Comment 2.5 Day vacation mode how to become a national good Sohu review wegener肉芽肿

Comment 2.5 Day vacation mode how to become a national good Sohu review wegener肉芽肿

November 26, 2017
/ / /
Comments Closed

Comment: "2.5 Day vacation mode" how to become a national good? Sohu review reports that the long lost "2.5 Day vacation" has once again become a hot spot of public concern. In the recently held 2016 national tourism work conference, National Tourism Bureau Director Li Jinzao said, the state should promote all levels of government to implement the system of paid leave into the agenda, promote local enterprises and institutions under the premise of ensuring the legal weekly 40 hours of work, not affecting the masses, create conditions for employees to avoid it leave, elastic "2.5 days of rest, explore the summer vacation mode". Although the implementation of the "2.5 Day holiday" model is a future, many people should not be unfamiliar with it. Who does not mean to increase 0.5 days holiday expectation and yearning, even if it can only exist in the summer, even though it may only cover on the organs, organizations enterprises and institutions it is still carrying this national collective look good. After all, the "adjustment" is not a simple combination of vacation time, but means the further improvement of social welfare. However, even coerced so look good, from the beginning is still in the "opinions" of the new variable will encounter a variety of emotional concerns. From point of view, there are two: one is worried about the "2.5 Day vacation mode although to promote, but also limited to a file or expression level, similar to the" according to the actual situation "and" conditional "fuzzy words, is to increase the uncertainty; two is worried about this it will become a" minority welfare ", after all, get paid leave is not comprehensive in the case of the implementation of a sudden increase of half day off, how to convince the company to agree? In this way, the carefully launched the" 2.5 Day vacation mode, or a mere formality, or become some groups. Welfare, welfare and realizing of this is likely to sacrifice the quality of public service cost. Although the proposed "guarantee the statutory work 40 hours a week, do not affect the masses work" premise, but after all, it changed the original service supply structure, to completely avoid the impact is not realistic. Of course, these are only the technical feasibility of the hidden worries, before it can not rise to the statutory holidays, the implementation will be greatly reduced, and then become a better look. On the other hand, whether it is at the national level or at the conference on tourism, the "2.5 Day vacation" model is fundamentally motivated by "stimulating tourism consumption demand". Along with the logic of the vacation mode, it is possible to create conditions on the travel time, but the stimulation of consumer demand, besides the guarantee of time, is also implicated in leisure costs, tourism supply and other factors. If not in the national income on a corresponding increase, if tourism supply can not mention quality and quantity, can not guarantee a healthy and orderly tourism environment, and how to ensure that the "2.5 Day vacation mode stimulate tourism consumption intention? In this case, at the" 2.5 days of vacation mode, must jump out of holiday adjustment itself. To truly become a national good, we should proceed from a more ambitious level of more three-dimensional system.

评论:“2.5天休假模式”如何成为全民利好?-搜狐评论  据报道,久违的“2.5天休假”再次成为舆论关注的热点。在近日举行的2016年全国旅游工作会议上,国家旅游局局长李金早透露,国家要推动各级政府把落实带薪休假制度纳入议事议程,推动地方和企事业单位在保证每周法定40小时工作时、不影响群众办事的前提下,创造条件让员工错峰休假、弹性休息,探索夏季“2.5天休假模式”。  虽然关于“2.5天休假模式”的推行是个将来时,但许多人对此应并不陌生。没有谁会吝啬对增加0.5天假期的期待和向往,即便它只可能存在于夏天、即便它可能仅仅覆盖于机关、团体、企事业单位,它仍裹挟着全民对此利好的集体期待。毕竟来说,此番“调整”,已然不是简单的休假时间的排列组合,而是意味着社会福利的进一步提升。  不过,即便是裹挟着如此美好的期待,从一开始仍在“意见”中的新变便遭遇了各种情绪上的担忧。集中来看,无非有二:一是担心“2.5天休假模式”虽然得到上至下的推进,但是还仅仅限于文件或是意见层面的表达,类似于“根据实际情况”、“有条件”的模糊用词,更是增加了不确定性;二是担心这会否沦为“少数人的福利”,毕竟,在带薪休假尚不能得到全面落实的情况下,突然增加的半天休假,又如何去说服那些企业去认同呢?  如此一来,此番精心推出的“2.5天休假模式”,要么流于形式,要么成为某些群体的福利,而这种福利的实现很可能是要以牺牲公共服务质量为代价。虽然此次提出了“保证每周法定40小时工作时、不影响群众办事”的前提,但毕竟还是改变了原先的服务供给结构,要完全规避影响并不现实。当然,这些只是在技术可行性层面上的隐忧,在它不能上升到法定节假日之前,落实起来是会大打折扣的,进而成为看上去的美好。  从另一个层面讲,无论是国家层面下发的意见,还是旅游工作会议上释放的信号,“2.5天休假模式”从根本上说,它是因于“激发旅游消费需求”而来。沿着此休假模式的逻辑,固然是可以在旅游时间上创造条件,但是消费需求的刺激,除了时间上的保证外,还牵连到休闲成本、旅游供给等因素。如果在国民收入上不能有相应的提升,如果旅游供给不能提质提量,不能保证一个健康有序的旅游环境,又如何保证“2.5天休假模式”实现刺激旅游消费的初衷呢?  于此而言,打量“2.5天休假模式”,必须跳出假期调整本身之外。要真正成为全民利好,就应从更宏大的层面进行更为立体的制度设计。相关的主题文章:

Comments are closed.