TNAG-0452-FCO40-517-Legislation-for-employment-of-workers-in-Hong-Kong-1974 — Page 11

CONFIDENTIAL

ensus mat

they are not

to associate these orgainsations with the work of negotiating bodies to the same extent that employers are encouraged to participate. The came attitude is reflected in the reports where it is stated that copies have been sent to the Employers Federation and to the Labour Advisory Board which includes four workers' re resentatives. Even though some employees' organisations may not be represented, for political reason, on the Labour Advisory Board, there would seem to be no barrier to the major organisations receiving copies of reports and draft legislation for comment. If they do not choose to avail themselves of the opportunity the Hong Kong Government would, then be een to have fulfilled its intention to implement the requirements of Convention 98. I assume that it is on the grounds that the major trade unions will not participate in tripartite negotiating machinery that of the four workers' representatives on the Labour advisory Board, two are elected by registered trade unions and two are nominated by the Government? To comply with the recuirements of the Convention the employers' representatives should be appointed on the same basis. Fortunately for Hong Kong, the less advanced Convention 1.o 84whockit is fully applied, provides an escape clause by qualifying the requirements for consultation by stating that practicable measures shall be taken". assume that long Kong would say that it was not practicable to consult those unions which do not normally co-operate with the Government?

all 11

I

5. with regard to the Labour kelations sill itself and the Executive Council memorandum to which the minutes referred to above relate, there would seem to be a number of unsatisfactory features which may or may not have repercussions in the ILO. Faragraph 18 of the memorandum XCC (74) 73 refers to the exclusion of the Crown as employer (Isuppose this exclusion is achieved by another law? It is true that the Labour Relations Bill does not contain a clause binding the Crown but neither does it appear to contain an exclusion clause). Labourers and artisans in Government employment appear to fall between the provisions designed for the Civil Service and those for industrial workers outside Government employment. As they are not prohibited from joining trade unions there should be no difficulty in relation to Convention 98 but care will need to be taken in drawing up conditions for joint consultative machinery for such staff to excluded from the protection provided by Convention 98 on the grounds that they are in the public service and therefore outside the scope of that Convention.

6. An odd feature of the Labour Relations Bill which has no significance in relation to International Labour Conventions but is noticeable because it is contrary to the generality of such legislation, is that it appears to contain no provisions making the findings of the arbitrator binding on the parties concerned even when they have been accepted by the Governor in council.

CONFIDENTIAL

/ I note