Should The Following Civil Servants Be On A Business Trip?

Whether or not a public official below the grade level should travel by plane should have two levels of basis: first, the objective conditions such as the distance between a business trip, the reality of pportation and the time cost.

For example, the distance between a business destination and a railway train is more than ten hours, and the business is urgent and busy.

Tracing back to the source is still the old way and the old thinking of officialdom, deciding whether or not to take an airplane by the size of officialdom, and whether there is still a slightest consideration for the priorities of the official business. The travel cost classification level and sub standard is a good policy. The higher rank civil servants enjoy the higher treatment within the standard range. However, taking the plane as a "high treatment and high enjoyment" is the end of the game.

Perhaps, the supervisory departments should devote more effort to those who exceed the standard and exceed the specifications to enjoy the travel treatment. They always keep their eyes on the ordinary civil servants, and probably do not see the official world outside the plane.

Secondly, a fact that must be cleared is that sitting on a plane does not mean stepping on a noble journey.

If the travel time is clear, it may be more realistic to buy some discount tickets ahead of schedule than the bullet trains.

Taking the plane as a "high-level" enjoyment is difficult to justify by restricting some of the public officers on a business trip by air.

If flying is really a "public enemy" of the brigade, then how much effect can we get from the prohibition of grass root elimination?

One of the ways to travel is, what is the purpose of "one size fits all" in a big way?

Actually, sitting on a plane is not a good idea.

Up.

Under normal circumstances, ticket prices are much more expensive than bus tickets and train tickets. Guangzhou's civil servants below the level of science and technology are not allowed to fly by air, but they are afraid that they can not fill the pool of tolerance consumption.

The new central and state agencies' travel expenses management regulations, which were introduced in 2014, clearly stipulate that "when traveling to various destinations, there are multiple means of pport to choose from, and on the premise of not affecting public duties and ensuring safety, business travelers should choose an economical and convenient means of pportation."

The implication is that, on the premise of good weather and favourable circumstances, business travel is of course the first choice for a convenient and economical economy.

However, due to factors such as time cost, traffic conditions and so on, under the level of

There is no way to ride a plane on a business trip. It can not be the focus of public criticism.

It should be said that the relevant provisions of Guangzhou's travel expenses management, from the "level below the prohibition of flying" point of view, the lack of minimum policy universality.

It is difficult to distinguish between sitting on the plane and using the rank of duty.

Just imagine that an ordinary policeman in Guangzhou is catching up with criminals in the field. Is it necessary to ride a green train on the rails?