Editors’ note: This essay combines two articles published on Memo covering the Swire Coca-Cola Workers’ one-day strike in September 2025. Republished with permission.
本文整合了兩篇發表於《備忘錄》的文章，描述2025年9月太古飲料可口可樂工人發動的一日罷工。
今早8時太古飲料（香港）職工總會發動罷工，逾百工人聚集在太古汽水廠門前，要求資方取消一個解僱車長的決定。涉事車長為工會理事，資方解僱車長疑旨在打壓工會。
On September 4th, the Swire Beverages (Hong Kong) Employees’ General Union launched a strike action. Over a hundred workers gathered outside a soft drink factory in Taikoo, demanding that management rescind the dismissal of a delivery driver. The driver in question is an elected union leader, and his dismissal is suspected to be an attempt to suppress union activities.
今日傍晚勞資雙方談判取得進展，太古飲料（香港）職工總會指公司作出很大讓步，工會歡迎及同意下述新安排，遂宣布結束工業行動，明日復工：
Swire Coca-Cola workers and their management settled later that evening, following a daylong strike by over one hundred workers. The union stated that the company has made significant concessions. The union welcomed and agreed to the following new arrangements, announcing the end of the strike and resumption of work tomorrow:
1. 公司撤回解僱涉事車長（身兼工會理事）之安排，改為將他停職，等候判決，期間支付底薪。
2. 不會處分今日參與罷工的工友。較早前，公司曾稱若下午不復工，所有罷工工人均會收到警告信。
3. 公司承認目前的安全條款不夠清晰，將會透明檢討、加強對話培訓。
4. 公司會設立「法律顧問」，讓員工日後有需要支援時可諮詢。
1. The company withdraws the termination of the driver (who also serves as a union executive), though the driver would still be suspended, pending judgment on the car accident. His base salary would be paid during this time while waiting for the judgment.
2. No disciplinary action will be taken against workers who participated in today’s strike. Earlier, the company had stated that all striking workers would receive a warning letter if they did not return to work that afternoon (if they accumulated three letters, they would be dismissed).
3. The company acknowledges that current safety provisions lack clarity and will conduct a transparent review while strengthening dialogue with workers and improving safety training.
4. The company will establish a “Legal Advisor” position to provide consultation support to employees when needed.
惟工會最後一項訴求（取消使用車上 telematic 設備監控員工）則不獲接納，公司會維持現有安排。雙方另達成共識，工會日後若再有工業行動，要在5日前通知資方。
However, the union’s final demand (to stop the use of telematic devices in vehicles to monitor employees)1 was not accepted, and the company will maintain the current arrangement. Both parties also agreed that the union must notify management five days in advance of any future workers’ industrial actions.
這場糾紛是如何開始的？How did the dispute begin?
事緣上月太古營業部車隊中，有工人工作時發生交通意外。工會曾要求公司提供法律支援，但遭公司拒絕。意外發生一個月後，公司於9月4日下午突稱完成調查，以車長違反內部安全指引「倒車時未有穿戴安全帶」為由，作出直接解僱決定。
The incident stems from a traffic accident involving a worker from Swire’s operations fleet last month. The union had requested legal support from the company, but the request was denied. One month after the accident, on the afternoon of September 4th, the company abruptly announced the completion of its investigation and issued a summary dismissal decision. The grounds cited were the driver’s violation of internal safety guidelines by “failing to wear a seatbelt while reversing.”
工會副會長陳慶龍表示，涉事工人為工會理事，已為公司工作十八年。他又指，公司所指的指引條文並非觸犯交通條例，是次意外警方也未有正式控告，「口供都未落」，公司卻未審先判，做法輕率。此外，公司從未發出完整的所謂「內部安全指引」，讓工人閱覽簽署。
The union’s Vice President, Chan Hing Lung, stated that the dismissed worker has worked for the company for eighteen years and is a union representative. He further pointed out that the guideline clause cited by the company does not constitute a violation of traffic regulations. The police have not formally charged him in this accident, and “no statement has even been taken.” Yet the company acted rashly by passing judgment without due process. Moreover, the company has never issued the so-called “internal safety guidelines” in their entirety for workers to review and sign.
公司也曾向工會表示，車上的監控設備只為了提醒同事，非用作懲處，最後卻違背承諾。他憶述，過去十幾年發生過兩三次同類事件，公司均會暫時安排非駕駛崗位的工作，而非迅速解僱。
The company had also previously assured the union that in-vehicle surveillance equipment was solely for reminding colleagues and not for disciplinary purposes, yet it ultimately broke that promise. Chan recalled that over the past decade or so, there had been two or three similar incidents of workers violating traffic regulations, but the company had always temporarily reassigned employees to non-driving roles rather than immediately dismissing them.
工會總幹事溫柏堅指，事件雖然只解僱一人，但車隊同事反應熱烈，因為感同身受、唇亡齒寒，「每個外勤同事都可能會遇到」。
陳慶龍認為，近年公司有意將車隊工作逐步外判，event team 車隊甚至已聘請5名外勞。他相信公司解僱理事的決定，是加劇外判的前奏，估計公司未必會輕易答應訴求，行動有機會成為持久戰。陳又指，營業部車隊的工作，包括運送飲料到餐廳、酒樓及辦館，估計參與罷工人數約二百人。
The union’s secretary-general Wan Pak Kin stated that though only one person was dismissed in this incident, other colleagues reacted strongly because they empathized deeply. They felt that if one part of the body suffers, the whole suffers, understanding that “every worker in the field could potentially face this situation.”
