progress report (june 2011) on the cis human rights audit

8/6/2019 Progress Report (June 2011) on the CIS Human Rights Audit

1/20

1

PROGRESSREPORTONTHEJUNE2010HUMAN

RIGHTSAUDITOFCHINESE

INTERNATIONALSCHOOL

CHINESEINTERNATIONALSCHOOL

HUMANRIGHTSGROUP JUNE2011


2/20

2

CONTENTS

Introduction......................................................... ............................................................. ........................2

Summaryoffindings...................................................... ............................................................. ..............3Democraticdecision-makingprocesses.................................................... ............................................3

Censorshipandfreedomofexpression................................................................................................3

Socio-economicdiversity..................................................... ............................................................. ....3

UnfairandUnreasonableWorkingConditionsofSecurityGuards............................. .........................3

HumanRightsEducation..................................................... ............................................................. ....3

Democraticdecision-makingprocesses................................... ............................................................ ....4

Conclusion....................................................... ............................................................. ........................5

Recommendations..................................................... ............................................................. ..............5

Censorshipandfreedomofexpression....................................................... .............................................6

Conclusion....................................................... ............................................................. ........................7


Socio-EconomicDiversity ........................................................ ............................................................. ....9

Conclusion....................................................... ............................................................. ........................9


Unfairandunreasonableworkingconditionsofsecurityguards......................................................... ..10

Conclusion....................................................... ............................................................. ......................11

Recommendations..................................................... ............................................................. ............12

HumanRightsEducation....... ............................................................. ....................................................13

Conclusion....................................................... ............................................................. ......................13

Recommendations..................................................... ............................................................. ............13

AppendixA............................ ............................................................ .....................................................15

AppendixB........................................................... ............................................................. ......................19

AppendixC........................................................... ............................................................. ......................20

INTRODUCTION

InJune2010,theCISHumanRightsGroupfinishedtheReportontheCISHumanRightsAudit.The

identifiedfourparticularweaknessesandmaderecommendationsforimprovementinthoseareas.It

alsomaderecommendationsthatcutacrossparticularareas.

ThisProgressReportfollowsupontheReportontheHumanRightsAudit.Itfocusesonthefourareas

ofweaknessidentifiedintheAudit: Lackofdemocraticdecision-makingprocesses Censorshipandrestrictionsonfreedomofexpression Lackofsocio-economicdiversity Unfairandunreasonableworkingconditionsofsecurityguards

andoneofthecross-cuttingrecommendations:

InsufficientHumanRightsEducationofstudents

Ineacharea,theProgressReportreviewsthefindingsoftheReportontheCISHumanRightsAuditas

wellasbotheffortstoimproveandsetbacksinthe2010-2011academicyear,drawsconclusions,and

makesrecommendations.


3/20

3

Outsideoftheseareas,progressremainstobemadeinotherareascoveredintheReportontheCIS

HumanRightsAudit,andreadersoftheProgressReportareencouragedtorefertotheReportonthe

CISHumanRightsAuditforastillrelevantandfullerpictureoftheoverallsituationatCIS.

SUMMARYOFFINDINGS

Thefollowingareconclusionsonthefourareasofweaknessdemocraticdecision-makingprocesses,

censorshipandfreedomofexpression,socio-economicdiversity,andhumanrightseducation.For

detailsonhowthefindingswerearrivedat,pleaseseeeachspecificsection.

DEMOCRATICDECISION-MAKINGPROCESSES

Studentandstaffparticipationindecision-makingprocesseshasnotimprovedsystemicallysincethe

Audit.Aproposaltoensureparticipationhasnotbeenadoptedbyschoolleadership.Decisions,such

asthebagrule,madeduringtheschoolyearwereopaqueandnon-participatoryresultinginalackof

ownershipof thedecisionsbymembersoftheschoolcommunity.Despitethis,noformalreviewof

decision-makingprocesseshasbeenundertaken.

CENSORSHIPANDFREEDOMOFEXPRESSION

ThesituationregardingcensorshipandlackoffreedominexpressionatCIShasdeterioratedsincethe

publicationoftheAudit,withmethodsofcensorshipadvancingfromself-censorship,tocensorshipby

the school, including disciplinary actions against perceived offenders. There is still a lack of

transparencyandnoclearguidelinesonappropriatechannelsforcommunicationandpublicationof

materials.

SOCIO-ECONOMICDIVERSITY

CIShasmadenoprogresstowardthecreationofafinancialaidprogram,norhasittakenothersteps

toincreasesocio-economicdiversityattheschool.Thisrepresentsafailureinitscommitmentstoits

own mission statement to produce students who are compassionate, ethical and responsible

individuals, contributing to local and global communities, respectful of other views, beliefs and

culturesandtoprovidingthebesteducationpossibletoitsstudents.

UNFAIRANDUNREASONABLEWORKINGCONDITIONSOFSECURITYGUARDS

CISisnotinlinewithinternationalstandardsinitstreatmentofthesecurityguards,asitrequires

them towork far more hours than are legally allowed in all other jurisdictionswith a developed

economy, including those in the immediate geographic region. Nearly one year after the Audit

brought this to theattentionof theadministration,no progresshas beenmade inaddressing this

urgentmatter.

HUMANRIGHTSEDUCATION

TheyearhasseensignificantgrowthinHumanRightsEducationatCIS.HumanRightsEducationhas

expandedfromYear10Choicestotheclassroomandtheentiresecondarycommunity.Anewopen-

mindedness and eagerness to be involved and make an active contribution to local and global

communitiesarebeginningtoreplaceindifferenceandpassivity.However,effortsmustbemadeto

bettercommunicateandcoordinateinitiatives.


4/20

4

DEMOCRATICDECISION-MAKINGPROCESSES

Democraticdecision-makingatCISwas identifiedasaweaknessin theHumanRightsAuditof June

2010.Inthesurvey,itreceivedthehighestnumberofno/neverresponses,indicatingahighlevelof

dissatisfactionamongrespondentswhichfollow-upspotinterviewsconfirmed.

