Like Tree44Likes

Pregnancy clauses in domestic helper contracts?

Closed Thread
Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4
  1. #31

    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Posts
    130
    Quote Originally Posted by HK_Katherine:
    HK employment law prevents termination of pregnant employees. Full stop. Irrespective of how poorly they perform.
    Contracts with maids are unlike other contracts. For example, they have no right to the minimum wage, and their living in HK does not give them the right for permanent residency. I am not saying you are wrong. I am just pointing out this fact.

  2. #32

    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    829

    6.3 and 9.4 answers the questions discussed. Overseas domestic helpers may come to HK under special contractual arrangements, but that doesn't exempt them nor the employer from the Employment Ordinance's provisions.

    People who fire helpers for being pregnant under the guise of some other excuse need to have clear evidence to back up the termination has nothing to do with the pregancy. Otherwise, you're pretty much making a bet your DH will waive their rights and not pursue a case against you. Although most of them will pretty much not do so, given the challenges of staying in HK without an income while pursuing a legal case against their former employers. Heck, most people I know from higher paying jobs in their own countries don't stand up for their full legal rights half the time as the risks of taking up a case against a former employer are so high. (Europe may be an exception where labour protection is pretty strong.)

    http://www.labour.gov.hk/eng/public/wcp/FDHguide.pdf

    Last edited by z754103; 13-09-2014 at 04:10 PM.

  3. #33

    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Hong Kong
    Posts
    15,557

    In HK employers cannot fire employees for being pregnant. This applies to pretty much everyone, including domestic helpers. This part of the law is quite clear, I don't see why there is even such a big debate about it.

    HK_Katherine and penguinsix like this.

  4. #34

    If clarity about the law prevented debates about it, lawyers would be out of a job /and/ they would have nothing to talk about during those LawSoc mixers.


  5. #35

    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Wrong side of the door to hell
    Posts
    6,079
    Quote Originally Posted by Max1478:
    Why was that? For disagreeing with you?

    Edit: And by the way, who do you think I was before being banned??
    Given your username, not the multi-banned one. If you think you have achieved maximum deepcover, think again. We will always work it out.
    Last edited by kimwy66; 13-09-2014 at 06:28 PM. Reason: smilies are always good

  6. #36

    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    384
    Quote Originally Posted by Mat:
    And i guess it makes u feel a little bit superior to call FDH employers idiots...right?
    Yes I do feel superior to anyone who calls their servant a 'helper'.

  7. #37

    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Posts
    130
    Quote Originally Posted by kimwy66:
    Given your username, not the multi-banned one. If you think you have achieved maximum deepcover, think again. We will always work it out.


    I am a bit lost. Who on earth do you think I was, before I was "banned"???

  8. #38
    Quote Originally Posted by Max1478:


    I am a bit lost. Who on earth do you think I was, before I was "banned"???
    Mate don't let any troll distract you off topic. Back to it, I am quite interested in your opinion though.

  9. #39

    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Sai Kung
    Posts
    5,854
    Quote Originally Posted by okey dokey:
    Mate don't let any troll distract you off topic. Back to it, I am quite interested in your opinion though.
    Hahahhahahahahahah, good one.
    Mat likes this.

Closed Thread
Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4