續 有 家 長 反 對 加 費 英 基 明 日 解 畫

medocb52

[size=+1]續 有 家 長 反 對 加 費 英 基 明 日 解 畫

逾 三 百 名 英 基 家 長 聯 署 ， 反 對 校 方 下 學 年 加 學 費 ， 英 基 本 周 會 與 家 長 會 面 作 出 回 應 。 　　(星島日報報道)逾三百名英基學校協會的家長日前聯署，反對校方下學年加學費，昨日再有逾二十名家長加入聯署行動。 　　除加學費外，部分家長亦對英基行政甚多不滿，如有屬下中學要求所有家長付出逾萬元購買手提電腦，卻只可於校內使用。英基將於明日及後日舉行諮詢會，回應家長的意見。 　　英基早前宣布，中小學的學費將於下學年分別調高百分之五及百分之七，近三年累積加幅達一成四及兩成三，逾三百名英基家長日前發起聯署，反對學校加學費，並已向立法會教育事務委員會申訴。聯署行動聯絡人楊德忠表示，昨日再接到二十多名家長的電郵，響應聯署行動，當中有家長已決定下學年轉校，但也有聯署表達不滿。 　　他又指， 家長對英基行政亦有不滿，如有南島學校的家長指，校方要求所有家長付出逾萬元，購買手提電腦讓學生作學習及做功課之用，以減輕學生書包重量，但電腦只能於學校使用。有家長亦指，港島學校為讓教師參與國際文憑課程（IB）的培訓，逢周三均提早一小時下課，學生整學年便損失數十小時的課時。 　　楊德忠續稱，英基近年把不少課程外判，如性教育課程、科學活動等過往屬免費的活動，現時須收取數十元費用，「學校亦無講清楚情況，家長以為是額外課程，但原來不參加，學生那堂便無課可上，要到電腦室玩」。他指將約見教育局官員表達意見。 　　英基發言人重申，校方在加學費前經過廣泛諮詢，而校方本周將舉行兩場諮詢會，回應家長的關注事項。他並呼籲，家長若對學校行政有不滿，可通過現有渠道作反映，並應指出具體事實及證據，讓校方能作出跟進。 2008-06-17

yellowbird

原帖由 Cara2006 於 08-9-27 10:32 發表
其實讀得國際學校，係唔係都應該有 D 預算呢？
加 7 % 學費後，如果你覺得經濟情形開始有問題，我覺得就代表你當初計得條數太盡。
國際學校，唔係平民學校。香港有免費教育，唔介意比少少錢，可以揀直資，私校，平均都係三幾千學費。我 ...

唉! 你病得咁嚴重, 真係為你屋企人難過!

nonohi

原帖由 Cara2006 於 08-9-27 10:32 發表
其實讀得國際學校，係唔係都應該有 D 預算呢？
加 7 % 學費後，如果你覺得經濟情形開始有問題，我覺得就代表你當初計得條數太盡。
國際學校，唔係平民學校。香港有免費教育，唔介意比少少錢，可以揀直資，私校，平均都係三幾千學費。我 ...

jui

原帖由 Cara2006 於 08-9-27 10:32 發表
其實讀得國際學校，係唔係都應該有 D 預算呢？
加 7 % 學費後，如果你覺得經濟情形開始有問題，我覺得就代表你當初計得條數太盡。
國際學校，唔係平民學校。香港有免費教育，唔介意比少少錢，可以揀直資，私校，平均都係三幾千學費。我 ...

