公僕獲額外加薪 政府須交代理據

<轉載自2015年6月11日 明報 社評>

特首會同行政會議決定本年度公務員加薪幅度，罕有地偏離公務員薪酬趨勢淨指標，額外多加0.5個百分點，涉及約9億元，政府卻未公開交代為何有此特殊安排。政府行事須有規有矩，尤其涉及使用公帑，更不能打馬虎眼；就此，政府有必要向公衆解說。另外，這個罕見安排開了先例，日後公務員就加薪問題與政府角力，令人擔心將會更趨白熱化。因此，公衆有權知道這次偏離機制的做法，是否切合香港最大利益，政府必須清晰交代。

淨指標有凌駕性 偏離須特殊因素

這次公務員獲超標加薪，是20多年以來首次，特別是低層公務員跟隨中層加薪4.62%，較薪酬趨勢淨指標高出1.6個百分點，更突顯獲厚待的實質。多年以來，淨指標顯示低層公務員加薪幅度較低，政府慷慨地將之與中層看齊，納稅人因而連年負擔額外開支竟成「慣例」，公衆早有不同看法。今年低層公務員薪酬趨勢淨指標本來是3.02%，所謂按「慣例」扯高與中層看齊之後，根據行政會議的決定，低層公務員加薪幅度偏離了淨指標超過50%，其幅度之大，使人無法接受是正常合理情况。

公務員的薪酬加幅是根據6項因素決定，即是薪酬趨勢淨指標、經濟狀况、生活費用變動、政府財政狀况、職方對薪酬調整的要求及公務員士氣。公務員團體對這些因素有爭議，但是總體而言，這個調薪機制仍然行之有效。因此，近年雖有公務員組織退出薪酬趨勢委員會，但是無損相關因素和機制在社會的普遍認受性。據曾任公務員事務局長的王永平表示，薪酬趨勢淨指標是最重要因素，相對於其他，淨指標有凌駕性，除非其他5項因素出現特殊情况，才可以改變按淨指標的建議加幅。這是政府有責任解說清楚的原因。

至於其他5項因素，就經濟狀況和生活費用的變動，看不到公務員獲額外加薪的理據。有關經濟狀况，財政司長曾俊華一度在財政預算案預測本港經濟增長只在1%至3%之間。事實上，各項數據顯示本港經濟正在放緩，今年首季經濟增長只有2.1%，展望內地經濟持續下行，美國與歐洲經濟數據時好時壞，受外部環境影響的本港經濟難以樂觀。因此，若說經濟榮景而使公務員獲額外加薪，缺乏基礎。

至於生活費用變動的因素，數據顯示本港通脹壓力亦已放緩，去月政府才把全年通脹預測由3.5%降至3.2%，意味着若沒有0.5個百分點額外加幅，按以往加薪模式，即是按淨指標建議和低層公務員與中層看齊，各級公務員的加薪幅度都高過通脹。因此，若說通脹劇烈而給公務員額外加薪，也缺乏理據。

其餘3項因素，比如政府財政儲備超過8500億元，可是庫房水浸，是否構成額外給公務員加薪之理？從公衆理財角度，公共資源須用得其所，額外加薪就看不到政府奉行了一貫的審慎理財原則。至於職方對薪酬調整的要求及公務員士氣兩項因素，並沒有客觀數據供量度，職方要求的加幅可以天馬行空，參考意義不大；若說涉及公務員士氣考量，則為何額外加薪0.5個百分點就可以使公務員士氣昂揚？箇中計算有什麼玄機，政府必須清晰交代。

政府毁棄綱紀 勞資關係添煩亂

公務員團體對於獲額外加薪，紛紛表態接受，有團體代表還形容加薪幅度偏離淨指標是「零的突破」，有助提升公務員士氣，云云。公務員團體的表態和說法，實際上已經為日後的爭取做鋪墊，往後政府若不偏離淨指標，有可能被指摘為損害公務員士氣；若「額外加薪」成為慣例和常態，則一直行之有效的公務員加薪因素和機制就形同虛設。可以說，政府已經提供誘因，甚至鼓勵公務員團體日後不再尊重和遵守薪酬趨勢的淨指標，為日後的管方與職方關係添煩添亂。

歷來每年公務員調整薪酬，都是管方與職方的一場角力，今年政府罕有地從薪酬趨勢淨指標退卻，給予公務員額外加薪，此舉在往後的加薪角力中，無疑會鼓勵公務員團體提出各式各樣理由，包括要求額外加薪。這除了加重納稅人負擔，在社會上製造一些矛盾，最主要是事態顯示政府毁棄綱紀，後患無窮。政府必須交代今年偏離淨指標的理據，同時說清楚「額外加薪」是否僅此一次，讓納稅人知道政府今後會否為了公務員而繼續罔顧其他市民的利益。

On civil servants' pay rise

THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE IN COUNCIL has made a decision on civil servants' pay rise this year. In an unusual departure from the net pay trend indicators (PTIs), the pay rise will be 0.5 percent higher than recommended, which will translate into around $900 million. The government has yet to explain why it has made such a special arrangement.

