who pays for world bank employee benefits?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:No one is being forced to work in unfriendly Washington DC. Some might even consider moving to the US for a year or a few years exciting and rewarding in and of itself. Local hires and international hires alike get what seems to me extraordinary benefits. What is so special about these employees that they should be allowed to bring over household help? Why are their children so special that they should be given generous allowances to go to any private school they want to (vs. only to a school that teaches in their native language)? Why 8 weeks of paid leave each year?

In this economy, some should be grateful to have a job at all with or without 8 weeks of vacation.

Only international hires get those "extraordinary benefits". And remember that if they lose their job, they also have to leave the country within a month.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No one is being forced to work in unfriendly Washington DC. Some might even consider moving to the US for a year or a few years exciting and rewarding in and of itself. Local hires and international hires alike get what seems to me extraordinary benefits. What is so special about these employees that they should be allowed to bring over household help? Why are their children so special that they should be given generous allowances to go to any private school they want to (vs. only to a school that teaches in their native language)? Why 8 weeks of paid leave each year?

In this economy, some should be grateful to have a job at all with or without 8 weeks of vacation.

Only international hires get those "extraordinary benefits". And remember that if they lose their job, they also have to leave the country within a month.

Yup, then run home and try to get back into the work force. It is risky, so the returns have to be good. We would expect the same treatment if we had a good job here and were recruited to a foreign job. That is assuming your spouse would go along.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Has the number or quality of foreign applicants for World Bank jobs declined since the tuition benefit was eliminated? That would be interesting to know.

the benefit has not been eliminated as such. we now get a mobility premium which admittedly is not as generous as before and stops after 10 years. Still, its better than nought!

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:jsteele - check your facts. its not first class necessarily (depends on lenght of trip, just like any private sector travel policy) and its not every year. And...are you willing to leave your country, culture, language, extended family and friends, and relocate to a far away place which - lets face it - is not necessarily friendly to foreigners... in order to work for your employer?

Hey, no need to get testy. I said I don't begrudge the employees their benefits. I'll even settle for business class every other year. And, for your information, for a number of years my work involved near constant overseas travel. I left my country, culture, language, extended family and friends. How do you think I ended up with a Georgian wife (okay, luck had a lot to do with it, but I was in her country because of work).

[Anonymous]

And why is nobody questioning federal employees, who ARE PAID DIRECTLY WITH MY TAX DOLLARS, who get paid to do NOTHING more than the bare 9-5 (let's talk about the "good enough for government work" mentality and the "let's not excell or push the bar up higher") and (in some agencies) get up to 10K of student loan benefits per year? why bash on the foreigners who are getting paid by MANY different taxpayers? oh yea, I forgot! Its cause we are great "mmericans" and we invented pizza and McDonalds, and we get to put a boot up the arse of anyone we don't like!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What is so special about these employees that they should be allowed to bring over household help? Why are their children so special that they should be given generous allowances to go to any private school they want to (vs. only to a school that teaches in their native language)? In this economy, some should be grateful to have a job at all with or without 8 weeks of vacation.

I think they ARE grateful to have a job, just as much as I assume you are grateful to have one too. Why are they allowed to bring household help and send their kids to private school? because that is what they would do if they were in their home countries, and the benefits structure is designed to mitigate all disruptions that are caused to employees and their families on account of their relocation for employement.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:And why is nobody questioning federal employees, who ARE PAID DIRECTLY WITH MY TAX DOLLARS, who get paid to do NOTHING more than the bare 9-5 (let's talk about the "good enough for government work" mentality and the "let's not excell or push the bar up higher") and (in some agencies) get up to 10K of student loan benefits per year? !

It will be 10 years before that benefit means anything. We have to show a record of 10 years of payment AFTER the act was passed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:[Do you know what the job market is like outside the US? In Latin America for example?
People are willing to do all those things you just mentioned just to have a decent paying job. The benefits are NOT necessary.

Actually, I DO know what the job market is like, particullarly in Latin America. And I also know a couple WB and other IFI employees who are taking a paycut, switching to local currency salaries, giving up the "unecessary" benefits, and going back to their home countries after a couple years in DC, mostly because of the toll on their families and children.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote: It will be 10 years before that benefit means anything. We have to show a record of 10 years of payment AFTER the act was passed.

In the case of some federal agencies, after a couple years of service you can get up to 10K tuition reimbursement a year.

[Anonymous]

Why the hissy fit over every slight possibility (oh my god) that someone is getting a good deal and the assumption that they couldn't possibly be worth it in the current market place and the further assumption that somehow our tax money is going to pay for it all?

[Anonymous]

The benefits have largely been eliminated for expatriate staff, though staff with benefits were grandfathered. I think it is obvious to everyone that the benefits were not necessary to bring the brightest talent from the world to work there (and frankly, when the benefits were offered, I would question whether the Bank actually attracted the best and brightest).

[Anonymous]

World Bank employees work long hours, and they left everything familiar and extended family behind. They deserve the benefits.

[Anonymous]

My dad was world bank. We had great benefits but the salary was much lower than w/ comparable careers.

He is British and my mom Australian. How do you expect the WB to recruit people from other countries where the public education and health care systems are so much better? Here, come to the US, go to a DC public school and live it up with our expensive health insurance. Oh, and by the way, we will give you 2 weeks (no other civilized country has such a short vacation) and you pay pay to go and see your family in Australia/England/Africa aon your own dime.

I am sure the best economists in foreign countries would jump at that scenario!! Some posters seem to think that everyone else in the world is clamoring to get a job--at any cost-in America. Not so for many stable countries with comparable (if better) quality of life....

Typical American ethnocentrism!

[Anonymous]

The bank gives 6 weeks vacation, not 2. And if you think it was necessary to attract talent, then why has the benefit been eliminated? Maybe we should all clamor to our governments that it is an outrage! Bring back home leave and private school tuition for WB staff! Please! The state of world development hangs in the balance!

[Anonymous]

Some posters seem jealous.