Friday, November 6, 2009

會計師公會偏幫僱主說話? (作者: Bittermelon)




最近香港會計師公會在10月份的學生通訊中轉載了一篇文章,內容主要是教導準會計師在經濟衰退及當前不穩定的環境中如何自處。文章發表了以後,在業內及網上討論區激發了很大的反響,加上有本地報張以「會計師公會苛刻文章捱轟 被指教做奴隸 偏幫僱主說話」為題報道了出來,事件成為近期業界的一大熱話。




平心而論,該文章可讀性頗高,有點像野外求生指南之類,造句簡短而且用字淺白易明,就算不是好評如潮,至少也令一眾準會計師有些啟發。特別是未經過97金融風暴或者03年沙士一役的那一批新人,這一篇文章可以說得上是指路明燈。相信主事人未有考慮周全吧,看過之後發覺文章的用詞較為尖酸刻薄,大有隔岸觀火的味道,不易引起讀者共鳴之餘,反而會令人產生反感。




況且這時正值僱主及僱員之間的敏感時期,各大中小型會計師行去年才推出無薪假措施,一眾核數從業員早已怨聲載道。幾個月前同一家報章就已經報道過,有一位四大會計師行的核數員被勸退,但因早前被公司要求放無薪假放多了,最後一期的工資不單全被扣清,該員工還需要向公司補回數千元才可以順利離職。除了無薪假外,行內幾家大型會計師行剛又進行了薪酬檢討,其結果又令眾人失望,加上公會早以被標籤,說是為了大型會計師行服務,所以公會再一次被人批評是偏幫僱主。




年輕會員表不滿




公會是否偏幫僱主說話呢?例如文章教人「學會在緊絀的預算下完成任務」、「別期望薪酬增加──你有份工已經夠運」、「公司裁員,如能幸免,你應該感到一種『生存者的內疚』,但別想太多,因為你很可能是下一個」、「要有工作量增加、回報減少的準備」、「記住所有被炒的同事,他們曾在漫長工時中幫過你」、「應該認同無薪假期,因為此制度能讓每個人留低,你又可以乘機休息一下」,每一項都像是針對會計及核數從業員當前的問題,但卻呼籲準會計師應該順應僱主的政策,背後的意思像是勸人認命。




公會被指為僱主說話,報章記者向公會查詢但未有正式的回應,不過有關的負責人卻以個人身份回覆,其內容就露了一點點端倪。根據報道,公會的副傳訊總監說:「純粹我個人觀點來講,呢篇文章只係想調校一下學生嘅心理期望,等佢哋對行業唔會有太大要求。」大家不禁會問,為什麼公會希望被「調校」的是學生而不是僱主的期望呢?雖然學生未算是正式會員,但也是公會未來的米飯班主,公會未有考慮會員的感受,卻只從僱主的角度去看事情,相信這就是很多會員,特別是較年輕的一群,對公會不滿的最大原因。




該文章雖然只是引述僱主、心理學家、會計師及人力資源管理人的建議,但如果用詞客氣一點、語氣貼近民情一點,相信文章真正會能夠幫助準會計師的職業和個人發展。個人認為公會的出發點是好的,除了教人做好心理準備去迎接苦日子外,文章也提出一些很好的建議,例如要注意新的機遇,為轉投其他會計專業範疇以及在大陸和海外工作做好準備。但只是因為用語不當,現在畫虎不成反類犬,在這次事件中,希望公會能汲取教訓,好好地正視一下與會員之間在溝通上存在的問題。




公會形象受損




在討論區上已經有人戲謔,公會應更改名稱為「Hong Kong Institute of Cheap & Poor Accountants」。公會每年花費不少用於推廣上,根據公會年報, 07年傳訊和公共關係的開支約是823萬元,而2008年的相關開支則是473萬元,雖然這次事件未必對公會的形象造成負面影響,但如果公會還是不肯正視問題的話,在未來不難看到,一篇文章或者一句說話可能足以令費用上百萬的推廣活動完全泡湯。錢白白花掉了可以再賺過(雖然身為會員的我不會甘心情願),但如果公會和會員之間的關係出現嫌隙而又不及時去修補,問題只會愈來愈深,最後損失的不但是公會或者會員,而是整個會計專業。




年青會計師協會會長馬振峰按:「Bittermelon所寫的,正是我們最近收到年青會計師們的部分想法。本會除了作為一個平台,讓他們發聲之外,亦有跟進行動。身兼公會理事的本會會員龔耀輝,已向公會行政總裁查問文章的背後動機。下星期五,本會將與美聯集團,聯合舉辦一個樓市講座,研究年青會計師如何上車入市。我們亦已邀請行政總裁參加,了解年青會計師的民間疾苦。11月13日,七時正,環球大廈2505室,報名電郵events@hkyaa.org,到時見。」

8 comments:

PM said...

"學會在緊絀的預算下完成任務" - in HKICPA's eye, "accounting professionals" is equivalent to "book-keeper".

As a member of HKICPA, I wish the Institute stops further marketing activities to promote the so-called "professionalism" of accounting - because even HKICPA itself did not believe so.

I agree with you that HKICPA did not respect its young members. And it's very weird because we, in substance, are the client of HKICPA- we do settle our membership fee with them on time.

Based on their act in the previous years (remember their hip-hop show?!), I have no expectation from them. Maybe we should have an option to claim our membership fee as a "donation to charity" instead of "professional membership fee" on our IRD form.

Horace Ma said...

Dear PM,

Would you be interested to join our seminar next Friday? We are inviting Winnie Cheung, CE of HKICPA to join as well such that you may want to share your view with her at the spot.

Look forward to seeing you there.

Horace
President, YAA

Anonymous said...

算數啦,無用架!公會根本係偏幫僱主利益。公會大部份幹事都係僱主!

bittermelon said...

Hi PM,
I agree with you that HKICPA does not respect its young members especially student members. I saw a real case at HKICPA office before.

Hi Anonymous:
既然是這樣,我們就需要運用手上的一票,選一些能真正代表我們的入進入 council 了.

JW said...

I agree with PM's view.

I am also very disappointed on HKICPA. Please refer the following press release (by HKICPA).

http://www.hkicpa.org.hk/file/media/section8_communications/media_centre/pdf-pr/2009/pr-20091022e.pdf

I did not know the full case. Maybe HKICPA can provide more information about the case and the "judgement" concluded.

(Extracted from the press release by HKICPA)

Mr. Y and Ms H were previously employed as members of the audit staff of a firm of
certified public accountants. The firm discovered that they had falsified, or had caused
to be falsified, certain audit working papers during an audit they conducted, and referred
the matter to the Hong Kong Institute of CPAs for action.

Question: NOT understand --> The boss/firm owner - No responsibilty or liability in this case? Didn't review the working paper and then sign the audit report (by boss/firm owner)?

bittermelon said...

Hi JW:
你這個case值得研究,我都不清楚事件,但單看新聞稿,兩位被指違反專業規定的CPA是由他們的CPA firm舉報的,如果是這樣,即是說該CPA firm的確有review w/p,所以為什麼他們不需要負責,你認為呢?

JW said...

Hi, Bittermelon

I think HKICPA should disclose more facts/information on this case.

Anonymous said...

If I have other CPA qualification (such as CPA Aust, ACCA), I will not join the HKICPA. In the commercial field, holding other CPA qualificiations are mostly recognised by the employers.

If you do not plan to be an auditor (CPA Practising), so holding other CPA qualifications are the same.

I am very disappointed on HKICPA - 偏幫僱主利益.