Power structure in contemporary Hong Kong: A case study of “Initial statutory minimum wage rate settlement” in 2010

Abstract

Understanding the power structure is the first step to analyze policy making process in every society. Smith (1995) suggests that the political power is usually distributed in the three main sectors namely the government, business sector and civil society. The only difference is how the power distributed in the society while some are evenly distributed but the others may not. In this regard, the theories of pluralism, neo-pluralism, elitism, Marxism and corporatism provide us with different theoretical approaches to understand the distribution of power in a society.

The objective of this study is to analyze the mode of labour protection policy making process in contemporary Hong Kong in the perspective of neo-pluralism. It seeks to analyze whether the labour protection policies are settled by political bargaining, if the government has its policy preference, and whether the business sector enjoys privileged position in the policy process.

The case of initial statutory minimum wage rate settlement in 2010 will be adopted. It would be a good example for us to understand the interaction between different stakeholders. On the one hand, the business sectors demanded for setting the initial minimum wage level at around $22 to $24 so as to minimize the influence for running businesses. On the other hand, the labour sectors sought the initial minimum wage should be safeguarded not only the staff but also his or her family members; therefore, the proposed wage level should be about $33. After expressing their confrontational opinions, the Provisional Minimum Wage Commission decided on starting the minimum wage legislation at $28. At last, the statutory minimum wage began on 1 May 2011.

The case of initial statutory minimum wage rate settlement is significant in the sense that many actors were involved and there were a great deal of conflict of interest among different parties during the negotiation process. More importantly, not only the business and labour sides, the Hong Kong government was criticized to be actively intervened in the policy making process. In other words, the government was the judge and player as well. As mentioned by Ma (2007) and Scott (2005), they believe the civil society expands their political influence whereas the political power of executive branches has been diminished after the handover. Cheung and Wong (2005) remind us that the business sector is still holding the dominant political positions in the policy making process. Accordingly, it is reasonable to believe that this case example could enhance our understanding the power structure in contemporary Hong Kong from the neo-pluralistic perspective.