Mixed views on boosting protection for part-time staff
Unionists and business representatives have in general expressed their support for proposed changes to a section of the Employment Ordinance to enhance protection for part-time workers, even though views are mixed on who the entitlements should cover.  Under the existing arrangement, an employee who has been hired continuously by the same employer for four weeks or more, with at least 18 hours worked each week, is regarded as being employed under a "continuous contract".  These employees are entitled to benefits such as rest days, paid annual leave, sickness allowance, and long-service payment. But the government has decided to review the rule after some said the definition of a “continuous contract” is out of date. Sources say the Labour Department has come up with four proposed changes, suggesting that employees who work 72, 68, 64, or 60 hours in four weeks can be entitled to all the statutory benefits. Speaking on an RTHK radio programme, Chau Siu-chung, the secretary-general for the Federation of Hong Kong and Kowloon Labour Unions, said the proposed amendments can plug some existing loopholes.   " [Currently] if the employer intends to evade the employment benefits, they can arrange the employee's hours in a way that, for example, in the first three weeks, the employee works around 62 hours per week, totalling 186 hours. Then, in the fourth week, the employee works only a few hours, falling short of the 18-hour requirement,” Chau explained.  However, Simon Wong of the Hong Kong Federation of Restaurants and Related Trades, told the same programme that while he believes a review is necessary, the changes may significantly bump up operating costs for the industry. "Under the current economic environment, employers need to be particularly cautious in their calculations. It's not about plugging loopholes but controlling costs, which is completely legal," he said. Separately, Roy Ying, co-chair of the Advocacy and Policy Research Committee at the Hong Kong Institute of Human Resource Management, said he doesn't believe the proposed changes will do much to change the local employment landscape.  “The old ways of hiring full-time and part-time may need a bit of a review now. I don't see how a reduced [threshold] can have a huge impact on the unleashing of manpower participation in the labour force.”