Particular problems were identified: lack student voice in choosing its representatives; lack of

participationofteachersindecision-makingprocesses;lackofcommunicationbetweenthestudent

body,thefaculty,andtheschoolleadership;lackofstaffandstudentrepresentationontheBoardof

Governors.

The Audit stated, Students elect the student council directly. However, the interfaceto make

appealson certain issues to the school leadershipappears to be primarily on a certain relatively

smallnumberofissues.Thereisnoformalmechanismofinteractionorcommunicationbetweenthe

studentcouncilandstaffmeeting.TherearepositionsofHeadBoyandHeadGirl,whoappeartobe

regardedtosomeextentasstudentrepresentatives,buttheyarechosenbyschoolleadershipandin

thissensearenotformallystudentrepresentatives.

Inteacherinterviews,thelackofopportunitytoparticipateindemocraticdecision-makingprocesses

isthebiggestandmostfrequentcomplaint.Thereareasignificantnumberofteacherswhoconsider

thisasubstantialproblem.

Students have no representation on the board, nor are minutes of board meeting minutes or

decisionsmadeavailabletothemonaregularbasis.

There is no staff participation in the setting of the staff meeting agendathere are no formal

mechanisms through which teachers can participate and no formal democratic decision-making

processes.

TheAuditmadeseveralrecommendations:

Installpermanentpositionsforstudents,faculty,andstaffontheboard,andhaverepresentativesbechosenfromtheirrespectiveconstituenciesthroughademocraticprocess;

allowastudentcouncilrepresentativetoattendeachstaffmeetinginthecapacityof

observer

Clarifyrelationshipsbetweenthestudentcouncil,otherinstitutions,andtheschoolleadership

Makethestaffmeetingadecision-makingbodythatmeetsregularlyaccordingtoanagendamadewiththeparticipationofallthestaff.Allsignificantissuesaffectingthewholeschool,

nomattertheirorigin,mustbeputtothestaffmeetingintheformofaproposal,discussedandvotedonbystaff.

TheHumanRightsGroupdiscussedthematterwithDrFaunce.ItwassuggestedthattheHRGdraw

upaproposal.(PleaseseeAppendixAforfullproposal.)

Themainpurposeof theproposalwastoofferstructuresthatensuretheparticipationof staffand

students in decision-making processes, in particular by focusing on improvements of relations

betweenstudentcouncilontheonehandandthestaffandadministrationontheother;byreforming

the staff meeting in order to ensure staff participation; and by placing staff and student

representativeson theBoardofGovernors.DrKerndiscussed theproposalwithDrFaunceandMr

Alexander.Theyrejectedthemostsignificantaspectsoftheproposal,inparticularsubstantialreform

ofthestaffmeetingto ensureparticipationand representationofstaffandstudentson theboard.Theyallowedthatsomelesssignificantchangescouldbeuseful,includingimprovementstotheway


5/20

5

thestaffmeetingisrunandthattheHeadofSchoolmightreporttotheschoolonoutcomesofboard

meetings.

Aneffortwaslatermadetoplacetheproposalon theagendaofa staffmeetinginordertocanvas

staffopinion.TheoutcomeoftheeffortwasthatMrAlexandersaidhewouldmakeanopencallto

stafftojoinagrouptodiscusswaystoimprovethewaythestaffmeetingisrun.Thecallwasmade,

buttodate,thegrouphasnotconvened.

Thus, no improvements have been made this year to ensure participation in decision-making

processes.Indeed,eventsoccurredwhicharguablyrepresentadeteriorationofthesituation.

ThebagrulewasimplementedthroughaMoongateannouncementonSeptember20,2010without

any prior consultation with staff or students. The student body took initiatives to express their

dissatisfaction.Continuouseffortsbystudentswererequiredtobringaboutanychange.IftheHRG

proposalhadbeenimplementedatthetime,aproposalonthebagpolicywouldhavebeenpresented

to thestudentcouncil andstaffmeetingin advance, thus leadingto amoreinclusiveprocessand

thereforeagreaterowningoftheeventualdecision.

The significantdecisionon a 1:1 laptop program in the secondary school wasmadewithout anysystematicinputfromstafforcleardecision-makingprocess.In spiteoffrequentrequests that the

decision-makingprocessbeclarified,thedecisionwasultimatelypresentedtostaffasafaitaccomplit.

ItappearsthatthedecisionwasmadebytheEducationCommitteeoftheBoardofGovernors,which

includesnoteachers.Itcanbearguedthat,giventhatteachersareprofessionalswhoareprimarily

responsible for the education of the students atCIS, their involvement indecisions affecting the

educationisnotonlyarightoftheirsbutalsowouldresultinbetterdecisionsandmoreenthusiasm

onthepartofteachersincarryingoutthosedecisions.

CONCLUSION

Studentand staffparticipation indecision-makingprocesseshasnot improvedsystematically since

the Audit. A proposal to ensure participation has not been adopted by school leadership, withminimalothereffortsbeingundertaken.Decisions,suchasthebagrule,madeduringtheschoolyear

wereopaqueandnon-participatoryresultinginalackofownershipofthedecisionsbymembersof

the school community. Despite this, no formal review of decision-making processes has been

undertaken.

RECOMMENDATIONS

Toschoolleadership:

Address staff and students demands for participation in decision-making processes in asubstantialandgenuinemanner

Allowstudentcouncilmemberstoattendstaffmeetingsasobserversandtoreceiveminutesofstaffmeetings

Install a student representative and a staff representative, elected by students and staffrespectively,ontheBoardofGovernors

Holdregulartwice-monthlystaffmeetingstwicemonthtodiscussanddecideonproposalsbyvote.

