政府法定語文主任協會 Government Official Languages Officers Association

28 December, 2001

Mr. Joseph W. P. WONG, GBS, JP,
Secretary for the Civil Service,
Civil Service Bureau,
West Wing, Central Government Offices,
11 Ice House Street, Central,
Hong Kong

Dear Sir,

        I refer to the memo of 11 December 2001 issued by the Commissioner for Official Languages (COL) to all members of the CLO grade (Ref. (29) in OLA CR 10/6 II).

        We strongly protest against the decision to cease payment of the dialect allowance to CLOs with effect from 1 February 2002. Our grounds are set out as follows:

1. The three-month consultation on job-related allowances (JRAs) for civil servants has just commenced and a six-month moratorium is recommended by the Standing Commission on Civil Service Salaries and Conditions of Service (the Standing Commission) to allow time for heads of departments (HoDs) to review the JRA payments under their jurisdiction. As you have emphasized time and again that the established mechanism should be adhered to and respected, no decision to alter the payment of JRAs should be made before the expiry of the consultation period and before a detailed review of the dialect allowance is conducted during the moratorium.
   
2. The CLO grade had never been consulted before the decision was made. According to the report of the Public Accounts Committee on Audit Report No. 33, the Deputy Secretary for the Civil Service has promised that the staff side would be consulted regarding the rationalization of payment of the dialect allowance. The Standing Commission also emphasized in Report No. 38 that HoDs should involve staff in the process of reviewing JRA payments. However, neither our grade nor this Association, which is the official trade union of the CLO grade, has been formally consulted on the issue.
   
3. It is grossly unfair to single out the CLO grade for the cessation of payment of the dialect allowance. According to CSR 705, the dialect allowance is payable to officers in the grades of Chinese Language Officers, Police Interpreters and Court Interpreters. For the sake of parity, the three grades should be treated in the same manner. As a decision has yet to be taken regarding the other two grades, we feel aggrieved at the unequal treatment.
   
4. It is unrealistic at the moment to expect the CLO grade to possess a standard in Putonghua that is higher than the rest of the civil service. Only a year or so ago, Mr. Lee Lap-sun, the then COL, announced that all CLOs were expected to attain an intermediate level in Putonghua in two to three years. Later, Mrs. Agnes Allcock, the incumbent COL, said in August this year that she hoped that all CLOs would be able to communicate in Putonghua in 6 months. And now, we are expected to possess a standard in Putonghua that is higher than the rest of the civil service! We agree that it is our long-term goal to be more proficient in Putonghua than other civil servants and we have been working hard toward that goal. This, however, takes time. Before we have attained the high standard expected of us and required for Putonghua interpretation, the mere expectation of individual civil servants should not become an excuse for the cessation of payment of the dialect allowance to our grade.

        As dedicated and responsible civil servants, we understand very well the need to use public funds in a cost-effective way. We are not opposed to the review of JRAs. We are just appalled at the flagrant disregard of the existing consultation mechanism as manifested in the unilateral cessation of payment of the dialect allowance to our grade. We strongly urge you to postpone a decision until the completion of the service-wide review on JRA payments and demand equal treatment for the three grades eligible for the dialect allowance.

Yours sincerely,

　

(TIN Kai-yin)

Chairman, GCLOA

c.c. Commissioner for Official Languages