為什麼公務員子女用教育補貼進國際小學

sheanylok01

老狐狸 寫道:
2003年中國內地公務員人數是653.67萬人，官民比例為1：198。而美國的政府公務員人數為310萬，官民比例為1：94

How about HK in 2006, 1: 43 ?

所以咪就係話單純囉...

隨便一個統計數字沒有什麼意義，而且這些統計數字最容易用來誤導人。1:98，你可以演繹成「比例太高」、「合乎標準」、「比例太低」。可以話係「隨口嗡」。

重點不是數目字的太小，而是以哪一個數字作為「標準」。而這個標準，亦會因應不同國家、不同環境、不同時代、不同情況有所不同。要計算很多不同因素得到這個標準，更加是難上加難，而且未必客觀。

S

I have copied someone's arguments on the Internet.  Might create controversies but it is unwise for me to defend or advocate.  Come to your own view please.

---

(1) public expenditure as a % of GDP had risen from low teens to a new height of 23% since early 80's.

(2) Government accounts for an incredible 10% of the total work force in HK.

(3) There are about 14,000 contract staff in government, 77% of which were recent hires.

(4) Many were led to believe that Government took serious actions to cut down the size of CS. Result? We have 340,000 staff in Government and subvented organizations, PLUS 14,000 newly hired. These 14,000 were not counted as Civil Servants (‘CS’) (because they are contract staff). What an expansion in a period of contraction!

(4) Out of the 180,000 CS,

63,000 with salary lower than $19,000
55,000 with salary between $19,000 and $48,000
62,000 with salary over $48,000.

Why do we need to have close to 50% of the work force in management positions?

(5) More resources diverted to better paid staff and AWAY from lower end front line. Very clearly the same pattern as in (4) above:

a. Beds in public hospitals increased by 3.7% per annum from 1993 to 1998. Nurses 3.4%.
b. Doctors: 4.5% p.a.
c. Senior Doctors: 9.6% p.a.
d. Consultants: 13.5% p.a.
e. Senior Management: 14.3% p.a.

(6) CS average salary rose by 37.3% from 1997 to 2001. During the same period, CPI dropped by 13%. Two factors combined, CS salary had a real gain of 58%. A recent HR survey shows that CS are overpaid by 60% compared to average private sector employees.

(7) CS senior management chose not to do any pay level surveys for 16 years. Why not? Something to hide from us?

(8) Even when CS faced overall salary cut, a good portion of CS still enjoy an annual pay rise of 4% a year.

(9) CS pension liability now runs at $300,000 million and growing fast. Higher than HK's fiscal reserve built up throughout the years.

Scared? The bad news is not over yet...

Who says CS is not over-privileged? Overpaid as much as overstaffed - in my humble view.

For those who are not familiar with the CS system, annual increment has nothing to do with personal effectiveness nor the general market condition.

Let's say you are an EO I, once you are confirmed to this rank, you get $37,200 p.m. Even if you perform poorly or if there is a salary freeze, you still get slightly less than 5% of pay rise in each year, until 5 years later when you reach $46,810 p.m.

Let's say someone is confirmed EO I in 1997, that EO I enjoyed 26% increase in salary ($46,810 over $37,200) if salary stayed flat. It didn't, for simplicity, let's say it went up by 7%, that EO I enjoyed total increase of 35% (!)

Assuming his contemporary in the private sector got pay cut of some 10% in the past 5 years in line with deflation, that EO I would then get a pay 50% higher than his contemporary (126%*107% over 90%).

50% difference! How out of mark! For reference, the median income in Hong Kong has dropped by 20% since 1997.

By the way, that EO I probably enjoys an annual leave of 40.5 days a year.

Excessive? Sure it is in my humble view.

Paid 55% higher than HSBC's; 80% higher than PCCW's.

CS Expenditure (salary + pension) 2001 : 160 billion
HKG Financial Reserve : 450 billion
HKG Land Fund : 800 billion
HKG Budget Deficiet 2001 (Est) : 50-80 billion

Govt expenditure as % GDP = 21%
CS expenditure as % of Govt expenditure = 60%

$160 billion for 300,000 - that works out to be average pay of $44.5K pm for an average CS.

