XN000022-1975-05-07 — Page 5

WEDNESDAY, MAY 7, 1975

OUTLINING THE MAIN PROVISIONS OF THE BILL, MR. PRICE SAID IT LAID DOWN FOUR MAIN PROCEDURES CONCILIATION, SPECIAL CONCILIATION, VOLUNTARY ARBITRATION AND A BOARD OF INQUIRY.

CONCILIATION THE BRINGING TOGETHER VOLUNTARILY OF THE PARTIES IN A DISPUTE TO RESOLVE THEIR PROBLEM WAS ALREADY PRACTISED WITH CONSIDERABLE SUCCESS BY THE LABOUR RELATIONS SERVICE.

MR. PRICE SAID THAT SPECIAL CONCILIATION WOULD TAKE PLACE EITHER AFTER, OR INSTEAD OF, CONCILIATION.

+WHEN IT IS USED, THE GOVERNMENT WILL BE SEEN TO BE ACTING BY PUBLISHING THE NAME OF THE CONCILIATOR USUALLY AN OFFICER OF THE LABOUR RELATIONS SERVICE APPOINTED BY THE COMMISSIONER FOR LABOUR, HE SAID.

+THE PARTIES WILL KNOW THAT THE GOVERNMENT, THROUGH THE LABOUR DEPARTMENT, IS NOT ONLY WATCHING WITH CARE, BUT IS ACTIVELY INTERVENING IN A POTENTIALLY DAMAGING DISPUTE.

+HAVING SEEN THIS PROCEDURE WORK ELSEWHERE I AM CONFIDENT OF ITS VALUE IN HONG KONG, BECAUSE THE PARTIES WILL KNOW THAT IF THEY IGNORE THE HELP OF THE SPECIAL CONCILIATOR THEY MAY FIND THEIR DISPUTE ON THE PATH TO POSSIBLE ARBITRATION, OR REFERRED TO A BOARD OF INQUIRY.+

MR. PRICE. DESCRIBED VOLUNTARY ARBITRATION AS THE SETTLEMENT OF A DISPUTE BY A SOLE ARBITRATOR AFTER HEARING ARGUMENTS FROM BOTH PARTIES.

HE ADDED : +THERE WILL BE NO COMPULSION TO ABIDE BY THE AWARD, BECAUSE OF THE IMPOSSIBILITY OF IMPOSING SANCTIONS ON A LARGE NUMBER OF WORKERS.

+HOWEVER, VOLUNTARY ARBITRATION IS BASED ON AN AGREEMENT OF THE PARTIES TO RESORT TO ARBITRATION, WHICH IMPLIES AN INTENTION TO ABIDE BY THE AWARD.

+IN SOME CASES IT SHOULD BE POSSIBLE FOR THE LABOUR DEPARTMENT, OR THE ARBITRATOR, TO SECURE BY ADMINISTRATIVE MEANS AN AGREEMENT IN ADVANCE TO ACCEPT THE AWARD.+

MR. PRICE SAID A PANEL OF ARBITRATORS WOULD BE DRAWN FROM PERSONS WHO WERE INDEPENDENT OF WORKERS AND EMPLOYERS AND NOT ALLIED IN THE PUBLIC EYE WITH EITHER.

THE BOARD OF INQUIRY PROPOSED IN THE BILL WOULD BE AN ALTERNATIVE TO VOLUNTARY ARBITRATION IF THE GOVERNOR- IN-COUNCIL BELIEVED IT WAS IN THE PUBLIC INTEREST THAT ALL THE FACTS PERTAINING TO THE DISPUTE SHOULD BE REVEALED FOR PUBLIC SCRUTINY.

/HE ADDED