Chen believes the company’s decision to dismiss the worker is connected to its recent trajectory of outsourcing its workforce to lower-paid foreign workers. He initially anticipated that management might not readily concede to demands, potentially turning the action into a protracted struggle. Chan further explained that the fleet’s duties for the sales department include delivering beverages to restaurants, banquet halls, and event venues, and that around 200 workers would participate in the strike.
勞動三權未竟：本港爭取集體談判權始末 Limited labor rights in Hong Kong
集體談判權是指工人有權透過工會作為代表，與資方進行定期集體協商，釐訂工作待遇及福利，而且談判結果具法律約束力。對工人而言，這能夠凝聚同工的聲音、為工作條件把關、勞方亦有權提出方案，令工人地位得以提升。對資方而言，有正式的協商機制，亦能避免勞方不滿時發動工業行動，影響生產力。
The right to collective bargaining refers to workers’ right to regularly engage in collective negotiations with employers through union representation to determine employment terms and benefits. The outcomes of such negotiations are also legally binding. For workers, this consolidates their collective voice, safeguards working conditions, and empowers labor to propose solutions, thereby elevating workers’ status and power in the workplace. For employers, a formal negotiation mechanism helps prevent labor actions triggered by workers’ dissatisfaction, which could otherwise disrupt productivity.
自由結社組織工會、罷工、集體談判——此三權結合，是工人平衡勞資議價力不對等的重要法子。在香港，前兩權近年面臨一定收窄，但尚有法律明文保障；但集體談判權卻只曾生效幾星期，令打工人的權益一直被閹割。
The combination of three rights—the right to freedom of association to form unions, the right to strike, and the right to collective bargaining—is crucial for workers to counteract the unequal bargaining power between labor and management. In Hong Kong, while the first two rights have been eroded in recent years, they remain explicitly protected by law. However, the law enshrining the right to collective bargaining had only been in effect for a few weeks, consistently undermining workers’ rights.
前文提及，太古工會是本港少有此權的工會。他們爭取得此權的契機，是2013年反對外判的抗爭：公司增加了運輸工人的工作量，卻在背後計劃將主要運輸線路外判，導致直聘車隊同事未來只能「揼石仔做細單」，激起眾怒。當時勞資談判破裂後，逾300名工人參與罷工，工會趁機要求公司正式承認工會為工人代表，並草擬及簽署集體談判協議框架。此安排翌年落實，至今工會仍享有代表權及諮詢權。
This strike is critical because the Swire Union is one of the few unions in Hong Kong with the right to collective bargaining. The union won this right during the 2013 protests against outsourcing. At the time, the company increased the workload for transport workers while secretly planning to outsource major transport routes. This would have forced drivers to take on only “small jobs” (thus earning less pay), sparking widespread anger. Following the breakdown of labor-management negotiations, over 300 workers went on strike in 2013. Building on the strike’s power, the workers seized the opportunity to demand that their union be formally recognized, and drafted and signed a collective bargaining agreement with the employer. This arrangement was implemented the following year, and the union continues to enjoy representative and consultative rights to this day.
這本來可以是每一個香港打工人都享有的人權。1997年6月26日，時任職工盟秘書長李卓人於末屆立法局提出的《僱員代表權、諮詢權及集體談判權條例》私人草案獲得通過，規定若企業僱員人數達50人，且工會會員人數超過僱員人數15%及取得逾五成僱員的授權，便可獲集體談判權。但主權移交16日後，臨時立法會便凍結該條例，10月底更正式廢除。其後有議員曾在立法會再次提出類似私人草案，但遭時任立法會主席范徐麗泰指草案「涉及公共開支及政府政策」，因此不允許議員提案。
The right to collective bargaining should have been a guaranteed social and economic right enjoyed by every worker in Hong Kong. On June 26, 1997, Lee Cheuk-yan, then Secretary-General of the Hong Kong Confederation of Trade Unions, introduced a bill titled the “Employees’ Rights to Representation, Consultation and Collective Bargaining Ordinance” to the Legislative Council. The bill was passed, stipulating that if an enterprise employed 50 or more workers and union membership exceeded 15% of the workforce and was supported by over 50% of employees, the union would be granted collective bargaining rights. However, just 16 days after the Handover, the Provisional Legislative Council froze the ordinance, formally repealing it in late October. Subsequent attempts by legislators to reintroduce similar bills in the Legislative Council were blocked by then-Legislative Council President Rita Fan Hsu Lai-tai, who ruled that such bills “involved public expenditure and government policy,” thereby barring future legislators from introducing them.
香港貧富懸殊日益惡化，基層勞工缺乏集體議價能力便是肇因之一。
The vast wealth gap in Hong Kong is only worsening, and one contributing factor is the lack of collective bargaining power among grassroots workers.
Footnotes
