僱主聯會阻加人工的理由

僱主聯會表示,僱主明年為僱員加薪不應多於百分之二點五。
猶記得僱主聯會去年的建議也是加薪百分之二點五,並曾在旗下刊物中表示「加薪潮引發衰退」之類的言論;今年經濟持續向好,僱主聯會表示來年需要更「慷慨」地加薪,但所謂「慷慨」,竟然和去年一樣,建議加薪不多於百分之二點五,難怪每年也例必遭到工會人士口誅筆伐,認為他們的建議太低。
真正有競爭力的好僱主,是希望僱員的人工可以不斷提升,原因是:公司要賺錢。邏輯簡單不過︰有好僱員,才有好業績,但也要有高人工,才有好僱員,箇中因果,清晰不過。陳總裁見公司今年上半年已經賺夠,決定下年按表現大幅加薪予旗下員工;曹老闆見秘書Amy辦事勤快,又有交帶,決定額外追加她的人工,以免遭到挖角;李小姐的公司人才流失得快,今年年中已經要開始加薪,以免年尾人手不足。
反而,最不想僱員加薪的,一是能力有問題的僱主,二是靠政府庇蔭的壟斷性企業。前者,賺錢的能力出了毛病,無法賺錢,又如何為僱員加薪?後者,賺錢是靠老闆和高層跟官僚的關係,這些企業頭捱生捱死的打工仔女嘛,還是不要自視過高;不過,又有誰願意自己的存在可有可無呢?
話說回頭,不同的公司,面對著不同的環境,根本沒有必要建議一刀切的「加薪百分之若干若干」。與此同時,站在僱員的立場上,要是有感加薪幅度追不上自己的生產力,加薪不足,香港的勞動市場靈活性大,特別是在經濟好景的時期,要另覓高就也不難。
這亦正正解釋了香港的工運為何一直沒有在正常有競爭的行業中發展起來。試問在勞動市場中,僱主要面對激烈的競爭,不提高工資、福利等,僱員轉工容易,可另覓高就去也,毋須依靠工會勢力。不過,這一幫所謂僱主聯會,他們每年為調整薪酬出口術,給人一個僱主們組織起來調薪的形象,直接令工人也組織起來。
勞資關係造成對立面,最終勞資雙方都會成為輸家,得益的只會是僱主聯會和工會。情況有如扎鐵工潮一樣,勞方要罷工犧牲工潮期間的收入,資方也因工程進度受阻而蒙受損失,得益的只有出來抽政治渾水的工會和商會。
僱主聯會有意無意之間,每年出口術激起工會怨憤,也令工會勢力擴展至本來已非常具競爭力的行業,兩者相輔相成,成為勞資關係中的連體癌細胞,侵蝕勞資雙方議價的自由空間,最終危害的,就只有僱主和僱員的利益。

高明輝

廣告

One response to “僱主聯會阻加人工的理由

  1. Re.: 蘋 果 批 : 最 低 工 資 令 香 港 夢 碎

    I have a few comments on this Oct 8 article.

    I agree with you that low wages at entry level will serve as incentives for younger workers to work hard and will allow low skill workers to secure a job. But I am not so sure that is the reason to ignore the need of minimum hourly wage.

    The widening wage gap is a sign that businesses in Hong Kong, and other cities in the world, have lost its balance. Prices rose and lowest paid workers’ wages could not catch up with the growth rate. If businesses choose to ignore it, then the government must step in.

    The crucial point is how much the minimum pay rate should be set. That’s what the government should have begun discussing and consulting the public last year, instead of launching the so called voluntary scheme — a waste of time.

    The example you listed about that 清 潔 公 司 主 席 甄 韋 喬. Yes, this is a perfect Hong Kong story. But first, this is an individual case and not everyone who work as hard or even harder has ended up like him. Some might be more successful but some might end up in worse situation.

    Minimum pay could bring security to a relatively larger crowd of workers. It is not “the" solution, but it is the better and sensible one in the time when a caring society is called for, I think.

    A free market does not mean it should be run without rules. But I have to be honest, that’s only my own thinking, I have failed my economy courses in high school and never truly understand the simplest rule of supply and demand.

    But I think it’s only fair to have the government setting out a baseline where no one should fall below, just like a poverty line that we should have had long time ago.

    甄 韋 喬 earned $4,000 working two cleaning jobs, which was $2,000 a job I assume, 20 years ago. That’s in the mid-80s, when a bowl of wonton noodle cost $4, a McD hamburger cost less than $3.5 and movie ticket cost $17 (I remeber watching Ghostbusters after school’s swimming gala that day.)

    Today, a cleaning worker earn around $4,000 and surely would not have extra time to work a second shift because of the EXTRA-long working hours that is not imaginable when 甄 韋 喬 was still scrubbing toilets himself. While a cheapest bowl of wonton noodles cost $10, and I don’t know exactly how much a McD hamburger is, but a movie ticket is certainly not $17, (at least $60 I guess?)

    My point is, when the price went up in two- to three-folds, why shouldnt wages? I am not saying that would only be reflected by setting a minimum wage, but I would love to have the government telling the businesses what is the minimal acceptable wages for a decent living workers deserve in Hong Kong.

    (Typing in English is just faster than typing in Chinese for me, not that I am good at it.)

    Cheers,
    Lee

發表迴響

在下方填入你的資料或按右方圖示以社群網站登入:

WordPress.com Logo

您的留言將使用 WordPress.com 帳號。 登出 / 變更 )

Twitter picture

您的留言將使用 Twitter 帳號。 登出 / 變更 )

Facebook照片

您的留言將使用 Facebook 帳號。 登出 / 變更 )

Google+ photo

您的留言將使用 Google+ 帳號。 登出 / 變更 )

連結到 %s