From the news, PCCW 13,200 staff $4b total pay, i.e. average = 25K pm

From HSBC’s Annual Report, HK Bank 25,000 HK staff $8.8b pay, i.e. average = $29K pm.

dad1234

老狐狸 寫道:
[quote]但公務員有16萬人

Yes, too many.

2003年中國內地公務員人數是653.67萬人，官民比例為1：198。而美國的政府公務員人數為310萬，官民比例為1：94
How about HK in 2006, 1: 43 ?[/quote]

我覺得你睇野真係好表面,依家好似對牛彈琴,總之各有前因莫善人,收

老狐狸

There is nothing poorer than asking someone to "收

老狐狸

你贊成承諾不用遵守、協議不用尊重、合約不用履行？ 你心目中這個出爾反爾的世界如果成為現實，恐怕世界大亂喇...  

有時做人單純ｄ真係幾好，少好多煩惱...   sheanylok01  

A contract makes things legal but not reasonable.
You can stubbornly say playing computer games is good for your kids even playing for a long time! That's your decision. But, I will never so stupidity ask you to shut your mouth.

各位支持舊有的『公務員子女教育津貼制度,』的超人,
bye   

stevema

S 寫道:
I have copied someone's arguments on the Internet.  Might create controversies but it is unwise for me to defend or advocate.  Come to your own view please.

---

(1) public expenditure as a % of GDP had risen from low teens to a new height of 23% since early 80's.

(2) Government accounts for an incredible 10% of the total work force in HK.

(3) There are about 14,000 contract staff in government, 77% of which were recent hires.

(4) Many were led to believe that Government took serious actions to cut down the size of CS. Result? We have 340,000 staff in Government and subvented organizations, PLUS 14,000 newly hired. These 14,000 were not counted as Civil Servants (‘CS’) (because they are contract staff). What an expansion in a period of contraction!

(4) Out of the 180,000 CS,

63,000 with salary lower than $19,000
55,000 with salary between $19,000 and $48,000
62,000 with salary over $48,000.

Why do we need to have close to 50% of the work force in management positions?

(5) More resources diverted to better paid staff and AWAY from lower end front line. Very clearly the same pattern as in (4) above:

a. Beds in public hospitals increased by 3.7% per annum from 1993 to 1998. Nurses 3.4%.
b. Doctors: 4.5% p.a.
c. Senior Doctors: 9.6% p.a.
d. Consultants: 13.5% p.a.
e. Senior Management: 14.3% p.a.

(6) CS average salary rose by 37.3% from 1997 to 2001. During the same period, CPI dropped by 13%. Two factors combined, CS salary had a real gain of 58%. A recent HR survey shows that CS are overpaid by 60% compared to average private sector employees.

(7) CS senior management chose not to do any pay level surveys for 16 years. Why not? Something to hide from us?

(8) Even when CS faced overall salary cut, a good portion of CS still enjoy an annual pay rise of 4% a year.

(9) CS pension liability now runs at $300,000 million and growing fast. Higher than HK's fiscal reserve built up throughout the years.

Scared? The bad news is not over yet...

Who says CS is not over-privileged? Overpaid as much as overstaffed - in my humble view.

For those who are not familiar with the CS system, annual increment has nothing to do with personal effectiveness nor the general market condition.

Let's say you are an EO I, once you are confirmed to this rank, you get $37,200 p.m. Even if you perform poorly or if there is a salary freeze, you still get slightly less than 5% of pay rise in each year, until 5 years later when you reach $46,810 p.m.

Let's say someone is confirmed EO I in 1997, that EO I enjoyed 26% increase in salary ($46,810 over $37,200) if salary stayed flat. It didn't, for simplicity, let's say it went up by 7%, that EO I enjoyed total increase of 35% (!)

Assuming his contemporary in the private sector got pay cut of some 10% in the past 5 years in line with deflation, that EO I would then get a pay 50% higher than his contemporary (126%*107% over 90%).

50% difference! How out of mark! For reference, the median income in Hong Kong has dropped by 20% since 1997.

By the way, that EO I probably enjoys an annual leave of 40.5 days a year.

Excessive? Sure it is in my humble view.

Paid 55% higher than HSBC's; 80% higher than PCCW's.

