MR CHAN KIN-POR (in Cantonese): Thank you, President. I would like to thank Mr Kingsley WONG of the Hong Kong Federation of Trade Unions (“HKFTU”) for proposing today’s motion, so that we can discuss the outsourcing system. The Government comprehensively reformed the outsourcing system in 2018, and the treatment of outsourced workers has been significantly improved, which was a major benevolent policy of the SAR Government back then. As the new system has been implemented for a period of time, I agree that a comprehensive review should be conducted to see if there are inadequacies and room for improvement.
Back then, the Government proposed a reform of the outsourcing system, which mainly included increasing the rate of end-of-contract gratuity to 6% and changed the marking scheme for tender assessment by altering the ratio of technical marks to marks on price aspects from the original 3:7 to 1:1, so as to encourage contractors to offer better remuneration to outsourced workers. According to a survey conducted by the Labour and Welfare Bureau, the median hourly wage of outsourced workers has gradually risen from $36.7 in 2019 to $55 in 2022, and the hourly wage of 40% of the employees in 2022 has reached $58 or above, which is higher than the latest statutory minimum wage level of $40, reflecting that the new system has already achieved certain results.
However, HKFTU has recently published a research report, in which it pointed out a number of shortcomings of the outsourcing system worthy of our consideration. The report mentioned that oligopoly exists in some trades and industries. In order to increase profits, contractors have reduced the remuneration and benefits of their employees, lowered the quality of service and exploited the rights and benefits of workers; and these problems still exist. Despite the increase in the rate of end-of-contract gratuity, some outsourced service companies will dismiss their employees prematurely without justification, or even employ the same staff member on a number of short-term contracts, with the aim of evading the responsibility of paying end-of-contract gratuities. Therefore, I agree that the Government should conduct a comprehensive review of the outsourcing system to identify the shortcomings of the system and explore ways to plug the loopholes. In fact, the four main procuring departments of outsourced workers incur a total annual expenditure of as much as $22.9 billion, the Government has to ensure that resources are properly utilized to ensure that the employees will not be exploited.
The original motion suggests the Government to “[take] the lead…to review the outsourcing system” and “convert posts with actual needs to permanent posts”, and HKFTU even advocates the establishment of a public municipal services organization which will directly employ its staff. However, I think there are quite a number of factors to consider in this regard, in particular, we must carefully consider the issue of whether or not the public coffer can afford the proposals in the long run.
In addition, many details are also worth discussing. For example, HKFTU has pointed out that the current median monthly salary for contract = workers (including cleaners, security guards and providers of other services) is still lagging behind the starting salary of $14,700 for Workman II in the civil service pay scale. Therefore, HKFTU demands that an organization be set up to directly employ its staff members, so as to improve their remuneration. However, if the new organization really refers to the civil service pay scale, on which the starting salary of Workman II is $14,700 with the maximum point reaching $17,300, even though the actual salary offered may not be that high, the package with other staff benefits and job security may attract more members of the public who are young and strong to compete for the jobs in accordance with the rules of the market. At present, most of the outsourced workers are middle-aged and elderly people from a disadvantaged background, and we all wish to help them. However, if the policy is not formulated properly, it may give rise to a negative consequence in which the older employees will lose their jobs due to a lack of competitiveness. Although this is only a hypothesis, we really need to consider such a possibility.
In addition, I am particularly concerned about the issue of monitoring. In fact, the Government’s outsourcing system is often plagued with serious problems in monitoring. Therefore, the Government must introduce a monitoring mechanism in the future, including deployment of staff to do monitoring work, such as conducting on-site inspections and surprise checks, meeting with contractors, meeting with employees, and so on. However, according to government documents, only two of the four outsourcing departments have monitoring records for the time being. Even though a total of nearly 3,000 checks and interviews have been conducted over the past two years, not even one case of irregularity has been detected, which really throws doubt on the effectiveness of the existing monitoring work.
As a matter of fact, most outsourced workers are conscientious in their duties, but there are inevitably black sheep. There are frequent reports in the mass media about workers loafing around or working perfunctorily. Despite the Government’s claim that no irregularity is detected, I think the majority of members of the public do not believe it. Even though the Government has proposed to enhance the system, it is only patching things up. The Government should conduct a comprehensive review, focusing particularly on the current monitoring system, to identify any omissions or shortcomings and think of ways to rectify them, so as to eliminate the possibility of having “a mouse dropping spoiling the whole pot of porridge”.
Thank you, President.