Skip to main content

Do the maths ... 有數得計

In a way to save outlays, the British Airways CEO is asking all the staff to work for free for 4 weeks; in fact he’ll be taking the lead and bite the bullet too.

Of course the CEO can well afford 4 weeks of such voluntary work, but those who rely on a salary to pay off mortgages, rents and day-to-day expenses won’t be too keen on this idea, and they are planning on a series of strikes to get their points across.

I’m sure the CEO would have been smart enough to come up with more workable alternatives. Four weeks of no pay out of 52 weeks of the year works out to be the same as a 7.69% pay cut over a year. Surely a steadier, albeit reduced, stream of income is easier to swallow than a period without any subsistence!

Unfortunately the airlines are doing it tough in this economic climate, and if they cannot entice the travelling public to loosen their purse strings, they will have little other choice than digging into the employees’ hip pockets.

英航行政總裁為節省開支,竟想出奇招,呼籲全體員工無薪工作四週,他還會身體力行,自己帶頭響應。

行政總裁他家底雄厚,義務打工對他也許問題不大,但對一眾要供樓、交租、養家的員工來說,一整個月沒有收入卻非同小可,所以他們打算一連串罷工以示抗議。

我想行政總裁這樣聰明,不是不會想到可以換換方法吧,其實停薪四週,把4除以52即是7.69%,一年內減薪7.69%也可收到同樣效果,對員工沖擊也沒那麼大,相信總會較容易接受吧。

航空業要熬過這場金融海嘯,真得出盡其謀,打動不到乘客的口袋,便唯有打員工的主意了……

* * *


This evening saw another recurring episode of massive delays on the railway!

Melbourne is plagued by train delays and cancellations all the time. Fortunately by law, the railway company has to offer compensation to holders of season tickets when its service targets are not met. The company only has to ensure that 98% of the published services are operated and 92% of all services arrive within 6 minutes of the schedule, and then it would be able to avoid handing out free daily tickets for compensation. But it’s definitely easier said than done …

I originally wanted to take the 17:58 train, which preceded the 18:10. But because all the trains that call at the same platform were suffering a delay, the 17:58 only arrived at 18:12, two minutes later than the next train scheduled. A lot of trains before and after that one were similarly delayed.

This string of delays must have hit the punctuality rate pretty hard, and I wonder why the railway company didn’t choose to make strategic cancellations instead, for the sake of the punctuality rate. They could have, for example, cancelled what was supposed to be the 17:58 and turned it into 18:10. Then not only would they be able to call that service ‘punctual’ by rule, but it would also look a lot better in the eyes of the passengers. What has stopped the company from doing this is anyone’s guess, but my suspicion is that the cancellation rate for this month is already on the verge of tipping over.

The railway company has been giving out compensation every month this year so far. I’ve already bagged two free daily tickets since April, and am probably set to receive another one this month. Admittedly I now have one fewer reason to grumble about the trains: a discount of 6.3% every month is pretty generous of them!

今晚下班,火車又大遲到了!

墨爾本火車脫班早已是家常便飯,可幸政府規定,服務不達標便得給持定期車票的乘客賠償一張日票,其實火車公司祇需保證每月運作起碼98%的班次而不少於92%的班次抵站晚點不超過六分鐘便可免此苦了,不過……

我本來想乘17:58那班車,再下一班是18:10,怎料行經同一月台(站台)的全部列車都有延誤,那班17:58的到了18:12才到達,比原定的下一班車還要晚。那班車之前和之後不知多少班次,都落得這個下場。

我心想,站在公司立場,一連這麼多班次誤點,肯定拖累這個月的準點率,為甚麼公司不策略性地取消一些班次,來換取好一點的準點率?例如把17:58那班取消後改頭換面當作18:10那班,不但該班次和往後的班次仍都可以符合「六分鐘即算準點」的要求,而且乘客看起來沒那麼礙眼,但公司沒出此下策,難道是這個月的取消率已岌岌可危需要保住?

這家火車公司由年初至今,沒有一個月不用給乘客補償,我自四月起也受惠兩次了,看來本月還會有,一次補償相等於為一張月票打6.3%折扣,總算可給我和一眾乘客消消氣吧。

Comments

Siu Heng said…
叫我做四週無薪工作... 我都同佢死過啦.

放四週無薪假我都可以接受...
C.M. said…
既然有得休息,無薪假都唔算過分勒。減薪仲慘,工作時間一樣,但工資仲少左。

只係一次過話放four weeks,就倉促左d啦。下次先話三個月內放一星期,再三個月睇下情況點咁員工都應該感覺舒服d既。
GK said…
C.M.:唔係呀,佢地係無薪工作,唔係放無薪假,好攞命ga!
C.M. said…
係喎,work for free喎!

嘩,係我都罷工!(純粹投訴點解有個咁無腦既CEO)

Popular posts from this blog

Newborn, new experiences (1) 新生兒,新體會(1)

The birth of our daughter at the end of September marks a new chapter and brings about new life experiences for me and my wife. 小女9月底出生,為我和太太揭開人生新一章,也帶來新的體驗。 Mum was admitted to a nearby public hospital for the birth. The maternity ward is a lifely and buzzling place, subdivided into many rooms occupied by up to 4 mums and their babies at a time. Visiting hours is from 08:00 to 20:00, and up to one person can visit at one time and two different people each day. These limitations are part of the hospital's covid policies when the rest of the society has moved on as if nothing had happened - apparently there used to be no limit to visitations before covid, so a dad could in fact accompany the mum and baby all night long. One long-lasting impression from the maternity ward was the symphony of baby cries in which all babies took their turns to join including mine. Calming down the baby was almost impossible in this ambience and was very tough on mum especially when she was battling her

不求甚解,可以嗎?

