[重貼]五一勞動節的自由工作者 (freelancer)宣言

廣告

廣告

按﹕自由工作者宣言一出,反應熱烈,所謂唔好比佢停,現在連同回應重貼一次,歡迎各位繼續加入,長期關注。(小西)

香港已成為下流社會(downward mobility society),它的特徵是:管理階層自我膨脹,低層員工工作壓力越來越大,工資被壓低;為了減低行政成本,縮減勞工保障(如有薪假期、醫療保障、工積金等),大量工作被外判,社會上出現了大量的自由工作者。

過去十年,自由工作者的人數大增,但其待遇卻每況愈下,這是因為:

1.很多工種, 如翻譯、編輯、電腦程式等,透過一些中介公司,移到國內;

2.很多機構為了縮減開支,壓榨自由工作者,舉例說,報章的稿費就十年不變;

3.很多本來應該付費的工作,以義工的方式來取代;這實際上是雙重的剝削,
既剝削了義工的熱誠,亦使大量自由工作者的工作被貶值,譬如說,很多大學願意花好幾萬在外地請一些客座講者來講幾個小時的課,可是,大學邀請本地客席講者卻不付酬勞,因為大學沒有這筆預算;

4.自由工作者之間缺乏協調,造成惡性的競爭,把工作的價格拉底。

我們呼籲:

1.政府公營部門,如大學、港台等機構,應檢討目前的運作,制定預算給自由工作者,停止以義工的方式進行剝削;

2.社會活躍份子、公共知識份子和同學在從事義務勞動前,不要純粹以一腔熱誠作為考慮,先思考這個機構是否真的沒有資源去聘請職員或給予報酬,若對方有資源,請要求洽當合理的酬勞;記著,你的熱誠可能搶去了別人的生計;

3.自由工作者要有尊嚴,若面對很不合理的待遇,不要純綷以「東家唔打打西家」的心態,而要公開一些機構的劣行;

4.不同工種的自由工作者,應以分享工作 (job sharing)的態度,互相協調,制定最低工資,不要造成惡性競爭;

5.有穩定工作的同僚,請以將心比己的態度去制定外判工作的條件。

自由工作者網絡

加入網絡: http://groups.google.com/group/free-alliance

聯絡人
梁寶山 ([email protected], 97803674)
鄭威鵬 ([email protected], 90883900)

貼紙

code﹕

<a href="http://www.inmediahk.net/public/article?item_id=109827&group_id=16">
<img src="http://static.flickr.com/46/140348866_90a7baeef5.jpg"/>
</a>

照片來源﹕jetalone

回應 百分百贊成

這是一個給無窮的講座、論壇和顧問及評審工作拖垮的身軀的由衷感受

-- 梁文道 於 May 01, 2006 01:22 AM

(按此看回應全文)

這個應被批判嗎?

"1.很多工種, 如翻譯、編輯、電腦程式等,透過一些中介公司,移到國內;"

我們現在都可能享受著國內因廉價成本而便宜的產品。現在的競爭就是和全世界競爭,在質量和價錢上競爭。我覺得不能因為資方利用低成本的方法影響了我們的生計而作出控訴。

-- 放浪軍 於 May 01, 2006 01:25 AM

(按此看回應全文)

被拖欠薪水

現在我已經找到全職工作了,但對於本人曾於去年嘗過被廣告公司拖欠了半年薪水的經歷,那段差點就要將事件轉介至小額錢債的日子仍然印象深刻、歷歷在目。自由真的需要如此的犧牲嗎?