到期喇!! 仲唔快 D 去覆診

Cara2006

其實讀得國際學校，係唔係都應該有 D 預算呢？
加 7 % 學費後，如果你覺得經濟情形開始有問題，我覺得就代表你當初計得條數太盡。
國際學校，唔係平民學校。香港有免費教育，唔介意比少少錢，可以揀直資，私校，平均都係三幾千學費。我就知有外籍孩子就讀本地主流學校，我唔信華人孩子唔得。
其實香港大部份小朋友都係讀緊本地主流學校；當初，點解你覺得唔想比小朋友讀本地主流學校？
世界就係咁，有 D 野價錢大眾化 D ，有 D 就係貴 D。覺得 BENZ 貴，買 TOYOTA 囉；覺得 DIOR 貴，買 BOSSINI 囉。
通街都係 TOYOTA，你個仔真係咁矜貴，要 BENZ 先得？
學校冇錢，你估第一樣 CUT 乜？當然唔係 ESF 高層的福利和人工啦；CUT 的，當然係前線教職員的人工，甚至清潔和部安員等的人工。國際學校老師最浮動，如果有另一間 OFFER 更好，佢地會走。老師都係人，要生活，人家人工好 D 點解唔走？
最後，損失的係邊個？
當然，唔係話學校可以無理地，無止境的加學費啦，不過如果參考通脹等因素，我覺得 7% 尚算可以接受。
如果學校真係咁好，作為家長，我就一定接受。

加學費事件，發生在金融機構巨浪之前，當時面出面人力市場，住屋市場，一直都係向上，羊毛出在羊身上，家長當然要乘受加幅啦。

無錢就唔好學人買 BENZ。
如果比唔起，唔該轉校。

最後，你地校內問題，唔該自己同學校傾，
傾唔掂，去 LEGCO 又好，報警又好，PO 上 BK 邊個幫到你？
成日話外面 D 人攻擊你地 ESF，不如諗下自己 ESF 家長的言行先啦，下下唔滿意學校，就 PO 上黎 BK 叫罵，家長質素真係好有問題。

KaKaYa

英基行政總裁認從未減薪 家長質疑教師增薪非加學費主因
(明報)6月21日 星期六 05:32
【明報專訊】英基學校協會家長反對校方加學費，風波愈鬧愈大。有家長質疑，英基合約教員2003至04年度需減薪一成，至今薪金仍未追回03年前水平，但教師減薪同時，部分管理層卻未受影響，英基學校協會行政總裁杜茵妮更承認，自己從未被減薪。

英基學校協會前晚就學費提高的問題，與30多名家長舉行第二場諮詢會。對於杜茵妮一直強調，加學費的主因是教師薪酬不斷提升，家長聯署發起人楊德忠卻指出，教師薪酬曾在03至04年度下調10%，近年雖加薪，但仍未回復當年水平。前晚諮詢會上杜茵妮被問及曾否減薪時，她直言包括自己在內的部分行政人員，從沒有被減薪，家長質疑，教師加薪並不是英基加學費主因。

另外，楊德忠又指出，英基未能解釋與其轄下投資機構ESF Educational Services（ESL）千絲萬縷的關係。ESL協助英基籌建轄下兩所私立獨立學校，並收取690萬元顧問費，但至今暫時回報僅220萬，ESL總監之位亦是杜茵妮兼任。楊德忠質疑，英基投資是否明智及有否牽涉利益關係，並指家長代表已約見教育局官員申訴。

兼任投資機構總監受質疑

英基學校協會傳訊總監郭彼德表示，所有問題已在諮詢會上解釋清楚。他說，杜茵妮04年入職，而受減薪影響的只限於03年或以前入職的員工，因此她從沒有被減薪。又指ESL是非牟利機構，負責協助英基籌劃各種課外活動，與英基有很多財政往來，「ESL協助英基投資興建兩所私立獨立學校，繳付顧問費是理所當然的。我們都一直強調，兩所私立獨立學校是長線投資，日後必有回報」。

教育局發言人則表示，會繼續留意事件，並鼓勵英基繼續與家長保持溝通。

Twolovelyboys

HHY2007 I totally agree with you on this.

I'm a new member and I've found this site very useful in gaining information and deciding which IS to choose, (believe it or not I even found information from WYmom to be useful).  

If every long serving members has this atittude that NEW member should not give their views or present their arguement than what is the point of this website forum.  IF this continues than at the end of the day there is a danger that long serving members will present their information and new members can only listen and believe everything that is said.  

原文章由 hhy2007 於 08-6-24 22:24 發表
Wymom,

What's wrong with being a new member?  You don't have to challenge me regarding where I am from.  I am a parent of other IS school than ESF or RC or DC. So what?

