2
The Dispensers' Case
3*
It was Mr Batchelor's understanding that the recent case involving the suspension of 26 dispensers had caused some distress among staff unions. In his view, it was unusual for a staff union to take the Government to court on a pay issue. This would not have been possible constitutionally in some countries. anxious to see some proper negotiating procedures established in Hong Kong which would prevent similar
Mr. Rowlands assured cases. happening again in future.
He was
Mr Batchelor that Government had acted reasonably and fairly in the dispensers' case. Staff unions should have no cause for concern. He asked Mr Leung to provide Mr Batchelor with detailed background information to enable the latter to have a full picture of the case.
Negotiating rights
4.
According to Mr Batchelor, some staff unions in Hong Kong had complained to him about the lack of proper negotiating procedures for civil servants in Hong Kong; staff unions had not been granted negotiating rights by the Government. In Mr Batchelor's opinion, this was contrary to the spirit and provisions of ILO Convention No. 98 which had been ratified. by the UK and applied to Hong Kong. In the light of this, he had written to the ILO on 18.9.80, drawing the Organisation's attention to this situation. In the letter, it was stated that "as far as the public service unions are concerned, there is little evidence that the main principles of Convention
The letter went No. 98 are being applied in practice". on to question "the validity of the assurance that within the ratification by the British Government of the Convention, the provisions and principles of the Convention are also applied to Hong Kong, and ended by asking the
/ ILO