-- 瘋腿 於 May 01, 2006 02:06 AM

(按此看回應全文)

今日出街的港台「公民社會」錄音

港台錄音一:食西北風

﹝可惜呀,錄音時想不到和五一的聯繫,如果唔係就正啦!﹞

噚日有個九十年代中在中大藝術系畢業、在香港文化界薄有名聲的朋友發了一個email來,內容如下:

「手頭的research又出唔到糧……今日銀行只有133元。前幾天發窮惡,想起一些較實際的辦法。就是開列一張明碼實價的價目表,以後有人找你做job,就電郵份價目表過去。我覺得大家都咁做既話,d人以後至會明寫字同「創意」係要錢既!」

價目表其中幾項分別是:新聞稿及雜文一字八毫;專題訪問稿一字一元連訪問;演講及主持每次一千蚊起;策劃活動小型千五、中型二千五、大型五千。我唔知聽眾覺得貴唔貴?但那些傳媒編輯呀講座主辦機構呀就肯定覺得貴。點解?因為佢地真的以為寫字同創意唔使錢架。

你問香港大部分文化工作者,每個人都有一段剝削血淚史。以我為例,呢一兩年曾經替大學、公信第一的報紙、新興青年智囊組織、大型書店講講座,每次都預備成個禮拜睇一大堆書加上腎上腺上升。但每次都係一個仙都冇,最多係送幾本你唔要的書、或者一個放手機的紀念座,加埋兩句多謝。寫稿係有錢,但少都得人驚,替某大報寫星期日副刊三千字連相只得八百蚊。一個月寫到盡都係得五六千蚊,點生活?

所以大家唔好再以為香港好尊重知識產權,香港人只係欺善怕惡,大企業出律師信告人就講尊重,一講到我們這些知識個體戶自由身工作者,大家就會話:佢地食理想呀嘛,係要付代價,係唔會有職業保障架啦。

講公民社會,一定要先講對知識人文化人的尊重。不如就由這間電台做起。我用了六個工作小時寫這五篇隨筆,由西貢的屋企山長水遠黎錄音。邀請我來的節目主持和幫我錄音的技術員都有糧出,唯獨係我出完時間力氣之後居然一個仙都冇要返屋企吃西北風。

咁o既現況,係咪有需要改變呢?

-- 朱凱迪 於 May 01, 2006 08:35 AM

(按此看回應全文)

這個應被批判嗎? - Of course!!!

"1.很多工種, 如翻譯、編輯、電腦程式等,透過一些中介公司,移到國內;" It is very bad. Bad for both HK and Mainland China.

'我們現在都可能享受著國內因廉價成本而便宜的產品。現在的競爭就是和全世界競爭,在質量和價錢上競爭。'
But this kind of 'competition' comes from the abusement of the labour,should we be happy to see it? I am against it, at least. I am already trying my best not to buy things which are 'made in China'. Also, you may not have noticed it, but the quality of many products and services have decreased in fact. Like the 'funny' translations, don't tell me that you haven't seen them at all!!! (E.g.: 'Pork oil' instead of 'lard' was seen on a package of cup noodles (famous brand!!!), but then it was corrected after a few months. Too bad I haven't kept that 'cup' (but really difficult, you know......)

'我覺得不能因為資方利用低成本的方法影響了我們的生計而作出控訴。' Why not? They are using cruel ways to do so, by the way (Please refer to the above point.).

-- Frostig 於 May 01, 2006 10:21 AM

(按此看回應全文)

中介公司

其實不是控制成本的問題, 很多公司在找中介的時候是以香港的市價, 翻譯是1蚊1字的價錢給的, 但中介公司外發到國內的時候, 卻以國內的價錢1蚊10字的價錢發出去.

宣言不是想批評國內的同工, 而是想說明中間剝削的問題, 就如外傭, 當我們反對外傭中介公司的剝削, 並不等於反對外傭, 而對中介的批評本身, 對兩地的同工, 長遠來說都是有利的.

-- 阿藹 於 May 01, 2006 10:34 AM

(按此看回應全文)

本地中介機構也有這種"格食格"的情況

根據我的經驗,本地中介機構也有這種"格食格"的情況。打個比喻,原本預算中外判工a的人工有$1000(合理的價),但最後判工a只有$600落袋。為什麼呢?因為$1000只是賬目上的數字,嗰$400是用來補那個中介機構本身原來的恆常性開支的。

-- 小西 於 May 01, 2006 10:56 AM

(按此看回應全文)

歡迎各自由工作者加入本欄

另外,本欄"自由工,自由風"歡迎各自由工作者加入。過去十年,自由工作者(freelancer)的人數大增,但他/她們的待遇卻每況愈下,情況從未被有系統的正視。本欄希望主要為本自由工作者提供一個平台,讓他/她們交流、凝聚,甚至作出集體抗爭。

起來!不願做奴隸的自由工作者!!

