***************************
Following is the question by the Hon Leung Yiu-chung and a written reply by the Secretary for Economic Development and Labour, Mr Stephen Ip, in the Legislative Council today (April 18):
Question:
In reply to a question from a Member of this Council on June 21, 2006, the Government indicated that it had no plan to provide paid paternity leave in addition to the existing annual leave benefits of civil servants, and it was seeking the legal advice of the Department of Justice (DoJ) on whether failure to legislate for paid paternity leave would constitute family status discrimination. It has been reported that there are local enterprises which have indicated one after another recently that they will provide paternity leave for their male employees, and according to the information of the International Labour Organisation, statutory paternity leave is currently provided in 41 countries. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:
(a) of the legal advice provided by DoJ on whether failure to legislate for paid paternity leave will constitute family status discrimination;
(b) whether it will reconsider taking the lead in providing paid paternity leave for all government employees, including civil servants and non-civil service contract staff, and requiring companies which provide outsourcing services for the Government to follow suit, in order to put the "family-friendly" policy into practise; if it will, of the details; if not, the reasons for that; and
(c) whether it will make reference to the experience of the countries concerned and study the feasibility of introducing statutory paid paternity leave in order to promote family harmony; if it will, of the details of the study; if not, the reasons for that?
Reply:
Madam President,
(a) On the question of whether failure to legislate for paternity leave will constitute family status discrimination, we have sought the advice of the Department of Justice (DoJ). The DoJ, having carefully studied the Family Status Discrimination Ordinance (FSDO), the Sex Discrimination Ordinance, the Basic Law and relevant sections of related international covenant, advises that failure to legislate for paternity leave should not constitute family status discrimination under the FSDO.
(b) The vast majority of civil servants under Government's employment are provided with full-pay annual leave ranging from 22 to 40.5 days, depending on their ranks, terms of appointment and years of service. Annual leave is provided for the purpose of recuperation from the pressure of work, betterment of health and attending to personal matters. To allow more flexibility in taking leave, the annual leave of civil servants can be accumulated up to a stipulated ceiling. Our record indicates that most civil servants have indeed accumulated a considerable balance of untaken leave which can be drawn for meeting personal needs that may arise during the year, including taking care of family members. As regards Non-Civil Service Contract (NCSC) staff, their employment packages are formulated with reference to those applicable to civil servants and other relevant considerations. At present, we have no plan to provide paid paternity leave in addition to the existing annual leave benefits of civil servants and NCSC staff.
Under the general conditions of contracts for Government outsourced services, contractors are required to comply with the laws of Hong Kong. They are required to provide employment benefits that their employees are entitled to in accordance with the Employment Ordinance. Whether the contractors will offer extra benefits in drawing up the terms of employment with their employees is a business decision of individual contractors. It is not appropriate for the Government to intervene.
(c) The study undertaken by the Government on whether we should legislate for paternity leave for male employees is underway. Some countries (e.g. Australia and New Zealand) provide unpaid paternity leave, while other countries (e.g. the United Kingdom, France and Sweden) allow employees to take statutory paid paternity leave with the remuneration during the leave period being directly funded by the social insurance system. There are also significant variations among different places in terms of the eligibility, time and manner of taking paternity leave. Furthermore, paternity leave for male employees is not governed by legislation in many advanced Western economies. The number of countries in our neighbourhood which provide statutory paternity leave is fairly small. It can be seen that the variations in the requirements and practises of different places are governed by the circumstances of individual places which involve underlying factors such as the economic situation, cultural background, social security and welfare system of the places concerned.
In assessing the feasibility of legislating for paid paternity leave, we will continue to study the relevant provisions and arrangements in various places of the world, the local socio-economic situation and take into account the views of different sectors of the community.
Ends/Wednesday, April 18, 2007
Issued at HKT 12:21
NNNN