CS Expenditure (salary + pension) 2001 : 160 billion
HKG Financial Reserve : 450 billion
HKG Land Fund : 800 billion
HKG Budget Deficiet 2001 (Est) : 50-80 billion

Govt expenditure as % GDP = 21%
CS expenditure as % of Govt expenditure = 60%

$160 billion for 300,000 - that works out to be average pay of $44.5K pm for an average CS.

From the news, PCCW 13,200 staff $4b total pay, i.e. average = 25K pm

From HSBC’s Annual Report, HK Bank 25,000 HK staff $8.8b pay, i.e. average = $29K pm.

Thanks... now I understand why government need to take action to cut the allowance... very terrifying figures... how can we survive with that government...need to take it serious otherwise...

SandyKL

HPChingchingma,

忍唔住，所以陪你出下場囉。

SandyKL

「講另一個故事：某一次默書後，你的大兒子取得了一百分。為了獎勵他,你的另一半買了一部遊戲機給他，並跟他定下協意,每做一小時功課便可亨有最多二小時的打遊戲機時間,你跟其他朋友都覺得這樣安排不好,後來你的細仔已沒有這樣安排,而你的大仔繼續話這樣的安排很好,因當初已定下協意。」

「講另一個故事：某一次默書後，你的大兒子取得了一百分。為了獎勵他,你的另一半買了一部遊戲機給他，並跟他定下協意,每做一小時功課便可亨有最多二小時的打遊戲機時間,你跟其他朋友都覺得這樣安排不好,後來你的細仔已沒有這樣安排,而你的大仔繼續話這樣的安排很好,因當初已定下協意。」

[size=x-small]兩個比喻只係家長與子女間既「協議」，冇法律效力;依家公務員同政府係勞資關係，訂立僱傭合約，絕對有法律效力，唔係話取消就取消，加上有基本法既法律約束，點可以將等閒口頭協議當係一份合約看待，你估阿老董果八萬五呀!當時佢係傳媒上作出八萬五承諾架，之後咪縮下個膊話冇左咯。

既訂福利要取消喎，有邊個僱員可以咁偉大會贊成架?介紹我識理個偉人

stevema

S, your figures also help to understand why this thread attracted so many strong feedback.  Being able to prove civil servant's welfare not excessive doesn't help to explain why HK people can/ should support such a benefit scheme. Again, the government has admitted this crisis by withdraw the benefit - at the same time, I can feel how difficult it could face by seeing that many views here...

SandyKL

要安定繁榮，緊係要搵人幫手維持架啦，前老板醒目，知道公務員既作用，後老板冇黎醒目，最後咪要踏番落台，黯淡告別。依家理個老板，話你知某d部門已經得到公務員事務局批准，再次招聘公務員，又或將合約制員工轉為公務員制勒，點解?因為若果一個政府，連公務員都唔支持，士氣低落，即係老板領導無方，襯早執包袱!

英國係政府老狐狸，知公務員既重要性，理度果隻老狐狸，真係要再深思佢老表點解要俾咁多福利公務員勒!

S 寫道:
I have copied someone's arguments on the Internet.  Might create controversies but it is unwise for me to defend or advocate.  Come to your own view please.

---

(1) public expenditure as a % of GDP had risen from low teens to a new height of 23% since early 80's.

(2) Government accounts for an incredible 10% of the total work force in HK.

(3) There are about 14,000 contract staff in government, 77% of which were recent hires.

(4) Many were led to believe that Government took serious actions to cut down the size of CS. Result? We have 340,000 staff in Government and subvented organizations, PLUS 14,000 newly hired. These 14,000 were not counted as Civil Servants (‘CS’) (because they are contract staff). What an expansion in a period of contraction!

(4) Out of the 180,000 CS,

63,000 with salary lower than $19,000
55,000 with salary between $19,000 and $48,000
62,000 with salary over $48,000.

Why do we need to have close to 50% of the work force in management positions?

(5) More resources diverted to better paid staff and AWAY from lower end front line. Very clearly the same pattern as in (4) above:

a. Beds in public hospitals increased by 3.7% per annum from 1993 to 1998. Nurses 3.4%.
b. Doctors: 4.5% p.a.
c. Senior Doctors: 9.6% p.a.
d. Consultants: 13.5% p.a.
e. Senior Management: 14.3% p.a.

(6) CS average salary rose by 37.3% from 1997 to 2001. During the same period, CPI dropped by 13%. Two factors combined, CS salary had a real gain of 58%. A recent HR survey shows that CS are overpaid by 60% compared to average private sector employees.

