". If it
is not peaceful, an offence would have been committed under Sec. 47. The proposed
amendment will provide a loophole whereby the employer who has no genuine desire to
settle the dispute will simply stay in his residence without communicating with the employees
5. The inclusion of blocking of or causing an obstruction in a street or a road will
make peaceful piketing almost impossible. The very purpose of Sec. 46 is to legallise
picketing. The Molestation of Workmen Act 1859 clearly states that peaceful picketing
should not be deemed or taken to be guilty of molestation or obstruction and should not
therefore be subject or liable to any prosecution or indictment for conspiracy. (22 Vict.
c.34 s.1).
6.
If the obstruction goes beyond the limit of Sec. 46, it is only then that the obs-