I have written several articles in this column pleading for no-fault indemnity for the families of industrial-accident deaths. Given the multiple serious industrial accidents that have occurred this year, I think it is incumbent on the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region government to reconsider my proposal.
Last month, the Kwun Tong court fined the three defendants who were involved in a fatal industrial accident in December 2022 that killed a 55-year old worker when a steel beam used to provide lateral support collapsed while it was being removed. The total fine of HK$130,000 ($16,720) was shared between the main contractor — Aggressive Construction Engineering Ltd — and two subcontractors after they pleaded guilty to 11 charges. The government last year rejected Aggressive Construction Engineering’s license renewal application following a series of fatal accidents at sites overseen by the firm and its sister companies.
The Labour Department noted that the area where the dismantling process was carried out was supposed to be restricted to authorized personnel, and warning signs should have been affixed around the site.
However, neither the worker who was killed, nor his colleague (who escaped injury), were trained or even informed about the dangers involved. This suggests that the main contractor may have committed gross negligence, so aggravated damages should be due. The tiny fine of HK$130,000 is grossly disproportionate to the contractor’s recklessness.
Two years ago, I wrote in this column (China Daily, Oct 11, 2022) that increasing the upper limit of the fine from HK$500,000 to HK$10 million as the government did in April that year was not effective, as actual fines levied were always minuscule compared to these upper limits. Even before the amendment, I know of no case in which the fine hit HK$500,000. I proposed to take another approach, imposing a “no-fault” minimum fine for each fatality at HK$1 million. This means that there would be no need to establish that employers are at fault. I also proposed that the “fine” should be designated to be the immediate and initial compensation to the family of the victim. Because sometimes a fatal accident may be the result of the worker not taking designated precautions, today I would add a clause stating that this otherwise mandatory damage will not go to the family of the worker if he or she is found to have failed to take the necessary precautions. This will certainly motivate workers to take these precautionary measures that are their responsibility.
To reduce serious industrial accidents and to offer immediate relief to the family of victims, I would further propose that the “no-fault” minimum fine at HK$1 million should extend to cases in which the worker is not killed but rendered unable to work again. Another detail that I would propose is that the main contractor should take full responsibility for any industrial accident that happens downstream under the supervision of subcontractors. I would suggest that the main contractor negotiate with its subcontractors about sharing the cost if anything happens. The terms should be reflected in the contract between the main contractor and its subcontractors.
To reduce serious industrial accidents and to offer immediate relief to the family of victims, I would further propose that the “no-fault” minimum fine at HK$1 million should extend to cases in which the worker is not killed but rendered unable to work again
On Nov 8, 2024, the Construction Industry Council issued a statement expressing concern over two fatal industrial incidents related to workers falling from height. In both cases, apparently the worker did not have a full body harness attached continuously to secure anchor points or independent lifelines with fall arresting systems. My proposal of disqualifying the family of the victim from receiving the HK$1 million damage if the worker does not do what is needed to protect him or herself will certainly motivate workers working at a height not to take chances.
Sadly, another fatal accident happened on Nov 9, also on a construction site. A worker was killed by a falling cage lift at a residential project construction site in Tai Wai, Sha Tin. This time, apparently it was the result of a machine malfunction. The victim was a 41-year-old man. He was crushed by the falling cage lift while moving items at the site of Pavilia Farm III. He is survived by his wife and two children, aged 6 and 13. A “no-fault” fine-cum-damage to the victim will significantly improve the motivation of the employer to take work safety seriously.
I have always maintained that in matters of public policy, we must consider the social benefit and the social cost of any proposed initiative. As far as I can see, the social benefits for my proposals are huge, while the social cost is quite small. On the benefit side, both workers and employers will be motivated, if my proposals are implemented, to take the necessary precautions to ward off all avoidable disasters. These precautions will save many lives and protect many families from the nightmare of losing their loved ones and facing financial disaster. On the cost side, it is said that no-fault damage at HK$1 million per fatality or permanent loss of employability could be a heavy burden to businesses. But an accident that does occur can cause huge delays, and, in the case of Aggressive Construction Engineering, even a license to operate. The latter would be an extremely large cost. Because the discontinuation of the license affected the progression of several projects, the social cost is huge. The company and Hong Kong would definitely have fared better if the accident had been avoided.
The no-fault fine-cum-damage does not cost the government much but will produce huge benefits to Hong Kong.
The views do not necessarily reflect those of China Daily.