(7) CS senior management chose not to do any pay level surveys for 16 years. Why not? Something to hide from us?

(8) Even when CS faced overall salary cut, a good portion of CS still enjoy an annual pay rise of 4% a year.

(9) CS pension liability now runs at $300,000 million and growing fast. Higher than HK's fiscal reserve built up throughout the years.

Scared? The bad news is not over yet...

Who says CS is not over-privileged? Overpaid as much as overstaffed - in my humble view.

For those who are not familiar with the CS system, annual increment has nothing to do with personal effectiveness nor the general market condition.

Let's say you are an EO I, once you are confirmed to this rank, you get $37,200 p.m. Even if you perform poorly or if there is a salary freeze, you still get slightly less than 5% of pay rise in each year, until 5 years later when you reach $46,810 p.m.

Let's say someone is confirmed EO I in 1997, that EO I enjoyed 26% increase in salary ($46,810 over $37,200) if salary stayed flat. It didn't, for simplicity, let's say it went up by 7%, that EO I enjoyed total increase of 35% (!)

Assuming his contemporary in the private sector got pay cut of some 10% in the past 5 years in line with deflation, that EO I would then get a pay 50% higher than his contemporary (126%*107% over 90%).

50% difference! How out of mark! For reference, the median income in Hong Kong has dropped by 20% since 1997.

By the way, that EO I probably enjoys an annual leave of 40.5 days a year.

Excessive? Sure it is in my humble view.

Paid 55% higher than HSBC's; 80% higher than PCCW's.

CS Expenditure (salary + pension) 2001 : 160 billion
HKG Financial Reserve : 450 billion
HKG Land Fund : 800 billion
HKG Budget Deficiet 2001 (Est) : 50-80 billion

Govt expenditure as % GDP = 21%
CS expenditure as % of Govt expenditure = 60%

$160 billion for 300,000 - that works out to be average pay of $44.5K pm for an average CS.

From the news, PCCW 13,200 staff $4b total pay, i.e. average = 25K pm

From HSBC’s Annual Report, HK Bank 25,000 HK staff $8.8b pay, i.e. average = $29K pm.

Lilies

以我所知，公務員本地學費津貼是學費的75％，而其基本學費的上限只是大約 HK$3500。  所以其最多只是取得HK$2625。  
另外還要就所得的津貼交稅。 以一年10期學費，現時稅率20%，最高稅毎月津貼HK$2625計算，毎月就所得的津貼要繳款之稅項為HK$525。  所以最終毎月本地津貼最多只是大約HK$2100。　　（邊有你講到咁離譜呀！）


絕對同意
晴B媽, vivian6108,n6108,wing530,weima,HPChingchingma,Tamannabel,curry123,jannie,sheanylok01,Ding,IRON
的意見

Ding

jessicalau

我間係英資公司.. 屬大型公司.. 有上千員工.. 在香港差不多有50年.. 我無作大.. 以前好景時d project 真係接唔切.. 年尾分 bonus 時..只係見到同事"彭"牙 .. 我都係因為果d bonus 先可以好快儲到首期.. 而家公司無咁好.. bonus 無咁多.. 但員工福利都唔差.. 咁當然最好嘅都係 senior grade .. 雖然公司無以前咁風光..不過 d 同事都唔會走.. 近衣2年已經好番.. 希望再好落去.. 我對公司好有歸屬感.. 不過我又點可以公開我在邊間公司做呢!..  

jessicalau 寫道:
Ding,

可唔可以講給我聽你在那間公司工作，等我又叫我老公考入來做，可以慳唔少。:)

tony_chan

老狐狸:
你唔去評擊一下房屋政策？醫療系統?
公務員無論薪酬同福利都倒退緊喇，好彩有基本法保障，唔駛低過97年

sheanylok01

老狐狸 寫道:
A contract makes things legal but not reasonable.

合約如此，法律亦一樣。法律同樣使事情合法化但並非合理化。So, what u gonna do?

