The rise of local labour legislation campaigns in post-war Hong Kong, 1969–1981

Abstract

ABSTRACTThis article tells the story of the rise of local labour legislation agenda in post-war Hong Kong in the period between 1969 and 1981. For over a hundred years, the legislation on labour issues has been mainly led by the Colonial Office, which was driven by the changing politics in Britain. Given the lack of channels for workers to participate in the government, the weak and divided union movement, and the unions’ prioritization of external political agenda over local workers’ welfare, workers’ voices had no influence at all on labour legislation. Looking into three legislative campaigns between 1969 and 1981, this article reveals how non-governmental organizations, rather than labour unions, mobilized workers to develop the local labour agenda serving workers in Hong Kong. This is a missing chapter in the study of Hong Kong’s labour legislation history and contributes to the understanding of the rise of the autonomous labour movement in post-war Hong Kong.KEYWORDS: Labour legislationlabour lawsunionsHong Kong AcknowledgementsI would like to thank Mr. Raymond Fung (ex-director of HKCIC), Mr. Lau Chin Shek (ex-director of HKCIC), Mr. Leung Po Lam (ex-employee of HKCIC), and Mr. Leung Po Lung (ex-volunteer of HKCIC) for sharing their experiences in HKCIC with me. While I have relied mainly on archival records in my research, conversations with them have been invaluable in helping me have a much better understanding of the historical context, beliefs and campaign approaches of HKCIC. Any errors that remain in this article are my sole responsibility.Disclosure statementNo potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).Autobiographical sketch(two or three sentences to be published; if a book is mentioned, please provide publisher and year).Notes1. Labour organizing efforts in 1930s and pre-war 1940s continued to be charged with anti-imperialistic sentiments and workers were mobilized to support the campaigns against Japanese invasion in mainland China (Lu, Citation2019). In the post-war years up to mid-1960s, social conflicts in Hong Kong were fused by ‘Chinese politics on Hong Kong soil’, referring to the political rivalry between the Nationalists and the Communists (Lui & Chiu, Citation1999).2. See Miners, N. (1981). p.48, footnote no.9. Miners contrasted the survey conducted by King, A. (1972). The Political Culture of Kwun Tong (Social Research Centre, Chinese University of Hong Kong) with other surveys, published in G. Almond and S. Verba, The Civil Culture (Princeton University Press, 1963, p.185), which revealed that in Britain, 78 percent believed they could affect government policies, 77 percent in the United States, 62 percent in Germany, 52 percent in Mexico, and 51 percent in Italy.3. The original proposal from the colonial government was that workers should have worked for not less than 20 days out of the 28 days preceding the holiday, or not less than 3 consecutive days immediately preceding the holiday, with no restriction whether the worker was under the same employment contract. The counter proposal from the Employers’ Association was that to qualify for a paid holiday, workers should have worked at least 40 days for the same employer within 56 days preceding the holiday of which no less than 6 consecutive days immediately preceding the holiday. See Aiers (Citation1959).4. Apart from HKCIC, the other organisations included, for example, the College Student Association of Hong Kong, the Neighbourhood Advice-Action Council, the United Nations Association of Hongkong, and the Workers’ League.Additional informationNotes on contributorsBan LeeBan Lee is a PhD student in the Department of History in the Chinese University of Hong Kong.