I just think it's not right  ...

hhy2007

Wymom,

What's wrong with being a new member?  You don't have to challenge me regarding where I am from.  I am a parent of other IS school than ESF or RC or DC. So what?

I just think it's not right to spread such irresponsible accusation that the current fee increase at ESF is mainly due to the investment in PIS schools.  Such kind of remarks would only provoke hatred among parents/students in concern, and will do no good for solving the problem.

Twolovelyboys

Should clarify the increase at RC is also 7% for the 2008-2009 for the primary section.

原文章由 Twolovelyboys 於 08-6-24 19:38 發表
WYmom,

I would like to make a point that "this has not hit the parents of ESF school first" as the increase in fees for the primary section for 2008-09 is also 7% same as ESF school.

I anticpate tha ...

Twolovelyboys

WYmom,

I would like to make a point that "this has not hit the parents of ESF school first" as the increase in fees for the primary section for 2008-09 is also 7% same as ESF school.

I anticpate that in the fee increase in future for PIS school will be in line with ESF school and will affect all of us.  

I will probably make the same arguement with similar principal as yourself, "why is fee increase the same as ESF with no forseeable capital investment in PIS school".  No doubt PIS school management will have explain by argueing that we need to pay back loan to ESF therefore have to increase fee or some other excuse to increase fee.  So as far as I'm concern we are in the same boat.  

In future I may make an arguement about bad management of PIS school but I would not make an agruement about paying back the loan to ESF because I understand ESL and ESF have an agreement which we have to keep.

原文章由 WYmom 於 08-6-24 08:44 發表


The funds required is not equally spread in 7 years.  The capital investment will be $39M only in 2008, $113M in 2009 and go high up to $297M in 2010, $267M more in 2011 and more afterwards.  So the ...

bbjan

is there any govt dept or offical in charge of checking the ESF account every yr? surely the ESF mgt is asking too much. The fee increase should not be higher than the inflation rate. Did they decrease or freeze the fee when the economy was not gd few yrs back?

KaKaYa

英 基 不 加 費 或 削 中 文 課 程  

英 基 上 周 舉 行 兩 場 簡 介 會 ， 解 釋 加 學 費 的 原 因 ， 但 未 能 說 服 家 長 。  

　　(星島日報報道)英基學校協會計畫下學年調高學費，引來逾三百名家長聯署反對。英基行政總監杜茵妮警告，若加學費計畫胎死腹中，校方可能被逼取消中文課程，長遠影響學生的普通話能力，亦未能向教師加薪，引致教師大量流失，影響教學質素。

　　英基上周舉行兩場簡介會，解釋加學費的原因，但未能說服家長。英基行政總監杜茵妮接受《英文虎報》訪問時坦言，若政府否決其加學費申請，校方已沒有後備計畫，教學服務勢必被削。

　　她形容，中文課程對學生來說「不能缺少」，但若英基未能加學費，校方將被逼取消該課程，長遠對學生有極大影響，「愈來愈多工作要求僱員懂普通話，因此不懂說的學生日後在本港市場競爭，將會吃虧」。  


　　她續指，加學費主要是為教師加薪約百分之四點八，以及將租金津貼提升約一成半，以挽留教師，否則將有大批教師流失，屆時學校的教學質素勢必下降。

　　對於家長指英基坐擁五億元儲備，杜茵妮解釋：「儲備是協會於過去四十年來累積的資產，只是帳面數字，不是現金。」她並反駁以學費投資私立獨立學校之說，指英基於九九年決定建校，二億四千萬元的建校費屬一筆過投資，而兩所私立獨立學校將分二十年向英基歸還撥款及利息。

　　家長對英基可能取消中文課程則意見分歧，兒子就讀沙田小學的本地家長認為，學校應不惜一切保留中文課程，寧願每年多付數千元學費；來自印度的家長John Mampilli則指，取消中文課程影響不大。

2008-06-24

WYmom

原文章由 Twolovelyboys 於 08-6-24 07:25 發表
WYmom,

OK I got my sum wrong from the ESF presentation the capital investment is HK$1047M but you must remember it is over 7 years.  In that time ESF would have recieved (HK$260M*7) = HK$1820M, which ...

