教育王國

標題: 2012 校車費用 [打印本頁]

作者: hohomum    時間: 12-6-8 09:32     標題: 2012 校車費用

剛在eclass看到下個學年的校車公司轉了,而校車費每月加了30% (至少是我的路線,其他路線我不知), 費用亦要每2個月付...

現在仍未收到學校通告,不知這個安排是否已confirm? 有其他家長知道嗎...謝謝分享...

http://www.puikiucollege.edu.hk/website/attachments/2012/2012-2013schoolbusfee.pdf

作者: TKTL    時間: 12-6-8 10:39

本帖最後由 TKTL 於 12-6-8 10:39 編輯

回復 hohomum 的帖子

Oh, the fee for our route (kln side) will also increase 28%. Poor us.......
作者: ireneT    時間: 12-6-8 16:46     標題: TKTL 的帖子

我都貴咗280個月




作者: 空谷幽兰    時間: 12-6-12 10:08

依家地 校車 好貴啊
作者: amychangsy    時間: 12-6-12 12:05

As I know the fees have been confirmed. And as I know we need to confirm and pay the seat before June!
Big headache!!!
作者: ononchu    時間: 12-6-12 15:31

I think that the increase is very great this year.  Totally unacceptable!!  About 57% increase for my case!!

Not sure anyone has reflected this to the school

作者: patrickBB    時間: 12-6-13 08:57

真係好貴呀! 阿仔係新生, 校巴錢差不多係學費既60% !!! 睇新聞, 好似呢個係今年新學年的普遍情況, 炒旅遊巴牌, 又最低工資, 有啲學校直頭無公司bid. 政府應該出啲校巴牌啦, 唔駛啲車去哂載遊客.
作者: karencml    時間: 12-6-13 12:01

如果我果區, 車費要 $2400, 仲貴過學費呀~~~攞命....
作者: miuchung    時間: 12-6-13 14:03

真係好貴,會吾會般好過。

作者: amychangsy    時間: 12-6-13 18:34

回復 karencml 的帖子

$2400 is for 2 months, right?

作者: koko    時間: 12-6-14 09:14

本帖最後由 koko 於 12-6-14 09:14 編輯

回復 hohomum 的帖子

哇,貴佐好多wor.要$3500for兩個月。
作者: karencml    時間: 12-6-14 09:31

回復 amychangsy 的帖子

佢係兩個月俾一次既咩? 我以為係一個月既費用.....咁$1200都唔算真係好貴.....
作者: hohomum    時間: 12-6-14 09:42

睇完新聞...只係覺得我地呢啲家長永遠都係肉隨鈷板上....正苦只會任由乜野都炒炒炒到貴哂....淨係教科書加價問題都攪咗咁多年(雖然此事暫時對我地影響不大, 但學校在不斷改革中,遲啲都唔知會唔會變成同其他學校一樣只倚賴外來教科書,不過如果真係有咁大的改變,我可能選擇走)... 校車問題? 睇怕到亞仔畢業都未解決.....
作者: ononchu    時間: 12-6-14 10:23     標題: 回覆:hohomum 的帖子

好一句肉隨針板上!
為何不同路線有不同的加幅?如果車費佔學費一半以上,是否合理?
不知道現行的校巴公司有沒有投標?因過往的公司加幅好像沒有那麼大




作者: 1010    時間: 12-6-22 11:08

Our fee also increase more than 30%. Even worst, we have to pay for 2 months everytime, this is totally crazy!
I called the school yesterday and the teacher told me 現行的校巴公司 at first didn't 投標, they even sold some of the school buses.
But since no other company 投標, so the school has no choice. Then 現行的校巴公司 partner with another company (that's why they changed the company name) promised to continue to provide service for next year. But they have to increase the bus fee.

I think this is totally unreasonable and I belive we have to raise our anger and dissatisifaction to the scool and PTA!

作者: NormalGuy    時間: 12-6-22 12:42

hohomum 發表於 12-6-14 09:42
睇完新聞...只係覺得我地呢啲家長永遠都係肉隨鈷板上....正苦只會任由乜野都炒炒炒到貴哂....淨係教科書加 ...
既然這是整個香港的問題, 就不能怪學校了.直資可以跨區收生, 若沒有校車, 學校和學生都受害, 有時付錢買服務都要大家願意提供服務才行.
作者: bjdadishe    時間: 12-6-28 00:28

本帖最後由 bjdadishe 於 12-6-28 07:24 編輯

現行的校巴公司做了六年為什麼不投標?難道就為了造就這間新的校巴公司以高價得標?為何不重新宣傳和招標?


學校究竟有沒有想過學生的安全 , 找一家全新沒有經驗的公司來做校巴!

在網上做了公司查冊 , 這間新的校巴公司竟然是一間全新註冊公司!!


公司編號: 1755776

公司名稱: NEW GRAND COACH LIMITED 大新旅運有限公司

成立日期: 201266

公司類別: 私人公司



全新註冊的公司不可能有經營校巴的經驗 , 但價錢比以前加了約三成 , 怎可能成功奪標?內裏出現了什麼問題?究竟有沒有招標?