Presentmajorproposals tothestudentcouncilbeforevotingontheproposalsatthestaffmeeting(refertoAppendixAfordefinitionofmajorproposal)

Meetstudentcouncilonaregularbasis

Tostaffandstudents:

Continue to express demands for participation in decision-making processes


6/20

6

CENSORSHIPANDFREEDOMOFEXPRESSION

TheAuditstated,MuchofthecensorshipthattakesplaceatCISappearstobeself-censorship.That

istosay,nooneinapositionofauthorityexplicitlystatesthatcertaintypesofexpressionorkindsof

informationoropinioncannotbeexpressed.Rather,variousmembersofthecommunitytakeitupon

themselvestocensorthemselves,ofteninthefearthatnottodosomayinviteopprobrium.Students

were,forexample,toldonWorldAIDSDaynottohangposterswithcondomsonthem.Othershave

noted thattheyhavechosennottoexpresscertainviewsonChinaforfearthat theywouldnotbe

appreciated.

TheAuditmadethefollowingrecommendations:

CISshouldactivelypromotefreedomofexpressionthroughstatingthatallviewsarewelcomeandencouragedandthrougheducatingstudentsinChoicesandLearningEnrichmentaboutthe

meaning,issuesandsignificanceoffreedomofexpression.

ConsidertheuseofMoongatetofacilitatecommunicationandexpressionofviewsbetweenmembersoftheCIScommunity.

Prioritizethedevelopmentofacultureoffreeexpression.

Thisissueofself-censorshipwasbroughtupbytheHumanRightsGroupinameetingwithschool

leadership.DrFaunceexpressedconcern.

TheHuman RightsGroup thensent a letter toDrFaunce andMr Alexander, requesting that they

activelypromotefreedomofspeechatCIS.Therewasabriefresponsetothelettersuggestingfurther

correspondence, but no further correspondence ensued. No action was undertaken by school

leadershiptopromotefreedomofexpression.

Several events have occurred since the publication of the Audit that suggest the problem of

constraintsonfreedomof expressionatCISmayhavebeenmoreseverethaninitiallythought,and

notlimitedtothephenomenonofself-censorship.

Severalstudentsreceivedpunishmentinconnectionwiththeirexpressionofcriticismofthebagrule,

despitethefactthat,asnotedintheaudit,CIShasnoofficialrulesorpolicyregardingwhatmaterial

mayormaynotbepublished.TheseeventsarealarmingastheysuggestthatmembersofCIScan

indeedbepunishedunfairlyforproducinganddisseminatinginformationandviews.Oneemailwhich

resultedinpunishmentwassentfroma non-CISpersonalemailaccounttovoluntarysignatoriesof

thepetition.Thus,CISwascensoringstudentsoutside-of-schoolexpression.

Suchcasespointtotheneedforadisciplinarycommitteethatincludesstudentsandstaffandamore

transparentdisciplinaryprocess.Inthecaseofthreestudentswhowerepunished,itappearsunlikely

thattheybrokeanyparticularCISrulesatall.Atanyrate,thestudentspunishmentsentthemessage

thatanystudentswhoexpressesviewswhichleadershipdoesnotlikeorwishtohearmaybesubjecttopunishment.

Thissummer,CISbeganasubscriptiontoCyberoam,anInternetfilteringservice.Itwasfoundduring

thecourseoftheschoolyear,thattheservicewasblockinganumberofwebsitesthatcouldnotbe

categorizedascontaininganycontentprohibitedintheschoolsInternetusepolicy.Belowisafulllist

ofblockedwebsitesandthedatesonwhichitwasdiscoveredthattheywereblocked.

16.9.2010

hrc.org

glrl.org.au

thetaskforce.org

iglhrc.org


7/20

7

12.10.2010

http://christiangays.com/

http://www.narth.com/

http://www.gaycenter.org/

http://www.sfcenter.org

gayteens.about.com

www.soulforce.orgdata.lambdalegal.org/pdf/158.pdf

www.gayfamilysupport.com/gay-statistics.html

www.lesbianinformationservice.org

www.nyacyouth.org

13.1.2011

www.glsen.org

18.02.2011

http://www.dayofsilence.org/www.dayofsilence.org

http://www.aeinstein.org

Allofthewebsitesexceptonehad incommonthattheypromotedLGBTrights.TheITDepartment

speculated that they mayhave beenblockeddue to explicit content, butno explicit contentwas

foundon the sites. The schoolsInternet use policy prohibits access toor use ofthe Internetfor

purposesofdiscrimination,yetironically,theschoolswebfilteringserviceineffectisdiscriminatory.

Theoneblockedwebsitenotrelatedto LGBTrightswasthatoftheAlbertEinsteinInstitute.TheIT

Departmentsaidthatthesitewasblockedduetoviolentcontent,buttheInstitutesstatedmissionis

to advance the study andusage ofnonviolent action in conflicts throughout theworld, in other

words,topromotenonviolence.

Inallcases,whentheITDepartmentwasalertedtotheblockedsites,itimmediatelyunblockedthem.

hasbeenresponsiveandcooperative,butifthepatternoflegitimatesitesbeingblockedcontinues,

theITDepartmentshouldlookintothemattermoresystematicallyinordertoaddresstheissueofunintentionalbuteffectivediscrimination.

Theheadofschoolis commendedfordefendingacademicfreedomandfreedomofexpressionina

circularsenttotheCIScommunityinApril.Yet,atthesametimetheheadofschoolsentthemessage,

Secondary leadership mentioned that it might be considering articulation of guidelines about

postering.Thisisanothercauseforconcern,assuchguidelinescouldresultinundueandambiguous

limitstofreedomofexpression.

While school leadership took punitive action against students for exercising their freedom of

expressionandconsideredguidelinesthatcouldpotentiallyreducefreedomofexpression,theschool

yearsawanincreaseinthenumberofoccasionsonwhichstudentsvoicedtheirviewsonsensitive

orcontroversialissues.Ironically,whileincidentsofcensorshipincreased,itappearedthatatleastcertainsectorsoftheCIScommunitywerecensoringthemselvesless,eveninthefaceofpotentially

graveconsequences.

