2
pay was not finally achieved until 1976, only recently seem to have realised that other groups similarly affected in 1971 ended up getting a better deal as a result of taking a more militant attitude. They are thus making this one of the main issues in their dispute with the Government over the 1976 package, even though, strictly speaking, it is not directly relevant.
3. SATA claim that a majority of their members accepted the new proposals only because a deadline was imposed and they claim some pressure was exerted by more senior officials.
4. In addition to a number of lesser grievances from the past, they are also raising the following objections to the new
proposals:
A
(a) the salary scales now being proposed are based
arn
(b)
on a survey carried out by the Government appointed
ཀ
Pay Investigation Unit (PIU); this survey covered
C.
-
17 firms, as against 24 in earlier surveys, and it compared unfavourably with a survey carried out at SATA's request by a commercial organisation, the Hong Kong Productivity Centre,' which covered 177 firms, and which came up with salary scales for shorthand typists some 25% higher than those of the PIU; the Association are also critical of the PIU on a number of other grounds;
the Association claim that the new scheme gives them poor promotion prospects, particularly since the re-organisation will make redundant some 120 Personal Secretaries, who will thus have first priority in filling the senior vacancies that‹ would otherwise represent the normal promotion- outlet for the shorthand and audio typists. In addition, the reduction in the size of the Personal Secretary grade will also have an adverse effect on the promotion prospects of their members.
/(c) SATA
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.