[問卦] 大家支持要公務員減薪的制度嗎?消失
現今的公務員制度 只有加薪沒有減薪
那麼 如果設計一套績效評估制度
例如平衡計分卡等制度 或是用GDP或其他績效指標來評比
不合格的部門就全體減薪,具體的承辦人員加重減薪
負責的公務員主管帶頭要減薪
然後表現好的在特別加薪加獎金,專案獎勵
這樣建立一個賞罰分明的制度
讓績效指標數據不好的人減薪
或是排名最後10%的人,強制減薪10%
或是經濟成長數據不好的時候 強制減薪讓大家共體時艱
這樣會不會又節省政府人事成本,又增加政府效能呢?設計一套能減薪的制度是好的嗎?
大家怎麼看?
--
※ 發信站: 批踢踢實業坊(ptt.cc), 來自: 1.167.132.125
※ 文章網址: https://www.ptt.cc/bbs/Gossiping/M.1484909392.A.C92.html
→
01/20 18:50, , 1F
01/20 18:50, 1F
→
01/20 18:50, , 2F
01/20 18:50, 2F
→
01/20 18:50, , 3F
01/20 18:50, 3F
→
01/20 18:50, , 4F
01/20 18:50, 4F
→
01/20 18:50, , 5F
01/20 18:50, 5F
推
01/20 18:50, , 6F
01/20 18:50, 6F
推
01/20 18:51, , 7F
01/20 18:51, 7F
噓
01/20 18:51, , 8F
01/20 18:51, 8F
→
01/20 18:51, , 9F
01/20 18:51, 9F
推
01/20 18:51, , 10F
01/20 18:51, 10F
→
01/20 18:51, , 11F
01/20 18:51, 11F
推
01/20 18:52, , 12F
01/20 18:52, 12F
噓
01/20 18:52, , 13F
01/20 18:52, 13F
推
01/20 18:53, , 14F
01/20 18:53, 14F
→
01/20 18:54, , 15F
01/20 18:54, 15F
推
01/20 18:55, , 16F
01/20 18:55, 16F
推
01/20 18:55, , 17F
01/20 18:55, 17F
噓
01/20 18:56, , 18F
01/20 18:56, 18F
→
01/20 18:56, , 19F
01/20 18:56, 19F
推
01/20 18:56, , 20F
01/20 18:56, 20F
當然不是只有主管打分數,意思是建立一套客觀的績效評估制度
被評鑑為不良者就減薪 就像現在大學也要評鑑一樣,評鑑不通過就減少預算
→
01/20 18:57, , 21F
01/20 18:57, 21F
噓
01/20 18:58, , 22F
01/20 18:58, 22F
※ 編輯: chungrew (140.119.157.180), 01/20/2017 19:02:27
噓
01/20 18:59, , 23F
01/20 18:59, 23F
噓
01/20 18:59, , 24F
01/20 18:59, 24F
→
01/20 18:59, , 25F
01/20 18:59, 25F
推
01/20 19:00, , 26F
01/20 19:00, 26F
推
01/20 19:01, , 27F
01/20 19:01, 27F
→
01/20 19:01, , 28F
01/20 19:01, 28F
→
01/20 19:02, , 29F
01/20 19:02, 29F
噓
01/20 19:02, , 30F
01/20 19:02, 30F
→
01/20 19:03, , 31F
01/20 19:03, 31F
推
01/20 19:03, , 32F
01/20 19:03, 32F
→
01/20 19:04, , 33F
01/20 19:04, 33F
→
01/20 19:04, , 34F
01/20 19:04, 34F
推
01/20 19:05, , 35F
01/20 19:05, 35F
噓
01/20 19:05, , 36F
01/20 19:05, 36F
→
01/20 19:07, , 37F
01/20 19:07, 37F
推
01/20 19:08, , 38F
01/20 19:08, 38F
→
01/20 19:08, , 39F
01/20 19:08, 39F
噓
01/20 19:09, , 40F
01/20 19:09, 40F
→
01/20 19:09, , 41F
01/20 19:09, 41F
推
01/20 19:09, , 42F
01/20 19:09, 42F
→
01/20 19:10, , 43F
01/20 19:10, 43F
推
01/20 19:10, , 44F
01/20 19:10, 44F
推
01/20 19:11, , 45F
01/20 19:11, 45F
→
01/20 19:11, , 46F
01/20 19:11, 46F
→
01/20 19:12, , 47F
01/20 19:12, 47F
→
01/20 19:12, , 48F
01/20 19:12, 48F
噓
01/20 19:12, , 49F
01/20 19:12, 49F
→
01/20 19:12, , 50F
01/20 19:12, 50F
→
01/20 19:13, , 51F
01/20 19:13, 51F
推
01/20 19:16, , 52F
01/20 19:16, 52F
→
01/20 19:16, , 53F
01/20 19:16, 53F
→
01/20 19:18, , 54F
01/20 19:18, 54F
→
01/20 19:19, , 55F
01/20 19:19, 55F
噓
01/20 19:21, , 56F
01/20 19:21, 56F
→
01/20 19:22, , 57F
01/20 19:22, 57F
推
01/20 19:24, , 58F
01/20 19:24, 58F
推
01/20 19:25, , 59F
01/20 19:25, 59F
推
01/20 19:26, , 60F
01/20 19:26, 60F
→
01/20 19:30, , 61F
01/20 19:30, 61F
→
01/20 19:34, , 62F
01/20 19:34, 62F
推
01/20 19:35, , 63F
01/20 19:35, 63F
→
01/20 19:36, , 64F
01/20 19:36, 64F
→
01/20 19:38, , 65F
01/20 19:38, 65F
→
01/20 19:38, , 66F
01/20 19:38, 66F
噓
01/20 19:47, , 67F
01/20 19:47, 67F
→
01/20 20:19, , 68F
01/20 20:19, 68F
推
01/20 20:44, , 69F
01/20 20:44, 69F
討論串 (同標題文章)
完整討論串 (本文為第 1 之 3 篇):