TNAG-0231-FCO40-267-Conditions-of-employment-of-labour-force-in-Hong-Kong-1970 — Page 51

broad principles of natural justice, so that each side is free to state its case, hearsay and all, and the Court can decide on the merits of the cases as presented.

10. With regard to additional points 1 and 2 on procedure and juris- diction in Court, there should probably be provision for appeal to the Supreme Court on points of law, and possibly provision whereby the Labour Court can refer a difficult point of law to the Supreme Court for prelimin- ary decision. The existing procedures of the Labour Relations Service provide for settlement by mutual consent or agreement of both parties, and there would be no need for the Labour Courts to be constituted solely for this purpose. They must be able to entertain claims regardless of mutual consent or agreement, but the procedure should be so framed that settlement by mutual consent or agreement is not excluded if in the course of proceed- ings this can be arranged.

It

11.

I am personally a little doubtful how far the effective estab- lishment of Labour Courts will assist the development of trade unions. could be that if the Courts are completely successful, the worker claimants will see no advantage in pressing their clains through trade unions, but, on the whole, I feel that this will not be so and that claimants will pre- fer to consult trade unions about their rights and the procedures for pur- sving claims in the Labour Courts.

42.

are:-

My comments on Mr. Gibson's Appendix 2 (Industrial Relations Act)

Point 1: On current experience, there could be little or no case for a permanent Arbitration Court. As far as individual claims of right are concerned, the Labour Relations Service does what is possible and the special Labour Courts would greatly improve the position. As far as claims of interest are concerned, it would be well nigh impossible, under existing conditions, to institute satisfactory arbitration proceedings, because in only one or two isolated cases does a particular trade union represent even a bare majority of the employees of a particular under- taking.

I do not see how an Arbitration Court, es described, could be com- pletely divorced from all Government agencies. Who, for instance, would employ the staff and pay their wages? If this is intended to be a case for establishing an Industrial Court along the lines of the Singapore Court, then I believe the simple answer is that Hong Kong is not ready for it. It is not without significance that Singapore experience has shown that a relatively strong trade-union movement has been greatly weakened by restrictions on industrial action.

Point 2: There was no case for recognition of any trade union in a major undertaking during my time in Hong Kong.. There would be strong employer objection to the setting up of machinery to compel recognition in the present state of vacuum. It has been my experience that a good strong Labour Department can always overcome the difficulty of recog- nition without recourse to legislation. The procedures can even include a ballot in appropriate cases. It is impossible to foresee how the Hong Kong trade-union movement will develop and, in particular, whether the existing rival unions of the extreme Right and the extreme Left will still be able to compete for recognition when a sufficiently large proportion of workers becomes organized. The fact remains, of course, that a strike over recognition is a very wasteful and usually umecessary business. It may be that there should eventually be legislation which includes the possibility of a ballot and machinery for compelling recognition, but I think it should await coge clear indication of the way in which the trade- union movement in Hong Kong will develop.

Point 3: I do not personally believe that legislation to compel the establishment of joint consultative committees is going to be of any value. On the contrary, I think it would be a poor start to any such committee that it had been thrust upon the employer by legal process. The establishment of a joint consultative committee should be a matter for joint agreement, which might be demonstrated, if necessary, through a ballot.

/Point