-- 小西 於 May 01, 2006 11:03 AM

(按此看回應全文)

已經有十二人加入 egroup 了

可以在裡面商討大計

-- 阿藹 於 May 01, 2006 10:05 PM

(按此看回應全文)

明白, 中介公司利用價格差異謀暴利

但是你們能否組成一些中介組織?

Frostig, 你有點extreme喎! 一樣商品或服務除了價格外, 品質也很重要, 買家都是在價格和品質中找個平衡點. 那個用"Pork Oil"的杯麵商當然是做了水魚啦!

-- 放浪軍 於 May 01, 2006 10:08 PM

(按此看回應全文)

volunteers的不正確用法

這個不只是香港的現象, 而是華人地區的現象。早前post了台灣文字工作者許斐莉的網誌, 正是這樣的哭訴.

http://www.inmediahk.net/public/article?item_id=104017&group_id=59

本人任職的某團體, 也有如此荒謬的行徑。外判的翻譯還好, 算是合理價錢; 至於文字創作, 對不起, 嚴例規定一是staff寫,一是volunteers寫, 有償文字工作一律禁止。okay, staff寫, 冇問題, 寫個死就寫到死。問題是,volunteers不是用來取代staff的, 不是因為staff的工作量太多做不來而要由volunteers代勞的; 而且, 很抱歉,volunteers的良莠不齊有時令staff的工作量太大, 倒頭來不如自己寫。最後和阿頂開火, 換來的就是老頂的logic,佢地真係好似你地咁講, 以為創意同文章是唔洗錢的。

我也做過freelancer, 也出席過兩岸三地的座談會,活動,分享會,發表文章, 有償的五隻手指數得清。洛陽紙貴已成過去, 這是華人的悲哀乎?

-- learnedfriend 於 May 01, 2006 10:10 PM

(按此看回應全文)

Not Extreme ga!!!

It was a REALLY very famous brand!
A Japanese brand with factory in HK Ar!!! When I bought it, didn't even notice that it wasn't made in HK Ga! If I had known that it was made in China, I might not have bought it Tim-Ar!!!

It was just a typical example! I just
don't think that things can be so good, both cheap and with high
quality...... So, there must be sth fishy. I just told you why I felt
that it was appropriate to protest against such a 'move' to China Jel!

-- Frostig 於 May 01, 2006 11:48 PM

(按此看回應全文)

Made in China

Sorry Frostig, I just mean I find
this, "I am already trying my best not to buy things which are 'made in China'.", extreme. I am not meaning you are exaggerating the facts.

Products made other than in China may not be much better than those in mainland.

-- 放浪軍 於 May 02, 2006 12:07 AM

(按此看回應全文)

真的這麼簡單嗎?

"我們現在都可能享受著國內因廉價成本而便宜的產品"

如果就是這麼簡單, 為什麼中國貨出口到外國要有配額限制?
為什麼他們不全數接收, 全國享受便直產品?
你有想過這樣他們的國民吃什麼?

不知道閣下是從事哪個行業? 可能工種移到國內對你暫時沒有影響, 但你知道嗎? 當年香港的工業很發達, 但隨著工廠北移,
影響到多少人的生計? 由當年低技術工種, 到現在一些較高技術, 較專業的工種都慢慢北移, 就為了現在的價廉物美,
將來香港真的會很快被邊沿化

-- 四郎 於 May 02, 2006 04:29 AM

(按此看回應全文)

笑話幾則 之 Freelance Performer苦

0係香港做一個藝術工作者真係好難, 點解...

1.某大團搵freelance, 排練連演出共兩個半月$8000
當你每日車錢加兩餐飯錢共100一日, 兩個半月之後你可以賺倒幾錢?

2. 某團體攪musical去新加波,日本等地巡回演出, 只係搵一D冇受過正式訓練0既人演出, 車馬費唔知夠車定夠馬?

