Anti-discrimination Code of Practice Criticized as "Useless"

Codes of practice designed to prevent discrimination on the grounds of raceor sexual oritentation have been considered as useless and just a paper policy.

Whereas in the new guidelines against discrimination the Government saidrace or sexual orientation should not be considered when hiring employees, itaccepts special circumstances such as when the employee worked or lived in theemployer's home. The Government explained that "balance must be struckbetween that rights and the right of individuals to determine who may enter orlive in their homes".

The codes were developed in an attempt to encourage employers to be lessdicriminating through self-regulation but do not make it illegal to refuse tohire an employee on the grounds of race or sexuality.

Earlier in February 1997, the Government issued consultation paper onenacting laws regarding anti-racial and anti-sexual orientation. finally, theGovernment declined to protect equal opportunities on race and sexualorientation through laws. Instead codes of practice for employers were issued. Discrimination on the grounds of sex, disability or family status is illegal.

Spokesperson for the Women's Coalition for Equal Opportunities Lam Wai-hasaid the acceptance of discrimination for employment in the household arose froma widely criticised survey conducted by the Government and the Government usethat as reasons to oppose enacting law relating to discrimination against sexualorientation. She said the code of practice is useless and has no legal effect.

Domestic workers criticized the Government overlook discrimination in homeemployment. Remy Borlongnan, chairperson of Asian Domestic Worker's Union saidshe had handled some cases of domestic helpers being sacked because employersbelieved they were lesbians. Other employeres did not want to employ domesticworkers from South Asian nations who had darker skin, she added.

June 1998