2006年3月15日

迫宮

你睇曾蔭權宣佈田二少留任個樣,幾happy。曾大爺又一次嘗試轉移視綫,將本來影響公營機構信譽、管理,以及自己仕途機會的風波,轉移去叫大家關注事件期間的「紀律問題」,班記者花幾日去追九鐵內部地震,又繼續有新聞做。

試想九鐵管理層班人,呢幾日邊個會有心機做野。盡快處理這些糾紛先係佢地呢幾日既重要任務,都無話係咪擅離職守既。曾特首你算把啦。

究竟公營機構員工是否不能「迫宮」﹖又是否如班議員同分析員所說,不好好懲戒這些「迫宮文化」,長此下去會動搖公營機構的穩定,影響巿民福址﹖

事實上政府挑選公營機構或什麼諮詢會的主席,來來去去均是同一班人,田二少、李業廣、顧爾言、陳智思等,都是政府御用人員,巿民在人選上其實沒有發言權。假設,這些「優才」其實不甚了了,公營機構員工在「打工仔」啞子吃黃蓮的情況又不能迫什麼宮,究竟巿民 / 公營機構員工有什麼渠道反映意見﹖冬冬都話九鐵內部士氣低啦。

就算好似壹仔今期話黎文熹「奸招」都好,佢出手前無同政府或九鐵員工打招呼,完全係「政治不正確」也好,又假設田二少真的管理不善、缺乏與員工構通,員工出聲又有什麼問題﹖工作間成日講政治、講關係、講利益,有時,我不太願意長大,面對參與這些遊戲。

唔被人「迫宮」(呢個詞語真係愈講愈核突),政府都係廢事多個燙手山芋。班議員梗係鋤住九鐵唔放。明報呢兩日俾我佢做緊打手的感覺,將視綫轉移至黎文熹句「對事不對人」係咪講大話到。田二少來一招欲擒先縱,星期日一句「佢地都唔明解我d西方文化」,苦口婆心話自己都係想提高問責性同九鐵的透明度,無人會反對,無野好講。高手過招,細路女學野呀。睡覺去。

9 則留言:

chanchan 說...

「紀律問題」今日算帳啦! 九鐵員工真係唔易做,市民0趙,議員又0趙,最難頂可能真係田二少事無大小日日0趙......咁唯有努力做好D啦.

Nelson 說...

看來劉細良的君王術開始發揮功力,可惜黎文熹未竟全功之後,竟親手逼害撑場經理,衰收尾也...

匿名 說...

我覺得班九鐵管理層做得太揚,以為一出招就可以推倒二少,真係相當naive!

最有趣的是果個黎先生,整個大頭佛出黎,最後仲迫埋自己落火坑,他自己一定始料不及。

金子

Kyushu 說...

主席總裁都不是善男信女, 教Kyushu 驚訝的是輿論和大眾意見普遍傾向支持 Michael, 未找到箇中玄機。

Martin Oei 說...

董建華時代餘毒:憎恨公營機構員工之過。

jim 說...

對於市民有利就是好,田少雖奸,但能夠迫出九鐵醜態畢露,現在整走兩件,未嘗不是好事。

匿名 說...

大眾不被鼓動全因兵變團隊提出聲討田少的論據實在太弱雞了。

1)田少過份賣力九鐵員工受不了,所以要把他拉下馬(o甘都得!)

2)月票計劃會令九鐵蝕本。(但係巿民得益bor)

3)每次出事沒有站在九鐵立場說話。(巿民就係驚你九鐵隱瞞事實丫。)

班九鐵高層個個年薪幾百粒,唔知點解要質人的時候就豬兜得o甘厲害,套田少的話,他們實在真係一班老實人。

金子

chloris 說...

同意一點

田二少係政府"熱爆"主席人選
於是乎
不論是 教育味gei 語常會 同公營機構 九鐵
佢都係用佢gei 商業機構立場來俾意見

無話 對錯 但係會好有外行人管內行人gei 味道loR
同埋政府唔好咁高調插手得唔得呢?

查實政府有無想過 點解來來去去得幾位人兄做主席ga?

五師兄 說...

I fear that people in Hong Kong are getting used to seeking the stable life. That’s very true that the management team has crossed the line. But if you look at the reaction of the public, it is quite scary that most of the people supports 田二少, and not the two Mr. Lai. I am not saying that they are good. They of course have their problems. I am just saying that it is so 一面倒.

As an ex-Management, I could only say that politically the Government (and Mr. 田) did the job much beautifully and wisely than Mr. Lai, but at the same time it makes an example to other that voicing out problems is prohibited in an organization. We have to notice very clearly that the reason why the two Mr. Lai have to step down / got fired was not because that they walked away from their post (what if they have their monthly meeting? The whole management team would also walked away from their post! ) (And after all they are all in the KCRC building anyway!), but because they oppose the opinion of the top and the government. If during that day they all present and support Mr. 田 and the Government instead, I don’t think they would have the same level of treatment.