Hong Kong economy, changes in the cost of living, the government's fiscal position, the staff sides' pay claims and civil service morale. Civil service unions have long been voicing doubts about these factors. However, the mechanism has overall been effective in practice, which is why the mechanism and the factors have remained universally accepted despite the withdrawal of several civil service unions from the Pay Trend Survey Committee (PTSC) in recent years. According to former Secretary for the Civil Service Joseph Wong, the net PTIs are of overriding importance in comparison with the other factors, and a pay rise recommendation based on the net PTIs should be adopted unless there are exceptional circumstances surrounding the other factors. This is why the government should explain its decision clearly.

Let us take a look at these five factors. We can see no justification for the extra pay rise given the state of the Hong Kong economy and the changes in the cost of living. Financial Secretary John Tsang forecast in his budget that the Hong Kong economy would grow at merely 1 to 3 percent. In fact, all the statistics point to a slowdown in the Hong Kong economy, which grew at merely 2.1 percent in the first quarter. A projected decline in the mainland China economy, as well as mixed economic data from the US and Europe, makes one difficult to be optimistic about the Hong Kong economy, which is strongly influenced by the external economic environment. That the civil servants are receiving an extra pay rise because of a robust economy is not a strong argument.

As for the changes in the cost of living, statistics actually point to slowing inflation. Last month the government revised downwards the annual inflation estimate from 3.5 percent to 3.2 percent. Let us look at the remaining three factors. True, the government's fiscal reserves have topped $850 billion, and the public coffers are flush with money. But should that be a reason for the extra pay rise? From the perspective of public finances, public resources should be used appropriately. We do not see how the extra pay rise is in accordance with the principle of financial prudence, which the government has long adhered to. As for the staff sides' pay claims and civil service morale, both of them are impossible to quantify. Civil servants can make demands as sky-high as they want, but these demands can hardly serve any reference purposes. As for the morale of civil servants, why does the government think that, by giving a pay rise 0.5 percent higher than recommended, it can raise staff morale? The government should explain clearly how it came up with such a percentage.

If extra pay rises become the norm, the factors and mechanism for deciding civil servant pay rises, which have been effective all along, will exist in name only. The government has simply provided an incentive for (or even encouraged) civil service unions to disregard or defy the net PTIs. This will only complicate the relationship between the government and the civil service.

公僕獲額外加薪 政府須交代理據

特首會同行政會議決定本年度公務員加薪幅度，罕有地偏離公務員薪酬趨勢淨指標，額外多加0.5個百分點，涉及約9億元，政府卻未公開交代為何有此特殊安排。

公務員的薪酬加幅是根據6項因素決定，即是薪酬趨勢淨指標、經濟狀况、生活費用變動、政府財政狀况、職方對薪酬調整的要求及公務員士氣。公務員團體對這些因素有爭議，但是總體而言，這個調薪機制仍然行之有效。因此，近年雖有公務員組織退出薪酬趨勢委員會，但是無損相關因素和機制在社會的普遍認受性。據曾任公務員事務局長的王永平表示，薪酬趨勢淨指標是最重要因素，相對於其他，淨指標有凌駕性，除非其他5項因素出現特殊情况，才可以改變按淨指標的建議加幅。這是政府有責任解說清楚的原因。

其他5項因素，就經濟狀況和生活費用的變動，看不到公務員獲額外加薪的理據。有關經濟狀况，財政司長曾俊華一度在財政預算案預測本港經濟增長只在1%至3%之間。事實上，各項數據顯示本港經濟正在放緩，今年首季經濟增長只有2.1%，展望內地經濟持續下行，美國與歐洲經濟數據時好時壞，受外部環境影響的本港經濟難以樂觀。因此，若說經濟榮景而使公務員獲額外加薪，缺乏基礎。

至於生活費用變動的因素，數據顯示本港通脹壓力亦已放緩，去月政府才把全年通脹預測由3.5%降至3.2%。其餘3項因素，比如政府財政儲備超過8500億元，可是庫房水浸，是否構成額外給公務員加薪之理？從公衆理財角度，公共資源須用得其所，額外加薪就看不到政府奉行了一貫的審慎理財原則。至於職方對薪酬調整的要求及公務員士氣兩項因素，並沒有客觀數據供量度，職方要求的加幅可以天馬行空，參考意義不大；若說涉及公務員士氣考量，則為何額外加薪0.5個百分點就可以使公務員士氣昂揚？箇中計算有什麼玄機，政府必須清晰交代。

若「額外加薪」成為慣例和常態，則一直行之有效的公務員加薪因素和機制就形同虛設。可以說，政府已經提供誘因，甚至鼓勵公務員團體日後不再尊重和遵守薪酬趨勢的淨指標，為日後的管方與職方關係添煩添亂。