不遵守合約�不遵守法律？ 而理由是「你」認為它不合理。如果人人都像你一樣，豈不是世界大亂？

法律還說得過去，因為在條文制訂時很多個人都無權選擇，只由一小撮尊貴議員做代表。可是，合約是雙方簽訂的，當然是雙方都同意合約內容的情況下才會在上面畫龜。任何一方認為 "unreasonable"，隨時可以不簽。簽了，自然就要遵守。

合約令事情合法化但不是合理化，沒有合約就可以令事情合理化麼？

唔知你係咪讀緊書。如果係，你交了學費，上上o下堂，突然校方覺得學費 "unreasonable"，於是趕你出校，你會怎樣？如果你唔係讀緊書，係做緊o野，你上工一段日子，突然僱主覺得與你簽訂的僱傭合約 "unreasonable"，唔出糧兼叫你即刻執包袱走，你會怎樣？如果你兩樣都唔係，自己做老板，你的顧客向你落單訂貨，你起貨了，對方卻突然覺得與你簽訂的合約 "unreasonable"不肯付錢，你損失慘重，你會怎樣？回到花了五十萬新裝修的家裡，你的新婚太太突然擲下鑽介，唔知做乜突然覺得婚約 "unreasonable"，分你一半身家勾佬去也，你會怎樣？這還未算，太太離開屋企時，業主同時進門，二話不說，叫你即刻滾、執o野搬走，因為佢覺得上個月與你簽的租務合約 "unreasonable"，現在不租給你了，你會怎樣？

在你這個可以隨便不守信譽、不尊重承諾，將法律合約當厠紙的世界裡，亂七八糟、一塌糊塗，最後自食其果。你做特首的話，香港可能亂到要宣佈進入緊急狀態...

都唔明點解剩係講 contract 一樣o野我都要費咁多唇舌... 離晒題。

You can stubbornly say playing computer games is good for your kids even playing for a long time!

:  :  :

It is only YOU who stubbornly use "computer games", a term which has a negative image to the parents, to compare with "education allowance as a staff welfare" because you already have an agenda.  "Education allowance as a staff welfare" is definitely not the same as "computer games" unless you stubbornly insist on it.  I can on the other hand compare "education allowance as a staff welfare" with "stationery" or "words of encourgement" which have a neutral or positive image and the tone will be very different.

Jury is still out whether "education allowance as a staff welfare" is a bad thing or else there will not have a debate here.  So, you were begging the question.

That's your decision. But, I will never so stupidity ask you to shut your mouth.

Of course you should not unless you are contracted to do so.

By the way it's not me who asked you to shut up.  I believe in freedom of speech and everyone has the right to express their opinion in a public space.

chanhao

既得利益者維護自己利益係人之常情, 聰明的係會保持沉默. 甚麼道理都會是徒然.

其他人眼紅又好, 不忿又好, 亦係人之常情, 當然需要發洩.

"大部份人總係覺得自己是有能者, 認為那是自己係應得.
計我話, 當年提出減福利減人工真係唔公平, 應該同時比另一選擇, 比一年時間佢地出去

sheanylok01

chanhao 寫道:
既得利益者維護自己利益係人之常情, 聰明的係會保持沉默. 甚麼道理都會是徒然.

既得利益與否，沉默的人多數被欺負。

其他人眼紅又好, 不忿又好, 亦係人之常情, 當然需要發洩.

當然可以。不過 factually incorrect 的，就要糾正，以免其他人被誤導。至於不同的 opinions，我覺得可以 discuss。希望持不同意見的人可以思考一o下人o地唔同o既諗法。

[quote]"大部份人總係覺得自己是有能者, 認為那是自己係應得.
計我話, 當年提出減福利減人工真係唔公平, 應該同時比另一選擇, 比一年時間佢地出去

風琴

[quote]
chanhao 寫道:
既得利益者維護自己利益係人之常情, 聰明的係會保持沉默. 甚麼道理都會是徒然.

其他人眼紅又好, 不忿又好, 亦係人之常情, 當然需要發洩.

"大部份人總係覺得自己是有能者, 認為那是自己係應得.
計我話, 當年提出減福利減人工真係唔公平, 應該同時比另一選擇, 比一年時間佢地出去

chanhao

估唔到真係有人挑戰個想法 .
當然係唔practical啦. 發夢就有, (如sheanylok01所講) 其實個結果不言而預啦, 十個有十個都唔會揀啦, 梗係o羅本基本法出來穩陣得多.

chanhao

係要人劃公仔劃出腸!