The funds required is not equally spread in 7 years.  The capital investment will be $39M only in 2008, $113M in 2009 and go high up to $297M in 2010, $267M more in 2011 and more afterwards.  So the increase in fees in the next 2 to 3 years will be even more terrible if they are arleady asking 7%+ increase in 08 when the capital needs is only $39M.  How much higher the increase should we expect in 09/10 then?  

They threaten in the news today to cut the Chinese program instead of cutting those unecessary administration cost on employing many more HR /accounting staff, their new increase of 15% in cash allowance, or their nice-to-have dental benefits.  So you can see what kind of educationists they are!


Yes, I understand your worries.  Just that these have hit us first before hitting you.  Not sure if you are aware, they are also gradually shifting a lot of payments to parents.  They also delete the discussion forum we used to have in the past to stop communication among parents.  So we can have no choice but accept the more and more increase every year and onwards.  So maybe parents have to really keep an eye on them rather than just carefree as before unless you are very rich and don't bother.

[ 本文章最後由 WYmom 於 08-6-24 10:27 編輯 ]

Twolovelyboys

WYmom,

OK I got my sum wrong from the ESF presentation the capital investment is HK$1047M but you must remember it is over 7 years.  In that time ESF would have recieved (HK$260M*7) = HK$1820M, which still leaves HK$770M.  What do PIS school get nothing from the government and at the same time PIS school have to pay back whatever is owned to ESF.

I admit my wording can be over the top sometimes this is because I have very strong views about including PIS school into the equation when discussing ESF school fees increase.  The reason for this strong view is very simple, every time it is included in the equation, it justs gives more excuse for ESF/ESL to incease fees of PIS schools in future.

No offence to anybody but comments like

"why is the ESF school fee higher than PIS" will only give an excuse for ESF/ESL management to increase the PIS fees to the same level rather than decrease ESF fees.   

"ESF Centre also administers /manages RC and DC, yet  no recurring overhead cost of the Centre is allocated to RC/ DC", ESF respose would be "Ah yes why didn't we charge them, we should do that next year".

"RC's students are enjoying more resources in terms of teachers' ratio, campus facilities and ESF mgt Centre" - ESF responsed will be "Great another excuse to charge more"

As you rightly said "As a lot of parents normally put their 2 or 3 kids in the same school."   I will be one such parent in a couple of years time and still trying to sort out the finance.

原文章由 WYmom 於 08-6-22 10:48 發表


The capital investment in the coming 3 projects is: $400+M times 3 = $1,200+M, not $400+M!!

The subvention has been decreased to $260+M in 2003, while the no. of students in ESF schools are increas ...

WYmom

原文章由 hhy2007 於 08-6-23 23:13 發表
Wymom,

That's not the proper way to interpreter data, and neither should we calculate net benefit in the way you mentioned.
The consulting fee received by ESL from ESF and the overhead cost paid by  ...

How do you know if $2M overhead fee (don't even know what's the real total overhead?) and $7M consultancy fee were priced at market value or not?  How do you know their justification?  You can say that only if you are the ESF/ESL management, are you?

I did not insist that PIS is the only problem, I have pointed out various financial management problems re raising funds, justification of increase in expenses,  increase in management headcounts, the large cash surplus accumulated... I have said that the focus should be on their financial management, but you just keep on defending on the single issue on PIS.   It is quite obvious where you come from, as a NEW member.  If you support ESF management so much or actually you are one of them, don't waste your time here, do stand out to explain the missing details in front of parents officially.  Pls provide more explanation with financials for parents and the govt officially.  We look forward to that.  Thank you.

[ 本文章最後由 WYmom 於 08-6-24 06:27 編輯 ]

hhy2007

Wymom,

That's not the proper way to interpreter data, and neither should we calculate net benefit in the way you mentioned.
The consulting fee received by ESL from ESF and the overhead cost paid by ESL to ESF are priced in accordance with market value.
If ESF don't use ESL's consulting service, it still has to subcontract it to other consulting entity and pay the bill.