CONCLUSION

ThesituationregardingcensorshipandlackoffreedominexpressionatCIShasdeterioratedsincethe

publicationoftheAudit,withmethodsofcensorshipadvancingfromself-censorship,tocensorshipby

the school, including disciplinary actions against perceived offenders. There is still a lack of

transparencyandnoclearguidelinesonappropriatechannelsforcommunicationandpublicationof

materials.


8/20

8

RECOMMENDATIONS

Toschoolleadership:

Refrainfrompunishingstudentsforexercisingtheirrightto freedomofexpression.In casesinwhichcertainaspectsofa studentsmethodof expressingherselfmightbeinappropriate,the

students should be alerted to this, but not punished for it, especially when the student is

expressingherselfaboutanissueinwhichtheschoolleadershipmighthaveaparticularvested

interest.Ifschoolleadershipbelievespunishmentisappropriate,themattershouldbereferred

toapreviouslyconstituteddisciplinarycommitteethatincludesstudentsandstaffasmembers.

Promote freedom of expression by taking opportunities to tell the CIS community of theimportance of freedom of expression and of academic freedom, especially on sensitive or

controversialmatters.

Incaseswhererestrictionsonfreedomofexpressionmightbeconsideredappropriate,consultextensivelywithstudentsandstafftodeterminewhatexactlythoserestrictionsshouldbeand

howtheyshouldbearticulated.Anyrestrictionsshouldhavetheconsensusofthecommunity.

Offera largernumberof avenuesofexpressiontostudentsandstaff.Currently,therearefewavenuesby which studentsand staff cancommunicatewith theCIS community,while atthe

sametime,thesecondaryleadershipapparentlyconsiderssomeofthoseavenuesinappropriate.

The solution is to offer appropriate avenues, such as assemblies intended to discuss school

matters,adedicatedpartofMoongateforfreeexchangeofviews,andstaffmeetings,which

currentlyfunctionprimarilyasinformationsessions.


9/20

9

SOCIO-ECONOMICDIVERSITY

Theauditfoundthatthelackofsocio-economicdiversityamongststudentsatCISwascausedbythe

high tuition fee coupledwith a lack of a policy to increasediversity and a lackofa financial aid

program.TheresultisthatstudentsareadmittedtoCISbasedontheirabilitytopay.Thisrepresents

aclearfailureinCISscommitmenttotheachievementofacademicexcellenceasarticulatedinthe

schoolsMission Statement since studentsare notadmitted based onacademic excellence buton

ability topay. Not only that, but itmeansan impoverishmentof the learningenvironment since

studentsdonotlearnamongstpeersrepresentingmanydifferent sectorsandclassesinsocietybut

onlyamongstatinyminority.AnnualtuitionatCISforoneyearisapproximatelyequaltothemedian

incomeofafamilyoffourinHongKong.Simplyput,atinypercentageofHongKongresidentsare

abletoaffordtoattendCashingKongisthemostunequaldevelopedsocietyintheworldintermsof

incomedistribution.The lack of diversity and financial aidpolicies at CISexacerbates rather than

amelioratesthisinequality.

Thekeyrecommendationoftheaudittoaddressthelackofsocio-economicdiversitywasthatCIS

shouldarticulateagoalofadmittingcandidatesbasedsolelyonmeritratherthanonabilitytopay

tuition.Towardthisend,CISshouldcreateafinancialaidprogramwitha strategywhoseeventual

aimisadmissionsolelyonmeritandnotonabilitytopay.

TheHumanRightsGroupmetDrFauncetodiscussthelackofsocio-economicdiversityatCachesaid

that if studentsexpressed adesire fora financial aidprogram, itwouldmake iteasier forhim to

pursueit.

Basedonthatadvice,theHumanRightsGroupranapetitioncampaigninJanuary.(Seepetitionin

Appendix B.) The key statement in the petitionwas, We, the undersigned, request that Chinese

InternationalSchoolcreatea comprehensive financialaid program.Wethinkthisshouldbe oneof

CIS'stoppriorities.Thepetitiongarnered145signaturesofCISstudentsandstaff.Itwasdeliveredto

DrFauncein lateJanuary.Atthattime,DrFaunceannouncedtoanall-staffmeetingthathewould

raisetheissueofafinancialaidprogramwiththeboard.HesaidhedidnotthinkthatCISwasreadytomakeafullcommitmenttotheprincipleofadmissionbasedonabilitytopaybutthatitneededto

makesomestart.

Therehasbeennoreportontheoutcomeofthatdiscussionattheboardmeeting,norhavethere

beenany apparentefforts to createa financial aidprogram. At thesame time, projects requiring

significantcapitaloutlayhavebeen approved. Thisindicates that CIShasthe financial resources to

createasubstantialfinancialaidprogram,butitdoesnotappeartobeapriorityoftheboardor

schoolleadership.

CONCLUSION

CIShasmadenoprogresstowardthecreationofafinancialaidprogram,norhasittakenotherstepstoincreasesocio-economicdiversityattheschool.Thisrepresentsafailureinitscommitmentstoits

own mission statement to produce students who are compassionate, ethical and responsible

individuals, contributing to local and global communities, respectful of other views, beliefs and

culturesandtoprovidingthebesteducationpossibletoitsstudents.

RECOMMENDATIONS

Redouble efforts to create a financial aid program which has as its stated goal admittingstudentsbasedsolelyonmeritonnotontheirabilitytopay.

Whenformulatingobjectivesandpriorities,conductsubstantialconsultationwithstudentsandstaffandtakeintoaccounttheviewsoftheentireCIScommunity.


