TNAG-0991-FCO40-1210-Policy-on-salaries-and-pensions-for-civil-service-in-Hong-Ko-1980 — Page 131

3

our Ref: SS L/M 131/79

Hong Kong Social Workers'

General Union

67 Shantung Street Flat B, 3/F., Kowloon

29th April, 1980

The Governor

Government House

Fong Kong

Dear Sir,

Re: Welfare Class Review

With reference to your letter dated 18th March, 1980, written with your authorization by Mr. E. P. Ho, Secretary for Social Services, we would like to draw your attention to the following:

2.

1980.

First of all, we are glad to inform you that the long Kong Social Workers' General Union was duly established and registered under the Trade Union Ordinance on 6th February, The Registrar has notified this in the Gazette of 15th February, 1980. An Executive Committee will be elected to take over the work of the Organizing Committee in our Union first general meeting which is to be held on 4th May, 1980.

3.

In spite of the points raised in your letter, we regret that you have evaded the most crucial point, that is, why our Union, the sole Union that represents social workers in Hong Kong, was rejected participation in the Steering Committee on the application of the Welfare Class Review for social workers of the voluntary sector.

4.

We understand that a registered Union is protected by law to do all things necessary for the purposes of its constitution. (Section 13, Chapter 332, Trade Union Ordinance) Cne of our cbjects laid down in our Union Constitution is to obtain and maintain just and proper rates of wages, hours of work and other working conditions and generally, to protect the interests of the members. We could see no reason of your excluding our direct participation in the Steering Committee which is considering matters of our deep concern.

5.

In the second paragraph concerning a combined review for social workers in both public and voluntary sector, you mentioned that "the explanation has been accepted by the voluntary sector generally." According to our understanding social workers in the voluntary sector were generally upset by the performance of the concerned department, as Sir, you may well recall, the social werkers have already expressed this dissatisfaction very strongly and firmly during the Quarterly Meeting of the Hong Kong Council of Social Service held on 10th December, 1979 and in the letters addressed to you, signed collectively by 1,263 sccial workers last December. Moreover, the Union in particular has pointed out that the conscious deliberation of excluding Welfare Class Review from voluntary agencies at the onset demonstrate a lack of foresight of the Social Welfare Department.

6.

The review machinery, that is, the Steering Committee and the Working Group could not be considered a full representation of the social workers in the voluntary sector. The membership of the said committee is largely nominated through the H.K. Council of Social Service, which only represents the voluntary agencies but not the social workers. As the review would sure have great implications

•

/on the career