端午節在尖沙咀海傍的無人機燈光表演,事後廣受網民嘲笑俗氣、像長輩圖等,屈原「現身」在空中飄更讓我覺得是其於死忌顯靈,很是詭異。 我在臉書轉發了ReNews的報導,想不到有人會點讚,而且是一個多年沒見的外國人,我納悶她究竟喜歡什麼、知否「到底發生什麼事」,只可猜想是她從沒見過用無人機砌出漢字,欣賞此藝術吧。 我在港大工作時,有國內同事有次跟我路過英皇書院時,對我說他對那學校沒好感,因為他討厭楊受成。我聽了先是心中有點驚訝,但沒流露出來,並笑着解釋道:英皇是英國國皇的意思,英文叫King's College,是政府辦學,跟楊受成的英皇集團一點關係也沒有!那同事沒意會背後的殖民史,更與搞娛樂事業的公司穿鑿附會,不過不應嘲笑,我反而覺得其不把自己困於校園、留意附近社區之精神可嘉(很多港人一向覺得國內人來港後往往不踏出自己人的小圈子呢)。 文藝創作和社會/社區的形成,固然與背後的歷史和文化息息相關,但評析時又是否完全不可抽離背景呢? 近年對香港流行曲的評論(尤其對當紅的鏡仔),時常着重「咬字」,例如姜濤最新的《DUMMY》就獲多人稱讚咬字清晰聽得明歌詞。歌手追求發音清晰,固然對歌唱是有好處,但如以發音不清就批評歌曲又會不會太輕易抺殺了整個作品?世界音樂如此多元,不懂外語是否就要封閉自己不接觸其他地區的音樂?而就算我們這些外國人聽得懂外語歌詞,我們大概也不夠資格評論歌手咬字是否清晰標準吧。正如閱讀文字作品,讀者又會不會因為不明白其中幾個字的意思而認為作品不值一讀?又如果對作品的評語只是「用字淺顯易明」,除非是兒童書,不然作者也會啼笑皆非或覺得膚淺吧? 不求甚解,原意是要領會大意而不必着眼於字眼之意思,到今天則演變成不深入理解。了解相關背景,明白作品的細節,固然定品評和鑑賞甚有裨益,但現實中大家受時間和個人知識所限,往往只能對背景資料簡單了解、略知一二,只可看到事物較表面之處。然而,不完全理解創作背後的原意,也不一定妨礙受眾對其之欣賞和評價;不完全理解一地的歷史,也不全然妨礙人們對當地建築、規劃等表達讚賞或提出疑問。聽歌不要執着要求歌手字正腔圓,歌詞大意聽一兩遍一般都可明瞭大概,就算不想深究歌詞,旋律節奏等也可以是欣賞音樂的切入點。不過話說回來,無人機燈光表演,如果主辦者用心思考主題和舖排,再在字體設計下功夫,同時彰顯漢字的內涵和美學,豈非更妙?

正字正確

廣州最近掀起保衛廣東話運動,早前星期日明報副刊一篇 文章 ,已對此作了精譬分析,我也不必插嘴了。 不過我想談談另一個相連的問題,相信久不久也會困擾好些港人,就是怎樣才算「正確」、「正統」的書面語。 我們自少便被老師耳提面命,廣東話絕不可用於寫作(雖然現在大行其道,我在網上留言甚至偶而寫電郵都會用廣東話),粵語和港式詞彙應以書面語(以普通話為標準的用語)取代,於是把雪櫃寫成冰箱、櫃桶寫成抽屜,諸如此類,從小已習慣,我也沒異議。 但香港實在很多獨有的或跟國內有差別的詞彙,應用於主要給香港人看的場合當然沒問題,但國內或其他華人就可能覺得蹩腳甚至不一定明白。同樣國內的好些用詞,港人看到也會覺得有點不自然甚至礙眼。我寫網誌不時都會掙扎,究竟用國內的用詞好(我想一般來說應該是比較「正規」的,而且近幾年跟來自國內的人多了交往,或多或少都學到一點他們的用語),還是香港的說法好(始終不少讀者都是香港人,用上國內的詞語他們或許會覺得有點怪怪的),所以我盡可能兩者兼用,港式說法通常以括號並列,但我有時祇會用國內的用詞,也有時祇用香港的說法,可見我也往往拿不定主意。 問題是應該怎樣劃界線,區別「正確」和「不正確」的書面用語呢?我們應該遵從甚麼的「標準」?比方說在香港,學生寫了一句「我的志願是太空人」,公認是沒有問題的,老師一般也不會勉強學生寫「我的志願是航天員」,好了,這樣便是承認了香港和國內的用語確有區別,但既然如此,為甚麼把該句寫成「我嘅志願係太空人」時,老師便一定不會容許?又或者為甚麼寫作時硬要把雪櫃寫成冰箱、櫃桶寫成抽屜?這道界線是誰定的,定立時又有甚麼理據?香港可不像很多國家般,有一個高高在上的法定語文機構(例如法國的Académie française),又或有權威性的詞典(例如英國的牛津字典,和國內的辭海),對語文作出一定規範,難免令人寫作時感到無所適從,甚麼香港和粵語詞彙可以用於書面、哪些不可。 用語的取向,也涉及文化取態的問題,我像一般港人一樣也認同寫作時要用書面語,盡量跟隨普通話的「標準」,但不會全盤用國內的詞彙和行文,一來不習慣,二來不免總有種維護本土文化的潛意識,特別是香港和國內社會制度上和文化上始終有點隔閡,這種矛盾不一定輕易化解。 究竟甚麼才算是「標準」、「正確」的書面中文,我想大概沒有「標準答案」,往往靠個人的見識和學養才可作出定奪,但隨著香港跟國內交往越來越