83,307
edits
Loyalty discount: Difference between revisions
no edit summary
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary Tags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit |
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary Tags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit |
||
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
For the strictures of salary bands, [[forced ranking]], gerrymandered [[performance appraisal]] system — all the great apocrypha of the [[HR]] canon — mean that through time how much a given employee is [[compensation|paid]] will decouple from the value she offers the firm, however meagre.<ref>As we have [[Cost-value threshold|remarked elsewhere]], it is more or less axiomatic that all employees contribute ''some'' positive value to their organisation: you would have to be pathologically antisocial not to. The exception that proves this rule is the unnamed [https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/15-years-skipping-work/ Italian hospital worker who bunked off for fifteen years].</ref> | For the strictures of salary bands, [[forced ranking]], gerrymandered [[performance appraisal]] system — all the great apocrypha of the [[HR]] canon — mean that through time how much a given employee is [[compensation|paid]] will decouple from the value she offers the firm, however meagre.<ref>As we have [[Cost-value threshold|remarked elsewhere]], it is more or less axiomatic that all employees contribute ''some'' positive value to their organisation: you would have to be pathologically antisocial not to. The exception that proves this rule is the unnamed [https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/15-years-skipping-work/ Italian hospital worker who bunked off for fifteen years].</ref> | ||
Over time, those who remain loyal to the firm are progressively ''penalised''. If they get pay rises they are anaemic, shrugged | Over time, those who remain loyal to the firm are progressively ''penalised''. If they get pay rises at all, they are anaemic, and shrugged off with the two-way optionality that HR managers know they are long. | ||
“As part of infrastructure, you don't share in the ''upside'', but you’re protected in a down year” they will say, in a good year | “As part of infrastructure, you don't share in the ''upside'', but you’re protected in a down year” they will say, in a good year. | ||
In a bad one, they will tell you, “we’ve managed to minimise the [[RIF]], but we’re still under s a 15% [[cost challenge]],” as if you are supposed to be grateful. | |||
For all the time you spend conducting and being subjected to [[performance appraisal]]s, at the business end of the year, talk of performance is mysteriously absent. It’s all about the big numbers, lumbering about way over your head, above your pay-grade and beyond your control. It’s not about you. | |||
The net upshot, per worker, is usually stagnation; in real terms — [[inflation]]-adjusted — you may wind up going backwards, over long periods. | The net upshot, per worker, is usually stagnation; in real terms — [[inflation]]-adjusted — you may wind up going backwards, over long periods. | ||