難道根本沒有依正程序去招標?為什麼一間在本年66日才成立的公司可以奪標?學校管理層出了什麼問題?


全新註冊公司怎可能有經驗去營運一間有一千多學生的學校的校巴 , 究竟有沒有牌照?有沒有保險?學校以什麼準則去選這校巴公司?學校誰人負責?要反映問題要找校長嗎?還是要先去教育局或….

PTA主席盧太曾經公開話過PTA董事中有人專責校巴事宜 , 有董事在什麼 “PTA校巴小組長期跟進校巴服務 , 究竟這董事是誰?怎樣聯絡他或她?為何弄至無人競標導致高價入標者即中而沒有事先向家長反映?為何全新公司也被接受?為何不重新招標?

這種行政混亂不單影響學生和家長的利益 , 也影響學校的形象 , 請主事者慎重從速處理!!有錯便改!!


如果把家長迫得太盡 , 也不排除有家長考慮將這事通知傳媒 , 讓更具資源和更具能力的他們像挖梁振英僭建般挖一下這事件背後有沒有見不得光的事?


現祈禱並誠心希望這是一次無心之失, 並希望巴士公司從善如流 , 把價錢合理化。


已有家長建議把這事件的前因後果分發給全港學校校長 , 讓他們也知道一些必要的通識以便將來可以睜著眼睛挑選校巴服務!


家長們 , 請不要以為自己是刀俎上的肉 , 有不公平的事情發生了 , 大家絕對有權怒吼!


如果有家長知道怎樣把家長的聲音通知 PTA 及校長 , 麻煩幫幫手!




作者: patrickBB    時間: 12-6-28 11:12

問題係政府唔出手, 學校都無辦法. 政府無再出旅遊巴牌, 啲公司高價賣出去. 啲車去哂載遊客, 如果有睇新聞, 有啲學校直頭無公司投標, 即係你去招標, 都無公司落標, 校巴都無得搭. 咁學校可以點?  應該要同教育局運輸署反映出一些校巴牌, 只係可以載學生.咁個校巴牌一定唔會抄到上天.
作者: amychangsy    時間: 12-6-28 12:25

This is the link of PTA, I think we can send e-mail to them to voice out our concern!

http://www.puikiupta.org/
作者: NormalGuy    時間: 12-6-28 12:41

bjdadishe 發表於 12-6-28 00:28
現行的校巴公司做了六年為什麼不投標?難道就為了造就這間新的校巴公司以高價得標?為何不重新宣傳和招標? ...
有道理! 但恐怕告訴PTA和校長是沒用的, 你怎知這間校車公司不是校長/副校找來的? 新人事新作風, 而PTA的成員是老師和家長, 怎敢異議.

試試找吳康民校董: [email protected], 曾鈺成校監: [email protected], 不知他們是空處理學校的事, 一個忙於國家大事, 一個忙於通宵開立法會!

作者: JadeW    時間: 12-6-28 13:02

本帖最後由 JadeW 於 12-6-28 13:11 編輯

校車的問題, 朋友的兒子在九龍區的直資/私立學校, 今年因夠時候要重新投標, 發現情況很不理想。之前一向做校車服務的公司, 做得不錯, 但今年竟然沒有投票。查明後發現, 該公司放棄了很多校巴業務轉做旅遊巴呢。而結果, 就由另一間公司以"價低者得"的標準下, 獲得了新的校車服務權。車費轉手後, 加了約$400元/月 (朋友的路線是由奧運站到旺角)。相信今年校巴加費的情況, 都十分普遍及加幅也不少呢! 而這公司亦是"新公司", 跟據朋友所說, 這"新公司"是由兩間舊的校巴公司合拼路線結合組成, 因此重新註冊為一間新公司。我不知培僑的情況會不會是這樣, 可能大家冷靜一點, 再向校方或家教會了解一下比較好。

點解都未做就話吾得呢? 就要去估係吾係有背景呢?
我只覺得吾做就吾得。未做就一定吾得。
家長的意見需要反影。但也要考慮校方/家教會的方面可做什麼。
最起碼, 可以做的應該是叫家教會公報校車的投標情況, 減少大家不必要的猜測。

另外, 我想問之前家教會有否做過校巴服務的問卷調查?
如有, 反應及意見如何? 如沒有, 反而應該建議家教會應在學期尾前先做一次問卷取資料及將結果反映予有關人士。
要取得實際數據及意見支持, 之後才可方便叫學校/老師/家教會研究檢討或行動!




作者: lfcdhsbc    時間: 12-6-28 16:48

回復 patrickBB 的帖子

今次事件應該唔關政府或牌照的事, 因為原校巴公司 "信誠" 一向都有牌照.

今次事件應該唔關油價的事, 因為過去一年油價有上有落, 沒有暴漲.