10/20

10

UNFAIRANDUNREASONABLEWORKINGCONDITIONSOFSECURITYGUARDS

Thisissuewasidentifiedasaweaknessintheauditprimarilybecauseoftheunfairworkingconditions

ofthesecurityguards.Theauditstates:

Inmanyrespects,CISratesquitehighlyinthisarea.Teachersappeartobegenerallysatisfiedwith

theirhoursandconditions.Whilesomewhatlesssatisfiedthanteachers,maintenanceandcleaning

staff also reported a fair degree of satisfaction. Students have concerns about overwork and

unbalanced homework schedules, but it appears that the school is aware of these concerns and

attemptingtoaddressthem.However,thelongworkhoursandfewdaysoffforsecurityguardsisa

gravematterthatshouldbeaddressedwithurgency.

Therearesignificantoutstandingissuesregardingworkingconditionsraisedbystudents,teachersand

non-teachingstaffwhichshouldbeaddressed(seeauditfor specific issuesandrecommendations),

butthematterofgreatesturgencyisstilltheworkingconditionsofthesecurityguards.Theaudit

describestheirsituationasfollows:

Thesecurityguardswork12-hourshiftssixdaysaweek,fora totalofa72-hourworkweek.Theyhaveonlyfourdaysoffamonth.Theyreceivenoovertimepayforadditionalhoursworkedover40

hours. While this appears to be somewhat standard practice in Hong Kong, it is definitely not

consonantwiththeconceptofreasonablehoursunderfairworkconditions.Securityguardssaythey

haveverylittletimetospendwiththeirfamilies.Otherstaffarecertainlynotexpectedtoworksuch

longhoursasamatterofroutine.

TheauditmadethefollowingRecommendation:

Asamatterofurgency,addresstheissueofoverworkofsecurityguards.Thisshouldbedonein

collaboration with the guards and following their own suggestions for a solution. In particular, it

shouldbedoneaccordingtothefollowingprinciples:1)nooverallreductionofpayforreductionof

work hours; 2) all those currently employed will remain employed; 3) agreement as to whatconstitutesa fullworkweekconsonantwith internationalstandards (about40hoursaweek),with

overtime payfor additional hours. CISshouldbea leader in labor relations practices andnotuse

patentlyunfairlocalstandardsasanexcuse.

Nearlyoneyearlater,noprogresshasbeenmadeinaddressingthisurgentmatter.

TheCISHumanRightsGroup decidednot to conduct anawareness-raising campaign on theissue

becauseofitssensitivity,involvingthejobsofpeoplein theCIScommunity. Instead,onOctober8,

2010,thematterwasraisedwiththeHeadofSchoolinthehopeofitsdiscreteresolution.Inresponse,

theHeadofSchoolstated,Oursecurityguardsare thebestcolleaguesimaginable,andsaidthat

CISshouldtaketheleadinbestemploymentpractices,promisingtotakeupthematter.TheBusiness

Officewasconsulted. Itstatedthatourconditionsarebetterthan thoseofferedbyotherschools,whooutsourcethejob.[sic]Severalpartsofthestatementwereunclear:OtherschoolsinHong

Kongor other schoolsinternationally?Whichconditionswere considered tobebetter? Inspiteof

repeatedrequestsforclarification,nofurtherfindings,conclusionsordatawerereported.TheHead

ofSchoolthensaidasurveyofinternationalschoolheadswouldbeconducted.InMay,theHeadof

Schoolreportedthathehadreceived18repliestohissurveyofinternationalschoolheadsandthat

theweeklyhours,exclusiveofovertime,werethefollowing:40hours:5schools;48hours:3schools;

50hours:1school;60hours:2schools;72hours:7schools,ofwhichoneseemedtoindicatethata

classofguardsworks12hoursx7days=84hrs.However,hedidnotspecifywheretheschoolswere

located.Itissuspectedthatthosewhichrequiresecurityguardstowork72hoursperweekarein

Hong Kong, since such practicewouldbeillegalin other jurisdictions.Butevenassumingthat,the

majorityofschoolsreported thattheirsecurityguardsworklessthan72hoursperweek.Whilehe

reiteratedthathewantstohaveCISbealeaderinworkingconditionsforsupportstaffandnotjustmerelycomplywith legal requirements,hedid notdrawanyconclusions fromhissurveynor say


11/20

11

whetheror notCISs treatment of security guards fulfills hisgoal ofCISbeinga leader inworking

conditions,norsaywhetherornotheplannedtotakeanyfurthersteps.

Theworkinghoursofthesecurityguardsaremuchhigherthanthoseofinternationalschoolsinother

places outside ofHong Kong, even in the Asia-Pacific region, because those other schools are in

jurisdictionswith laws regulatingmaximumwork hours. (InJapan, themaximumnumber ofwork

hoursperweekis40;inMainlandChina,50;inSouthKorea,52;inTaiwan,60;inSingapore,62.Allofthesecountriesalsohavelawson theminimumhourlyovertimerateaspercentageoforiginalpay:

Japan,125%;MainlandChina,SingaporeandSouthKorea,150%;Taiwan, 160%.)HongKong isthe

onlydevelopedeconomyintheworldinwhichthereisnolawregulatingmaximumworkhours.Even

incomparisontootherworkersinHongKong,thesecurityguardswork28hoursmoreperweekthan

theaverageworker.

HongKonglaborpracticesarenotinlinewithinternationalstandards.Aftertenyearsofdeliberation,

theHongKonggovernmentenactedminimumwagelegislation,but theminimumwageof$28per

hour,whichenteredintoforceonMay1,isfarbelowalivingwage.NotonlyisHongKongistheonly

developed economywithno lawonmaximumworkhours,it also lacksother basiclabor lawson

mandatory overtime pay and protection of the right to collective bargaining. CIS aspires to

international standards inmostareasof itsoperations,andas theHeadofSchoolstated, itshouldalsodosoinitsemploymentpractices.WillCISonlyobeytheletterofthelawinajurisdictionwhere

laborlawsdonotmeetinternationalstandards,orwillCISensurethatallofitsemployeeshavefair

workingconditions?