If you still insist on your belief that the current school fee increase at ESF is mainly caused by PIS establishment, that's fine.
But, please bear in mind that there quite a few people out there don't buy your view.

bbjan

wingba,

TOTALLY AGREE with what u said:  

ESF should pay more attention to financial management especially the RoI of its funding. If it can achieve 50% of what Harvard did in managing its asset we should not be worried about fee increase.

almom

Parents, calm down and think about the whole situation again.

I am not good at bookkeeping or accounting. But I know that you pay the same amount (or almost the same amount?) for the same t-shirt at Giordano no matter which shop you are going to buy from. But customers in an old branch in TST would not blame customers of the new shop in Mongkok, just because a lot of money has been spent on furnishing the new shop.

Yes. Just within these 3 years, we have 2 new schools PIS's. That is a huge amount of money has been spent on constructing the campus, buying new computers, stocking up with chairs and tables etc. But as far as the book is concerned, these are all assets of ESF. RC and DC parents get NOTHING other than educational services. All we get is 10+ months of education, just like the rest of ESF schools. OK, I admit that there are things that are not exactly like other ESF schools. We have newer computers, we have newer tables. But the thing is, at some point down the road, you are going to get your share of "new stuffs". And honestly, even amongst the ESF schools, you do not all have exactly the same hardware or facilities, do you?

RC and DC are unlikely going to spend any huge amount on upgrading the hardware in the near future. However, I am sure there will be money spent on other "older" ESF schools, refurnishing the building, buying newer computers, etc. When money is spent next year, or the next, with an ESF school, does it mean that we RC/DC parents will then have a chance to accuse ESF on spending more money on ESF schools than on PIS schools?

BTW, in case people forget, school fees are not the only income. There are also income generated by those after school activities taken place at different schools. Now are we also going to consider that income as well? And can any one tell me which school is making most money and which school is making least money? And.....

If I still remember it, around one year ago, a lot of parents kept reminding people that RC/DC were school set up to generate money for ESF/ESL. I am a bit lost here. Why are people making totally opposite comments at different times? Are people making different comments at different times merely for their own convenience?

Parents (ESF, RC or DC) are paying the fees for what they want to get, ie educational services. We all have rights to challenge the management of how they spend the money. In the respect, we all agree that ESF/ESL do have a reputation of being a big spender. If parents want to vent the flames, accuse the group of the way they spend the money.

When you think about the whole picture, I think all parents of ESF, RC and DC have put in a proportion of the school fees into the management team. So WE ARE ALL subsidising the ESF/ESL management team. In a way, we are "losers".

Parents, please lock your target before you fire. And do not shoot at your own comrades. Now, your enemies are larghing.

WYmom

原文章由 hhy2007 於 08-6-22 20:01 發表
WYmom,

To my understanding of the auditor's report, (correct me if I'm wrong), ESL paid ESF HKD 2.194M in 2007 and HKD 1.809M in 2006 for overhead cost. I figure this is in the category of "Miscellan ...

Thanks for your reply.  But also in 2007, ESF paid ESL 6.957M as consultation fee in return.  So net-net still it is ESF paying ESL $4.763M in 2007.

Their relationship is really very complicated and all inter-related, so they are really not independent cos!

Anyway, we can see that ESF has more than enough cash surplus to cover their required increase, which is not related to ESL.

[ 本文章最後由 WYmom 於 08-6-22 21:32 編輯 ]

hhy2007

WYmom,

To my understanding of the auditor's report, (correct me if I'm wrong), ESL paid ESF HKD 2.194M in 2007 and HKD 1.809M in 2006 for overhead cost. I figure this is in the category of "Miscellaneous Income" of the $59M of "Other income".  As to the loan repayment and interest payment, it should be $3.908M in 2007.  I don't know their repayment schedule, and therefore, can not break down this $3.908M.  

If you want to have a clearer picture, I suggest you and other interested ESF parents talk with ESF's financial manager for a better explanation.

As to making PIS as independent cost center, it's understandable that ESF just want to collect the agreed amount of fees as a source of income, and doesn't want to finance ESL's operating if the later is not profitable.

In fact, I am in no position to defend for ESF.  I read their reports, and got my view.  If you have other info to correct me, please do.  Thank you.