********************************
Following is a written reply by the Secretary for Labour and Welfare, Mr Matthew Cheung Kin-chung, to a question by the Hon Frederick Fung on statutory paternity leave in the Legislative Council today (November 14):
Question:
In its replies to related questions from Members of this Council last year and this year, the Government indicated that the relevant study on legislating for statutory paternity leave for male employees was underway, and it did not intend to take the lead in providing paid paternity leave for civil servants. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:
(a) of the latest progress of the study, its expected completion date and preliminary results;
(b) of the areas covered by the study, whether it has made reference to the practice of Hong Kong's competitors in the region (e.g. male employees in Taiwan and Singapore are currently entitled to paternity leave of two to three days), and whether it has looked into the positive effects of statutory paternity leave on enhancing Hong Kong's competitiveness and attracting talents to work in the territory; and
(c) given that some local enterprises have recently started to provide paid paternity leave of two to five days for their male employees, whether it will reconsider providing paid paternity leave for all government employees, so as to set an example as a good employer, promote its policy of encouraging enterprises to shoulder social responsibilities, and help to retain talents; if so, of the details; if not, the reasons for that?
Reply:
Madam President,
(a) & (b) The Government reviews from time to time our labour legislation in the light of changing social circumstances and the pace of economic development to ensure that the legislative provisions meet the reasonable expectations of employees and employers. The Labour Department has already embarked on a study on whether we should legislate for paid paternity leave for male employees. The scope of the study includes legislation governing paternity leave in other economies in such aspects as the duration of paternity leave, the eligibility criteria for and the manner of taking such leave, as well as the payment of remuneration during the leave period.
Based on the information we have collected so far, it is noted that different places have adopted different practices regarding paternity leave as appropriate to their own economic situation, social security and welfare system, population policy and labour market situation etc. Some economies provide unpaid paternity leave to employees (e.g. Australia and New Zealand) while in other economies the social insurance system assumes direct responsibility for paying employees' remuneration during the period of paternity leave (e.g. the United Kingdom and Sweden). A number of developed western economies as well as some of our neighbouring economies have not legislated on paternity leave. Given that the practice adopted may vary from place to place in accordance with individual circumstances, it might not be appropriate to make a direct comparison between the relevant arrangements elsewhere with Hong Kong.
As to whether the provision of statutory paternity leave is conducive to enhancing the competitiveness of Hong Kong and attracting talents to work in the territory, there is hitherto not much information to which we can make reference. Overall speaking, we are of the view that the competitiveness of a place and its ability to attract talents hinge on a host of factors such as the legal system and law and order of that place, its infrastructure, health care system, efficiency of the government and the quality of the people.
In deliberating whether we should legislate for paternity leave, we should first and foremost ensure that there is wide consensus in the community in this regard and that a reasonable balance is struck between the benefits of employees and the affordability of employers. We will continue with our in-depth study on the subject. At the same time, the Government will continue to act as a facilitator partnering with the business community and non-governmental organisations in promoting family-friendly employment practices, including the provision of paternity leave to help employees balance work and family commitments.
(c) We consider that the full-pay annual leave generally provided to civil servants are adequate 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 terms and conditions are distinct from those applied to civil servants. It is the Government's established policy that the employment terms of NCSC staff should be no less favourable than those provided for under the Employment Ordinance and no more favourable than those applicable to civil servants in comparable civil service ranks or comparable levels of responsibilities. 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. Earlier on, we have encouraged departmental management to, where operational needs permit, favourably consider applications from expecting fathers for taking their earned paid leave to take care of their spouse and newborn baby.
Ends/Wednesday, November 14, 2007
Issued at HKT 11:38
NNNN