3. 某油公司有新product推出要找performer, 油站方面0既中國藉負責人問我地負責人, 點解D performer唔係外國人....

4. 某大劇團話比機會fresh grad, $6000排連show三個月, 其實因為搵唔倒人做, 咁提攜下D新人囉

5. 某舞團導師薪金10年冇加過, 一加就加0左2%,
如果我月薪有$100000我可以加倒$2000, 但係我月薪只有$17XX

6. 某大學danso學生跳演唱會$500一場, 冇rehearsal fee,
你要同佢掙, 收幾錢好呢?

-- 四郎 於 May 02, 2006 05:22 AM

(按此看回應全文)

NOT ONLY a Matter of Quality

As stated, the working conditions of the factory workers are also my considerations. The quality may not be much better, but if I know that the workers are treated better, I would prefer that even if the price is slightly higher. Or, if the quality is much higher (like clothes produced in HK), a much higher price is sometimes accepted.

How can you help the bosses suppress and practically kill the workers? (Given that once you know the harsh situation.)

I remember there was an article talking about garments made in China. Who can find for me so we can link this discussion to another dimension? Thanks in advance!

-- Frostig 於 May 02, 2006 05:37 AM

(按此看回應全文)

香港如何能變成創意城市?

對待搞藝術, 文字和科技 freelance 的待遇如此 !

-- 阿藹 於 May 02, 2006 09:12 AM

(按此看回應全文)

The Curse of Pascal

Let me say at the outset that I endorse raising demands for just and dignified work in society. The little prattle that follows does not dispute the said general stance.But it does invite the reader to reconsider the moral predicament a member of a modern society might face, when he or she proposes that we stop doing something on the ground that that something tends to perpetuate some social ill.

The predicament is this. The proposal, in itself, seems to make perfect sense. For if our action is shown to be complicit in perpetuating a social ill, our decision to act or not must, on reflection, stand in a causal relationship to the said ill. We are accountable - if causality implies accountability - for the presence of the ill, and to those who do suffer therefrom. The argument is straighforward; the proposal, intuitive.

But if we take the argument seriously, and examine our social life in all its subtle connections, we must also realize that we stand almost invariably in a causal relationship to some social ill. Suppose someone studies abroad. He must fly to the country where the institution of study resides. The plane consumes certain kind of oil necessarily. But oil, in the present world, comes largely from countries where oil proceeds benefit mainly the powers that be. By taking the plane, the student contributes in this small way to the welfare of some exploiter. So, on reflection, he might opt for not studying abroad at all.

But now, suppose he really gives up the chance of studying abroad.He contributes thereby, and also in a small way, to the drop in demand for the airline which he otherwise would have chosen. In this small way, he might increase the airline's price (burdening therefore other students) or reducing its number of job openings (affecting then some other workers). It is not clear how much he would help the world by not flying. But it is not clear either if he flies.

One might object that these are only small ways, which the student,as well as we the observers, could well ignore. But to invoke a quantity argument certainly betrays the original proposal. For the spirit of that proposal is not that we are critically a cause of some social ill, that, absent our action, the ill would have been drastically reduced,or even eliminated; but that we are such a cause simply. It is the presence of that causal relationship, rather than the significance of it, that justifies the proposal. Otherwise, one can always counter that since he is only a small potato in this large iron cage, his acting or not does not matter.

Clearly we are at a double-bind. On the one hand, we want to feel that by stop acting in a certain way we can stop contributing to some social ill; on the other hand, the same logic must needs prohibit almost all our social undertaking - nay, it must completely reject our ground to exist at all. For unless we totally remove ourselves from our current dwelling, the way a modern society supports its members - namely, by way of many intricate and long causal chains - means almost for sure that it is related to the continuation of certain social ill.

I have no solution to this double-bind. Pascal once hinted at this problematic condition in his Pensees, which I take as a genuinely troubling thought. Some would therefore be inclined to ignore the condition, and live as he pleases. When criticized, he can quickly point to the hypocrisy of the critic. The critic might have no answer and be left to grumble. Or he might have one. But what that is, I simply do not know.

Y.T.

