TNAG-1363-FCO40-1809-Hong-Kong-Hansard-reports-and-minutes-of-the-meetings-of-the-1985 — Page 239

Sir,

Speech by the Commissioner for Labour in the Legislative Council on 10 July 1985

Employees' Compensation (Amendment)(No. 2) Bill 1985

I move the second reading of the Employees' Compensation

(Amendment) (No. 2) Bill 1985.

Experience has shown that there are a number of points

where the Employees' Compensation Ordinance needs further

clarification.

Section 9 of the Ordinance provides that certain

specific injuries are considered to result in a specific degree

of loss of earning capacity as listed in the First Schedule to

the Ordinance. If an injury is not listed in the Schedule,

Difficulties

the degree of loss of earning capacity has to be decided by

an Assessment Board appointed under Section 16.

have been experienced by the Boards in the assessment of certain

non-scheduled injuries and the Bill seeks to spell out more

clearly the principles guiding the Boards in such cases.

For scheduled injuries compensation is based on the

percentage of loss of earning capacity specified in the First

Schedule, whether or not the injured person has managed to find

a job at a salary equivalent to what he was earning before the

injury. However, it appears from a recent Appeal Court case

that under the existing Ordinance, if an injury is not listed

in the First Schedule, the injured person may lose his entitlement

to compensation if he obtains employment at a salary equivalent

to what he was earning before he was injured. This is felt to

be unfair, since there is still the likelihood that the injured

person's ability to keep his job has been reduced. Thus in the

long run his earning capacity is likely to be reduced.

To deal with this anomaly the Bill provides that the

Board may, but is not obliged to, give weight to any actual

earnings after the injury.