TNAG-1734-FCO40-2447-Minutes-and-Hansards-of-the-Legislative-Council-of-Hong-Kong-1988 — Page 271

чор

Statement by Mr PANG Chun-ho1

MR. PANG (in Cantonese) :

Sir,

к

In December 1985, this Council passed the Employment (Amendment)

Bill 1985 which is, in fact, a bill on the Xong Service Payment Scheme.

At that time, I highlighted the imprefection of the Bill, and I abstained

Fromised from voting.

At that time the Government agrees to review as well as to Bill

三

it

improve the provision one year after the implementation, of the ordinanes.

deferred a bit in amendin although the administration has taken a little bit too much sime

1

amendin

the Zong Service Payment Scheme, I am still pleased with the

improving the scheme.

attitude of the administration to improve the scheme.

amendment

The present/bill to the Long Service Payment Scheme

mainly proposes : First, on resignation, employees who are 65/and

or above

65/and

who have no less than 10 years of service are eligible for long service

(clause 6 of the amendment Bill) are, cenfet for

audedly, amendmen ment Secondly, employees who cannot continues

paymeny.

#

providing

work and whe-art

ne that they have completed the

resign because of health reasons

qualifying number of years of service for the scheme should receive the

(clauses 4 and 6 of the anand want Bill)

pay payment Thirdly, for those employees who die in service, their family

members are also eligible for the Kong Service Payment cheme.

Passed

The spirit of the bill in comparison with that connected in

1985 has reflected it is a great progress and a more positive

Authority has realised approach. This shows that the authorities have noticed the loopholes of

long seine, payment scheme.

the antinace Although the present amendment bill has changed

style

the

there is

?

previous situation of total reliance on employers' initiative,

still one shortcoming. that is, on resignation, only those who are 65 or

above will be eligible for the payment. This is quite unfair to many

the employees who have attained

qualifying years of service but have

not yet reached 65. I am concerned about this situation.

/P 2