Opinion | Pay aside, first ensure decent conditions for port workers
Mike Rowse says labour officials can't shirk their responsibility
I often think that Pontius Pilate gets an unfair rap at around this time of year, as new generations of children are taught that he was largely to blame for the crucifixion of Christ, an event we now celebrate as Easter. Wasn't he just a governor sent to keep order in a rebellious foreign state? Wasn't he bound to free Barabbas instead of Jesus when the mob demanded it, literally washing his hands in the process to deny responsibility?
Even now, we still use the expression to "wash one's hands of something" in a critical way.
This whimsical thought is my back-door entrance to the subject of the dockworkers strike at container terminals operated by Hongkong International Terminals (HIT).
There is one straightforward aspect to the dispute: the workers want a pay rise, claiming that they haven't had one for years. That part of their demand will no doubt be settled in the usual commercial way.
But some other aspects are rather odd. For example, only a minority of those working on the docks are direct hires of HIT itself. They are not on strike. The majority are the employees of four different subcontractors, and these are the ones who have downed tools.
Next comes the involvement of two different trade union umbrella organisations. One is the Federation of Trade Unions, which represents those not on strike. One is the Confederation of Trade Unions, which represents those who are.
Labour secretary Matthew Cheung Kin-chung felt obliged to hold crisis talks with both, in separate sessions, together with some of the employers. Other contractors refused to attend, while HIT itself would only come as an observer.