HONG KONG LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 18 January 1989
香港立法局—————————一九八九年一月十八日
1987年領事關係(商船及民航)
(阿拉伯埃及共和國)今
1987年領事關係(商船及民航)
(阿拉伯埃及共和國)今
1989年(開始生效)公告...
Oral answers to questions
Equal pay for equal work
9/89
8
1. 譚耀宗議員問:《經濟、社會、文化權利國際公約》第7條(a)款(i)段規定男女同工同酬的權 利。一九七六年英國政府簽認這條公約時,保留權利延期在香港的私營機構方面引用上述條文。 政府可否告知本局為何自一九七六年以來,一直對香港實施這條公約第7條(a)款(i)段的規定作上 述推延;以及政府今後將會採取何種步驟改善此種不公平情況?
SECRETARY FOR EDUCATION AND MANPOWER: Sir, I understand that when the Hong Kong Government considered this issue in 1976 it accepted the principle of equal pay for equal work, but felt that to apply Article 7 of the Economic Covenant without reservation would cause practical problems.
At that time the Government felt that any differences in conditions of work between men and women were mainly due to the differences in the positions they held, rather than to discrimination. However, in order to be sure of full compliance in the private sector the Government would have had to legislate. The Government was not convinced that this was necessary and therefore asked the United Kingdom Government to make the appropriate reservation.
Since then the question of equal pay for equal work for men and women has been reviewed twice, in the context of reviewing ILO Conventions, in 1978 and 1986. These reviews were conducted by the Labour Advisory Board's tri-partite Committee on the Implementation of International Labour Standards. On each occasion the committee found that there was generally no discrimination in the labour market against either sex. Wage rates in industry and salaries in commerce were determined by market forces with reference to such factors as job nature, level of responsibility, qualifications and so on. It did not therefore seem necessary for the Government to intervene. However, I will ask the Labour Department to keep the position under regular review.
譚耀宗議員問:主席先生,根據人力統籌司的答覆,既然勞工市場普遍並不存在性別歧視,政府
即使立例管制照理亦屬無妨,而且對香港的形象也有好處,政府對此有何解釋?
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.