Astheauditfound,thesecurityguardsworkfarlongerhoursthananyothergroupofworkersatCIS.

Researchhasshownthattheymustworkverylonghoursjusttosupporttheirfamilies.This leaves

themwithlittletimetospendwiththeirfamilies.WhileotherCISemployeesareenjoyingtheirleisure,

thesecurityguardsareworking.

Themostrelevantinternationallawspertainingtotheissuearethefollowing:

Article23.1oftheUniversalDeclarationofHumanRightsstates,"Everyonehastherighttowork,tofree choice of employment, tojust and favourable conditions of work and to protection against

unemployment."(emphasisadded)

Article 24 states, "Everyone has the right to rest and leisure, including reasonable limitation of

workinghoursandperiodicholidayswithpay."(emphasisadded)

These two UDHR articles are incorporated into the legally binding International Covenant on

Economic, Social andCultural Rightsunder Article7: "TheStates Parties to thepresent Covenant

recognizetherightofeveryonetotheenjoymentofjustandfavourableconditionsofworkwhich

ensure,inparticular:(a)Remunerationwhichprovidesallworkers,asaminimum,with...(ii)Adecent

livingforthemselvesandtheirfamiliesinaccordancewiththeprovisionsofthepresentCovenant;"

and"(d)Rest,leisureandreasonablelimitationofworkinghoursandperiodicholidayswithpay,aswellasremunerationforpublicholidays."

Under the Basic Law ofHong Kong, the ISESCR is legally binding inHong Kong. (Article39: "The

provisionsoftheInternationalCovenantonCivilandPoliticalRights,theInternationalCovenanton

Economic,SocialandCulturalRights,andinternationallabourconventionsasappliedtoHongKong

shall remain in force and shall be implemented through the laws of the Hong Kong Special

AdministrativeRegion.")

CONCLUSION

CISisnotinlinewithinternationalstandardsinitstreatmentofthesecurityguards,asitrequiresthem towork far more hours than are legallyallowed in all other jurisdictionswith a developed

economy, including those in the immediate geographic region. Nearly one year after the Audit


12/20

12

brought this to theattentionof theadministration,no progresshas beenmade inaddressing this

urgentmatter.

RECOMMENDATIONS

Totheadministration

Asamatterofurgency, addressthe issue ofunfairworkingconditionsof security guards,inparticular, that their hoursworked are too many and that they have insufficient rest and

leisure. This should be done in collaboration with the guards and following their own

suggestionsforasolution.Inparticular,itshouldbedoneaccordingtothefollowingprinciples:

1) no overall reduction of pay, 2) overall reduction of work hours; 3) all those currently

employedfulltimewillremainemployedfulltime;4)agreementastowhatconstitutesafull

workweekconsonantwithinternationalstandards(about40hoursaweek),withovertimepay

foradditionalhours.

TheCISHumanRightsGroupemphasizesthattheseissuesshouldbeaddressedasmattersofurgency.

Tostaffandstudents

Concernedstaffandstudentsshouldexpresstheirconcerntotheadministration.Thisshouldbedonewiththecollaborationandconsentofthesecurityguards.


13/20

13

HUMANRIGHTSEDUCATION

HumanRights Education atCISwas anoverall crosscuttingrecommendationmade in theaudit. It

stated:

CIS should educate both students and staff about their rights. In the case of students, involve

studentssuchasthoseintheCISHumanRightsGroupandothersintheefforts.

WhilehumanrightsrelatedissuesareaddressedinmanyacademicsubjectsatCIS,theonlyplacein

theformaleducationinwhichtheyaredirectlyandexpresslypresentedisYear10Choices.Thisis

commendable,thoughmanyYear10studentsreportedthattheyfounditdifficulttorelatetothe

issuestheywerepresented.Theauditstated,Toagreatextent,studentswillbemorereceptiveto

theeffortsoffellowstudentstodiscusshumanrightsthantothoseofstaff.Thisappearedtobean

areaofopportunityforpeer-to-peereducation.

SomechangesweremadetotheteachingofhumanrightsinYear10Choicesthisyear,andseveral

rights-relatedtopicswerepresentedsuchastheMillenniumDevelopmentGoals.Atthesametime,

theHumanRightsGroupcreatedanewlessonplanforYear10Choicesinthefuture.(SeeAppendix3

forfullplan.)ThetwoCHOICESlessonsaredesignedtohelpstudentsunderstandtheirownrights.

TheCISHumanRightsGroupwasaskedbytheheadofYearofYear11todiscussLGBTissuesduring

theCHOICESsessiononsexuality.Thegroupdiscussedwithstudentsanti-LGBTdiscriminationandthe

useofhomophobicslurs.TheCHOICESsession,especiallyeffectivebecauseitwasinconjunctionwith

theLGBTweek,wassuccessfulandreceivedgoodresponsefrombothstudentsandteachers.

Theaudit stated,WhileChoices,StaffMeetingand Collaborative Planning appear themost likely

pointsofentryinthecurrenttimetable,integrationofeducationaboutrightsshouldalsobeanaimof

classroomteaching.

Manyteachersalreadyincorporaterights-relatedsubjectsintotheirsyllabiandteaching.Tobuildon

theirwork,theHumanRightsGroupcontactedteachersandofferedto visittheirclassestodiscusshumanrightstopics.ItreceivedaverystrongresponsefromteachersandtodatehasvisitedChinese,

Drama,EnglishandMusicclassesaswellashomerooms.

The Human Rights Group also attempted to raise awareness about human rights issues through

campaigns,including:

BurmaCampaignscreeningofBurmaVJ,discussionofBurmeseElections InternationalDeathPenaltyAbolitionDayDeathPenaltydebate InternationalWomensDayDiscussionforum LGBTweekDiscussionforum,DayofSilence,ScreeningofMilk June4thCampaignScreeningofTankMan,DiscussionForum,June4thVigil

CONCLUSION

TheyearhasseensignificantgrowthinHumanRightsEducationatCIS.HumanRightsEducationhas

expandedfromYear10Choicestotheclassroomandtheentiresecondarycommunity.Anewopen-

mindedness and eagerness to be involved and make an active contribution to local and global

communitiesarebeginningtoreplaceindifferenceandpassivity.