今次事件應該唔關最低公資的事, 因為最低公資是上年五月一日實施, 要加上年都可以大幅加.

唔理原因是什麼, 如果真的如樓上那位家長所講, 係原校巴公司與友人合組公司裝扮成新公司而藉口大幅加價, 就可能有道德和法律問題, 更有學校的行政問題糾纏其中.

以前聽過家教會為家長力爭降低校巴費用加幅, 但今次卻一加就三成, 家教會主席應要向家長盡快交待一下事情始末, 令家長知道究竟發生了什麼事.

樓上那位bjdodishe家長說得對, 點會揾間全新公司來經營, 唔通其中真有不可告人的事?

如果有人將呢度D討論傳比校長, 我又唔信校長會唔管, 雖然我都唔反對將事情反映給曾鈺成校監同吳康民主席.



作者: NormalGuy    時間: 12-6-28 17:50

本帖最後由 NormalGuy 於 12-6-28 17:51 編輯

校長剛於5時發通告解釋, 是少有的高效率,
作者: cp2004    時間: 12-6-28 19:45

有冇想搬去大圍新村, 我知小巴亭後82座地下(3房) HK$11,000 及二樓(2房) HK$11,000) 放租.

業主陳太 9588517. 快些問, 因位置好很快租.
作者: bjdadishe    時間: 12-6-28 23:23

的士牌照500萬一個, 但這價錢並沒有跟的士落旗價或車費掛鈎, 校巴本來已有牌照, 因為牌照漲價而加車費實在過份.
要政府多發校巴牌, 可以聽NORMALGUY意見, 考慮由家長聯署去信 梁振英 和 吳康民 和曾鈺成, 要求政府多發校巴牌, 把牌價如朋牌般推倒, 看看還能不能像現在這樣過份, 聯署信的安排只能由家教會或學校安排.
請大家幫幫忙. 謝謝!!!
作者: kl25173359    時間: 12-6-29 15:51

ELASS 通告

Reasons for the Rocketing Rise of School Coach Fees


12.109384


28


th June 2012


Dear Parents,


In view of the recent enquiries received regarding the rise of school coach fees for the coming school year, I am


writing to report on the latest situation so that parents could have a better understanding of the issue.


Due to the expiry of the current contract of school coach service by the end of this school year, our school has to


conduct the tendering exercise for the acquisition of school coach service for the coming 3-year cycle. Between


March and April this year, we invited around 20 school coach / tourist coach operators (including the one currently


serving our school) to tender for the school coach service by mailing out the tender documents. However, it was


disappointing that no replies were received. The school then conducted a second tendering exercise in April and


May by posting advertisements in the newspaper. At the same time, staff-in-charge contacted the school coach or


tourist coach operators one by one to understand the “market” situation.


Meanwhile, it has been widely reported in local press that school coach service is in shortage because the


government has stopped the issuance of school coach licences for years. As a result, the school coach license price


has boosted up more than 10 times in the market within a few years’ time, from just over $100,000 in 2006 to


around $2M this year. Besides, with the profit margin for school coach service much lower when compared with


that for tourist coach service, some of the school coach operators have switched their operation to tourist coaches.


Thus, quite a number of schools are now facing the problem of “no-school-coach-service” as they do not have any


operators responding to their tender invitation. Due to the tremendous rise in the coach licence price and with the


service demand exceeding the supply, it was unavoidable that there would be a substantial increase in the school


coach fees. For details, please refer to the attached news.


Regarding the second tendering exercise, it is fortunate that we have a few operators responding (but still no


response from our serving operator). In accordance with the requirements on tendering & purchasing procedures


stipulated by the Education Bureau (EDB), our Tender Opening Committee had confirmed the validity of the tender


documents and referred them to the Tender Approving Committee for consideration and approval. The Tender


Approving Committee, after considering the number of school coach routes that could be provided as well as the


coach fees, decided on the operator to be offered the future 3-year service contract.


I would like to emphasize that the shortage of school coach service is a territory-wide phenomenon, caused by the


insufficient number of licences as well as the inflating licence price. Without government’s active intervention, the


problems can hardly be solved by individual schools on their own. In fact, various educational organisations have


been voicing out their concerns to the Government recently but no concrete solutions have been worked out so far.


We fully understand the additional financial burden imposed on parents with a high school coach fee. However, it is


unlikely that the school coach shortage problem could be alleviated within a short time. Our school has already tried


the very best in following the EDB’s procedures to secure the school coach service through the conduct of tendering


exercise. We have no authority in amending any tendering documents or negotiating with the selected operator on


the school coach fees. I sincerely hope that every parent could understand the difficult situation encountered by the


school.


Finally, I would like to assure that our school will continue to keep an eye on the latest development of the issue and,


at the same time, monitor the quality of service of the future school coach operator.


Yours sincerely,


WAN Pui Kwok


Principal, Pui Kiu College


[Attachment: News concerning the school coach licences and fees]





歡迎光臨 教育王國 (/) Powered by Discuz! X1.5