What annoys me is the deliberate 'spin' to accentuate the positive. For example:
ELC - as someone has already pointed out I think, you get a max of £2,000 on 3 occasions, so to include it as part of an 'annual' salary benefit is incorrect. Also, do you get £2,000? No, you get funding towards the course of up to £2,000. So if the course costs £1,150, that is what you get.
CEA - While I realize some people may abuse the system, the reason CEA is provided as a 'benefit' is that our employer moves some of us around so often that our childrens education is totally disrupted, and they are disadvantaged. If we weren't moved so often the 'benefit' wouldn't be needed. Also, depending on the school, CEA doesn't cover all the fees, more like 50-60%. So, for each child at Boarding School, rather than having a benefit, to most families it represents a 'cost' of £9-10,000!! Not a decidsion taken lightly.
However, I must admit they missed one trick. The benfits are 'net', take an example of say £10,000 for CEA. That would mean earning an extra £16,000 'gross' (approx) to obtain £10,000 net if you were a higher rate tax payer. So maybe the benefit calculator should produce gross figures if it is trying to show you what your equivalent salary would be in the civilian world?