2
I am conscious that your second letter indicates your acceptance, to some extent at least, of the foregoing but to avoid misunderstanding I have thought it desirable specifically to answer some of the assertions which you made at first.
Still in a general sense, but speaking from an economic standpoint, you have said that some small businessmen are rumoured to be transferring their operations to Taiwan and that confidence in the future of Hong Kong is felt to be in danger. If the first of these propositions is to any extent true, it will not have escaped you that the reasons for such a move might be the comparative cheapness of labour in Taiwan and the much less rigid enforcement there of labour laws. As to the second proposition, there is no evidence at all so far that industrial production has been affected, except marginally as an indirect consequence of riots, curfews, disruptions of transport and a few lightning strikes of a political nature, all of which have been of short duration. The number of man-days lost in major disputes totalled only about 40,000 in 1966-67, the average for the past ten years. It is unlikely that any other industrial country has experienced such a proportionally small loss of man days as Hong Kong in the last decade.
To turn now to a more detailed consideration of the criticisms made in your original letter, the question of working hours seems to lie at the root of dissatisfaction with our conditions. I assure you that there has never been any complacency in the administration on this score.
Towards the end of 1966, the Commissioner of Labour approached the Federation of Hong Kong Industries with a suggestion about modifying the practice of paying good attendance bonuses and introducing a system of a six-days week. The Federation gave favourable consideration to the suggestion and prepared a formal circular to its members recommending that they should base their operations for all workers, both male and female, on a standard working week of six days, with the current practice of making overtime payments, allowances, and good attendance bonuses to male workers being continued when it is required for work which is undertaken outside this working week. (Female workers are of course already prohibited by statute from working on the seventh day.) This will go a long way to meet your suggestion for a universal rest day throughout all industries in Hong Kong. It is unlikely that one particular day would be acceptable locally as a universal rest day. The Chinese community attaches no religious or other significance to any one day of the week and it is for that reason that legislation for women and young persons provides for one day in every seven rather than for a particular day of rest. There are other obvious advantages in staggering which have led to consideration of its adoption elsewhere, too.
The Labour Advisory Board discussed the question of the reduction of working hours for women and young persons early in May. There was agreement in bringing the permitted hours into line with international standards: both workers and employers accept the aim of a 48-hour week although inevitably they differ on the means of achieving it. However, workers are prepared to accept generous provision for overtime to facilitate a downward adjustment of standard working hours, and employers are prepared to co-operate in a scheme for the phased reduction of hours throughout industry. A bill has been published and will be introduced into the Legislative Council next week. If enacted, this will give
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.