-- Y.T. 於 May 02, 2006 09:46 AM

(按此看回應全文)

回應四郎

I am a network technician and I do not have a permanent job also. I am also a contract staff and my company has more workers in mainland than in Hong Kong.

Many of my friends have to travel to mainland and Asia Pacific. We all know our industry is in the hard time, many people from mainland are well-educated and their salary is
very competitive. We do not blame but we try to learn some stuff other
than just IT. This is my way (including most of my IT friends) to deal
with this hard situation.

-- 放浪軍 於 May 02, 2006 10:04 AM

(按此看回應全文)

Made in Hong Kong

Frostig, I do not have much money in pocket to make that consideration. I make the decision based on the price (see if I can afford) and "does it worth?".

Anyway, I agree the rest of the manifesto. It is a free market. You find the pay is less and refuse to do the job. Go ahead or ask for more.

By the way, there is not much product made in Hong Kong, especially clothes. Many clothes are made in mainland, get 90% completed, being shipped to Hong Kong, get the rest 10% done (e.g. finish up the collar, buttons) and then label "Made in Hong Kong".

-- 放浪軍 於 May 02, 2006 10:22 AM

(按此看回應全文)

喂返黎先

個討論去到冇雷公咁遠,又自由市場又全球信息產業工作流動又社會連鎖反應。好多行業都有freelance,其他行業的情況我不敢說,但以inmedia成員或友好身處的文化傳媒圈為例,問題很大程度上不是「市場決定人工」或者「我們的行動會不會變相損害了其他人」,而是一種專門剝削知識個體戶和文藝工作者的風氣。

近呢幾年個社會賴係活躍,個個機構大學都話搞talk,搞工作坊,讀書會,一開始時少少地話「幫下手」都冇計啦,但機構卻因此養成了不用撥budget給嘉賓﹝叫你做嘉賓,其實係羊牯阿四白痴仔﹞的習慣。結果一個二個都係咁,個個話幫下手,個個都唔俾錢。這是現況。我們這個社會裏似乎有聲有色的文化活動,大部分是由一班嚴重無償或低薪的獨立人去支撐。

那天去港台錄音,主持人見我寫了一篇罵人的講稿,便打趣說了兩句話:一﹞air-time唔係錢呀;二﹞咁你inmedia度有冇錢?冇。咁你就唔公平淨係鬧港台。

唔使請pascal出黎,問題未去到那種層次。一個一年用億億聲的港台可以咁講野﹝當然有d青年智庫眼光遠大,真係獲air-time如至寶,搶咗唔少報紙地盤﹞,仲搵inmedia同自己比,俾着你下次仲同唔同佢做野?當然唔會。不單唔會,仲應該叫晒d朋友唔好幫佢無償勞動,最終形成壓力等佢地知
道知識同創意係要錢o既。

宣言是要將極度傾斜的天秤稍稍移正。

-- 朱凱迪 於 May 02, 2006 01:32 PM

(按此看回應全文)

不同行業的特徵

我想全球化對不同行業是有不同的 implication 的.
前陣子跟美國的imc朋友聊,他說美國某 it 工會,因為以反對輸入it 外勞和海外同工而導致一半以上的員工退出工會.我很支持這種國際工人團結的態度.但全球化的外判生產是
freelance 化的現象其中一個成因和背景.而工會亦要探討如何保障兩面工人的利益.

但香港現在的問題已超出 market 的理論.他媽的 wto在香港開會,政府組織幾百個中學生做免費勞工;教統局下的中小學所有講座和 workshop 都有 budget 比講者,大學卻反而沒有這規定.

其實依家國內有好些國內報紙和雜誌的稿籌比香港的還高.香港的文字工作者也會轉往內地,我們亦不希望被國內同工歧視.但若國內同工因為我們而生計受影響,我想以同工/工人團結的角度,亦要思考如何互相支持.