RECOMMENDATIONS

Buildingon theeffortsof variousgroupsand individuals in theschool,form aHuman RightsEducationgroup comprisedofPastoralOfficestaff,HumanRightsGroupmembers, andother

interestedpartiestodiscussandcoordinateHREinitiatives.


14/20

14

EncouragestudentstoplayamoreactiveroleincontributingideastoandleadingChoicesandLearningEnhancementsessions.To dosowouldentailaprocesswhereby towardstheendof

theacademicyear,thePastoralOfficewouldsolicitideasforChoicesandLearningEnhancement

andholdapublicmeetingtodiscussideasforthecomingyear.HeadsofYearmayundertakea

similarprocessatYearlevels.


15/20

15

APPENDIXA

AProposal

tocreateformalstructures

toensuretheparticipationofCISstaffandstudents

indecision-making

December2010

CISHumanRightsGroup

INTRODUCTION

InJune2010,theCISHumanRightsGroupcompletedahumanrightsauditbasedonthearticlesin

theUniversalDeclarationofHumanRightsassessingCISsadherencetointernationalhumanrights

standards.

Theauditfoundthatwhiletheschoolrespectsandpromotestherightsofstaffandstudentsinmost

cases,thelackofformaldemocraticdecision-makingstructureswasoneoftheschoolsfourmain

weaknesses.ThisissuewasdiscussedwithDr.FaunceatameetingonOctober5,2010.

Belowisacomprehensiveproposalforadecision-makingstructuretoensuretheparticipationofstaff

andstudentsindecision-makingprocesses.Thisproposalisintendedasaconcretemeasureto

addressthedemocraticdecision-makingdeficit.

ThisproposalregardstheBoardofGovernors,theHeadofSchool,theHeadofthe

SecondarySchool,theStaffMeeting,andtheStudentCouncilasthemaindecision-making

entities.Theproposaloutlinestheirrelationshiptooneanotherandtheirmainrolesand

responsibilities.TheproposalfocusessolelyontheSecondarySchool.Itmayormaynotbe

appropriateforthePrimarySchool.


16/20

16

PROPOSAL

Webelievethatensuringtheparticipationofstaffandstudentsindecision-makingnotonlyisa

matterofbasicrightsandfairnessbutalsothattheactiveinvolvementofthecommunityaswhole

resultsinbetterdecisions.Thecontentofthedecisionsisbetterforittakesintoaccountawiderange

ofviewsandideas,andtheconsensusandbuy-inthatareachievedmaketheimplementationofthe

decisionsmoresuccessful.

Ensuringstudentparticipationindecision-makingthroughformaldecision-makingstructuresisalsoof

greateducationalvalue.Allschoolsshouldteachstudentshowtobeactivecitizensandshould

promotedemocraticculture.Thebestwayofdoingthatistopracticeit.Throughtakingonmore

responsibilityformakingproposalsandparticipatinginandimplementingdecisions,studentslearn

howtomakeandexecutepoliciesthataffectacommunityinaresponsibleandconstructivemanner.

Ensuringstaffparticipationindecision-makingisthebestwayofmakinguseoftheknowledge,views

andideasofthestaff.

22000

Staff Meeting

Board of Governors

Head of School

Student CouncilHead of Secondary


17/20

17

THESTAFFMEETING:

TheStaffMeetingisthecentraldecision-makingvenue.

AllmajordecisionsthatsubstantiallyaffecttheSecondarySchoolshouldbepresentedtotheStaff

Meetingintheformofaproposalandvotedonbystaff.

TheStaffMeetingshouldtakeplaceapproximatelytwiceamonth.ItemsfortheagendaoftheStaff

Meetingshouldbesubmittednolaterthanfourdaysinadvance,andtheagendashouldbecirculated

nolaterthanthreedaysinadvance,inordertogivestafftimetoprepareforthemeeting.

Agendaitemsmaybepresentedasproposals(p),fordiscussion(d)andasinformation(i).

Informationalitemsshouldbekepttoaminimumanddisseminatedviaotheravenueswhenever

possible.TheStaffMeetingshouldprimarilybeavenuefordiscussionanddecision-making.

Whenaproposalismade,thestaffvoteonit.Eachstaffmemberhasonevote.Thevoteshouldbecountedbythoserunningthestaffmeeting,andtheresultshouldappearintheminutes.

TheStaffMeetingshouldberunbyachair,responsibleforcompilingtheagendaandchairingthe

meeting.Thereshouldalsobeadesignatedminute-taker.Thesepositionscanbefilledonarotating

basisbydifferentmembersofstaff,forexamplegoinginalphabeticalorder.

MinutesofaStaffMeetingshouldbedistributedtostaffassoonafterastaffmeetingaspossible.

TheStudentCouncil(seebelow)maysendtworepresentativestothestaffmeetingasobservers.

Studentsmaybecalledupontocontributewhentheirinputisconsideredvaluable.TheStudent

Councilmaysubmitinwritinginformation,opinions,suggestionsandideastotheStaffMeeting,or

worktogetherwithasponsoringmemberofstafftosubmitaproposal.Studentswillbeaskedto

leavethestaffmeetingwhenconfidentialmatters,suchasthecasesofindividualstudents,arediscussed.Asfaraspossible,thenumberofconfidentialmattersshouldbekepttoaminimumand,

withpossibleexceptions,confinedtothecasesofindividualstudents.

Whenaproposalispassed,thedecisionisforwardedtotheHeadofSecondary.Inallcases,theHead

ofSecondaryreservestherighttoacceptorvetoadecision.TheHeadofSecondaryshouldinformthe

staffmeetingofwhetherthedecisionisacceptedorvetoedinatimelymanner.

