TNAG-1733-FCO40-2446-Minutes-and-Hansards-of-the-Legislative-Council-of-Hong-Kong-1988 — Page 288

MR. TAM (in Cantonese) : Sir, I support the Protection of

Wages on Insolvency (Amendment) Bill 1988 because I

phenomenon believe that the Bill can remove an unfair situation that

has been around for years. At first glance, the number of

phenomenon seems insignificant workers affected by this unfair situation does not idok

great. The record will tell you that ever since the

setting up of

the fund, only eight claims involving 16

employees came under the ambit of the old regulations.

However, this may be because of the fact that some workers

and as a

already know about this provision with the result that

do

department cmcuned they did not file a claim. Hence, the authority does not

phenomenon have the relevant record. This unfair dituation has been

in existence ever

and cal

since the establishment of the fund

causing losses to employees. The amendment Bill now to be

introduced is at best be lated.

According to the new provisions, all employees whether

are

they be working for company or

ᄉ

an

individual, and

and/or payment in

regardless of whether the wages owed and/or

lieu of notice exceed $5,000, the Commissioner for Labour

is empowered to draw money from the insolvency fund for ex

gratia payment to the relevant employees

amendment Bill

is not

In fact, Actually

granting

Encession

adding anything ex

the

for the

then

ex affected employees, it merely gives the employees what is

entitled basic rights.

rightfully theißs. That is when employers owe them wages

and payment in lieu of notice, the insolvency fund can

Heir

and

come to their aid supporting the livelihood. For the

sake of equity, I support the Bill which protects the

workers interests.