-- 阿藹 於 May 02, 2006 02:21 PM

(按此看回應全文)

唔係針對港台

唔係因為佢係一個公營電台而針對佢,
但係我唔明點解一年吃六次萶茗就有錢,
拍戲話冇budget, 得幾百蚊一組戲
我想知道港台係請班人番0黎食飯定做野
呢頭話推廣藝術, 又起西九
另一邊就將D資源拎去飲飲食食
呢D就係唔尊重。唔通藝術, 創作等等都係唔值錢0既?
唔係一個專業? 連低技術勞工都不如?
掃地阿姐都比我地專業?

-- 四郎 於 May 02, 2006 02:23 PM

(按此看回應全文)

係咪呢個意思呢,請問?

pascal?留返讀書組至讀啦,我諗佢老人家唔會介意。我唔熟佢老人家,唔知佢套嘢可唔可以咁引申。不過就算得,咁係咪即係話﹕既然徹底情白似乎真係好難,咁就最好咩都唔好講,當咩事都無發生過呢?係咪呢個意思呢,請問?

-- 小西 於 May 02, 2006 02:33 PM

(按此看回應全文)

A Reply to 朱凱迪 and 小西, with further remarks

The machine with which I commit these thoughts to writing does not allow me to enter Chinese, except where I can quote. I hope you could bear with me.

To 朱凱迪:
I agree with you, that the discussion has wandered away from the content of the manifesto, which may or may not be unfortunate. Under the rubric of globalization and global competition, some, like Frostig, declared that they would not buy anything from China, on the belief that the goods were produced in an inhumane setting. Some disagreed. It is with this bit of the discussion that my little prattle is chiefly concerned; and not with the original manifesto. You can clearly infer this from the arguments I put forth in the piece.

Now, in the piece I tried to argue plainly, considering the various implications of a simple hypothetical, and the nature of moral arguments for and against the course of action Frostig is undertaking.It is only towards the end of the piece that I, for a nice embellishment, pointed to Pascal. None of my arguments rest on his
authority. If you are unhappy with this figure's appearance, you can
happily delete my last paragraph and read the whole thing in that
light. I assure you, you would miss little.

Whether the nature of the moral considerations has risen to the level of Pascal, I do not know. But your way of putting it:唔使請pascal出黎,問題未去到那種層次, reflects more a dismissal than engagement. I hope this was the case only because you mistook me to be commenting on the manifesto, rather than some subsequent proclamations.

To 小西:
Like as I said to 朱凱迪, my arguments do not rest on the authority of Pascal. If you think Pascal is irrelevant, I would happily suggest that you read my piece but ignore the last paragraph.

Now, as for the relationship between absolute innocence and the right to protest or to act in some particular way, that is precisely the question I wanted to raise. I acknowledged, at the outset of my piece, that I endorse generally the demands made in the manifesto. But I think that carion calls to buy not from China, e.g., presuppose a kind of moral position, of whose implications the caller is often not aware.

I propose this as a question, a predicament. As one of the participants in this discussion suggested, goods produced in other countries might no less be produced in an inhumane fashion. Applying the same logic, then why do we not stop buying most of the things we now buy?

My question is meant to highlight, that in choosing among different courses of action, not only a genuine concern about humane production is involved, but very often a subtle balance between good moral feeling (after stop buying goods from China, say) and pragmatic considerations.

One conventional strategy of people who think themselves to be critical in rejecting the dominant practice, is to expose how hypocritical it is. For instance, a critic from Inmedia might compare the pronouncements of the HK government and its concrete acts, and find them inconsistent. Great applause would then come from the critical quarter. Battle won.

And yet, the opponent can perhaps do the same thing to the critics,and demand that they examine their own hypocrisy. Now, at this moment,if the critics only dismiss the challenge with some blanket statement,the opponent will certainly laugh with equal excitement.

Thank you, both of you.

Y.T.

-- Y.T. 於 May 03, 2006 05:42 AM

(按此看回應全文)

Chinese Input (to Y.T.)

Are you using Windows? (Because if you are using Mac, then I really can't help.) If so, go to
www.NJStar.com to download and install the NJ Star Communicator, then
you can input Chinese. I am using this software alone to type all my
Chinese articles and comments. Rather slow though......

-- Frostig 於 May 03, 2006 07:34 AM

(按此看回應全文)

廣告