TNAG-0087-FCO40-123-Conditions-of-employment-for-Hong-Kong-Chinese-working-in-th-1969 — Page 125

i

3

However if any contract is presented for attestation

which for instance seeks to cut down qualify or dispense

with the undertakings required in (f) (k) (1) and (n) the

Commissioner would and should refuse attestation.

in various contracts that have been submitted for

attestation the authorities have refused such contracts on

seems

to be the main

various grounds but the clause that

trouble is that which deals with the rights of the parties

on a termination of the contract.

In the model contract issued for guidance by the

Hongkong Authorities this question of termination is dealt

with in lause 14. Any such clause must conform to the

requirements of Section 5 (2) (k) in particular.

The effect

of this provision is that save where termination of the

contract has been occasioned by or in

default of the worker the worker if he

e

consequence of the

S0 requests the

employer is

entitlea

at to be repatriaɩea

the expense of

the employer.

In the case of Ho wan Who was engageu by Chinese

Restaurant Ltu. as

a

chinese

clause COOK

14 of the attesteu

in

the 1orm provided by

contracɩ dated 7th January 1966 was

the above-mentioned "model contrect"

•

This worker though engaged for two years alter a

snort period walked out without

eflectively terminated the contract

notice

-

in

50

doim, he

ith claus.

nis

1 ! accordance

liability to reimburse

one month's wages.

14 (1) thereof incurring oniy a

employers to the extent of the amount of

brings a chinese worker το this

Any employer who

country on

а contract

clause

14 in it in the

that has been attested and SO has

terms suggested

a

in

the model contract

may well rind that the worker shortly after taking up his

employment either walks out without notice or after the

required notice (say one month) has expired. The unfortunate

employer thereby has lost (a) the cost of, bringing the worker