Inturn,theHeadofSchoolreservestherighttoacceptorvetoanydecisionmadebytheHeadof

SecondaryandshouldinformtheHeadofSecondaryandtherestofthesecondarystaffinwritingof

hisdecision.

Approximately20%ofeverystaffmeetingshouldbereservedfortheHeadofSecondary,whomay

usethetimetoreporttothestaff,tofieldsuggestions,todiscussissues,orforanyotherpurpose.

THESTUDENTCOUNCIL:

Thestudentcounciliselectedbythestudentbodyandrepresentsthestudents.Itistheonlystudent

entitythatrepresentsstudentsintheformaldecision-makingstructure.

Notonlymaythestudentcouncilsubmitinwritinginformation,opinions,suggestionsandideasto

theStaffMeeting,asnotedabove,butitalsomeetsmonthlywiththeHeadofSecondarytodiscuss

issues.

HEADOFSECONDARYSCHOOL:

TheHeadofSchoolinallcasesreservestherighttoacceptorvetoastaffmeetingdecision.


18/20

18

TheHeadofSecondarySchoolmaymakeproposalstothestaffmeetingonanysubstantialdecisions

involvingtheschoolcommunity.Generally,thesewillbemajordecisions,asopposedtomoreroutine

administrativedecisions.ThepurposeofthisisnottoconstraintheHeadofSchoolsdecision-making

powerbuttoensurethatdecisionsaremadeinaninclusivewaythattakesintoaccounttheopinions

andideasofthestaff.AstheHeadofSecondaryinallcasesreservestherighttoacceptorvetoastaff

meetingdecision,eveniftheStaffMeetingvotesagainstaproposalmadebytheHeadofSecondary,theHeadofSecondarymayvetothatdecision.

TheHeadofSecondarymeetswithrepresentativesoftheStudentCouncilmonthlyinorderto

maintaingoodcommunication.

TheHeadofSecondarysubmitsdecisionsthatboththeHeadofSecondaryandtheStaffMeeting

havepassedtotheHeadofSchool,whoinallcasesreservestherighttoacceptorvetoanyandall

decisions.

BOARDOFGOVERNORS:

ThereshouldbeoneStaffRepresentativeandoneStudentRepresentativeontheBoardofGovernors.

Theserepresentativesshouldbeelectedby,respectively,theStaffMeetingandtheStudentCouncil.

Therepresentativesshouldhavethesamerightsasallothermembersoftheboard.

AgendasofBoardofGovernorsmeetingsshouldbedistributedtotheStaffandStudent

Representativesfarenoughinadvancethattheyareabletoconsulttheirconstituencies.Staffand

StudentRepresentativesshouldalsobeabletocontributetotheagenda.StaffandStudent

Representativesshouldsubmitreportstoeachmeeting,andasmallportionofeachmeetingshould

bereservedfordiscussingthereports.


19/20

19

APPENDIXB

Thefollowingpetitionforafinancialaidprogramwassignedby145secondarystudentsandstaffin

January2011anddeliveredtoDrFaunce.

DearDr.Faunce,

We,theundersigned,requestthatChineseInternationalSchoolcreateacomprehensivefinancialaid

program.WethinkthisshouldbeoneofCIS'stoppriorities.

Asthemissionstatementsays,CISis'committedtoacademicexcellence.Webelieveoneofthebest

waysofimprovingeducationatCISistoworktowardaprincipleofadmittingstudentsbasedsolelyon

meritratherthanonabilitytopay.Indeed,wewouldliketosee theschoolworktoformallyadopt

thatasitsgoalanddesignacomprehensivefinancialaidprogramandaplanwithcleardeadlinesthat

allowsittoreachthatgoal.

Not only do we think a comprehensive financial aid program will help CIS to fulfill its mission

statement and improve its education, we also think it is a matter of social responsibility to the

community ofHongKong.Themedian income ofa family offourin Hong Kong isapproximately

$15,000 amonth, only a little bit more than CIS tuition.As it stands, only a tiny fraction of the

populationofHongKongcanaffordtosendtheirchildrentoCIS.Withoutafinancialaidprogram,CIS

iseffectivelyexcludingthevastmajorityofHongKongstudents,tothedetrimentofbothHongKong

andCIS.

Introductionofsuchaprogramwouldalsoexposestudentsalreadyatschoolheretoadifferentway

oflifeandsocio-economicbackground,teachingthemrespectofotherviews,beliefsandcultures

asisstatedinCISsmission.

Itisforthesereasonsthatwe stronglysupporttheintroductionofamorecomprehensivefinancial

aidprogramtotheschool.

Sincerely,


20/20

20

APPENDIXC

FirstsessionHumanRightsandGlobalIssues

Thismayconsistof:

InvitingspeakerstotalkaboutHumanRightssituations(e.g.HanDongFang,membersfromAmnestyInternational,Humanitiesteachers)

Screenings of a documentary (e.g. Burma VJ, The Gate of Heavenly Peace, Bowling forColumbine)

PresentationsfromindividualGIGgroups(e.g.FISH,WorldinFiveetc.)aswellasotherextra-curriculargroups(e.g.MUN,DebateClub)

Resourcesneeded:

TwoHRgroupmemberstointroducethesession Communicationandadvancepreparationforcontactingspeakers VenueAuditorium/Dramastudio

SecondSessionHumanRightsatCIS

Thismayconsistof: Identifying the rights that studentshaveas aCIS student,as Hong Kong citizenand asa

globalcitizen.

Presentation of the areas in which Human Rights at CIS could improve (censorship,democraticdecisionmaking,financialaid).

DiscussionanddebateonthecurrentHumanRightssituationatCIS(distributionofamoreYear-10friendlyaudit)

Resourcesneeded:

Allmembersofthehumanrightsgroup Venue:sufficientlysizedclassrooms

progress report (june 2011) on the cis human rights audit

Documents