Performance related pay...

G

Guest

Guest
#3
Its shocking mike...Lacks trust in the employee trained to do their job...Encourages manipulation..incorporates division or segregation...Encourages a judgemental society...

Just dont get me started on this it is purely sickening all round..I would never ever vote for such a thing.

I think UKIP came out tops on this issue and im not even a UKIP supporter...Im in bits here..lol
 
#4
It's perfectly fair for industries who get wage rises based on time served only, like the first God knows how many grades of a teacher, irrespective of whether they are actually doing a good job.

A wage rise is in recognition of experience and success, it's not an automatic right.

Should PRP be applied to every job, absolutely not. But for some industries, it has to be the way forward.

When I worked properly for a living lol what I call the easy days, I only got a wage, when I was of more use to the company. Learnt addition skills, could provide greater cover when colleagues were ill, improved myself in that industry and it wasn't per skill, it was based on gaining 4 or 5 more skills which also helped my promotional aspects not just basic wage.

Just being there 12 months doing the same job to a level that was acceptable and didn't get me the sack wasn't cause for a wage rise. Why should it have been?

It encourages people to strive to better themselves, not only for themselves, but also to provide a greater service for the company. If your performance is crap, why should you earn as much as somebody who's performance is great - and ergo - why shouldn't you be shot back to the job centre, to let somebody who can do the job better have a go?

Anyone who doesn't believe their performance can be judged in terms of the bonus they receive for going above and beyond the basic job description is somebody who wants to be lazy, do the minimum possible, not improve themselves but still take home the same as somebody with real talent.

And that is what you call a counter point.

UKIP always come out on top, they can speak bollocks and say anything for applause because they are never going to be elected.

I've just got to this point in QT by the way.

A basic wage is a basic wage for doing the minimum. Getting a rise should be based on performance, not just because some wanky Union (in the case of teaching) have whinged and striked enough to mean you get rises based on time served from day one even if the kids teach the class better than you.

And yes, I came across a few teachers like that in my time, who would've ended with a pension per month I will never achieve even if I go back into the normal rat race.
 
G

Guest

Guest
#5
It encourages people to strive to better themselves, not only for themselves, but also to provide a greater service for the company.
---

What a shame you feel this way. And it is exactly why I am against it.

Because humans dont care for nothing but money do they? Humans would never strive to do better for themselves and others - it will only be for the smell of money on the end of the rope.

What a disgusting way to treat human kind.
 
#6
It's called self pride, self use and self confidence.

You missed that amongst the lazy barb mate, where they clearly lack that and feel entitled.

Everybody should strive to improve themselves, in a work environment that comes with a greater renumeration. In life it comes with self respect.

If you don't believe they are linked, I'm not the one treating man kind in a disgusting way.

We are talking about PRP. Improve yourself at work, take on greater responsibilities, your home life with the confidence boost that gives you will also improve in terms of self confidence, self worth, and it will mix into your leisure life where you'll probably do a little bit more than just watch TV - you'll be open to new experiences.

Really think they are separate...or think some industries should basically double their wage just because they don't get sacked?
 
#7
Or to put it another way, that you might get without being a little high and mighty.

Is it right that a nurse and a teacher - who are already from day one fantastically well paid at baseline, after 3 years of competent service, can still earn less (given the debt they take on to reach those positions) than a bin man with an equal Union enforced basic pay plus overtime provision?

Who is providing the greater service, do you need to be competent and caring to put a bin - thesedays - onto a lift that does the job for you?

Or should people like teachers and nurses not be well rewarded in comparison because of the job they do - but not just because they do the job for a few years, and don't improve themselves, show promotional hopes and so on?

Teachers get what, 4-6 wage rises based on time served, not whether they can actually do the job. Why is that right? Shouldn't we be rewarding the teachers who can do the job, rewarding those who give up their weekends to run football and sports clubs, those who give up their after school time and lunchtime to run activities.

Should a teacher who genuinely works 12-15 hours a day walk home with less, than a teacher who does the bare minimum, photocopies a shit load of pages, tells the class to shut the fuck up and work through them, whilst they sit there fiddling with their phone?
 
G

Guest

Guest
#8
You are categorising people.

In a teaching sense you could have one that has a class achieving straight A's in a well to do area....And another teacher in another area where one pupil is unhappy everyday. Yet the teacher and his/her skills one day raises a smile and in the end creates a happy pupil - yet no evidence of immediate higher grades. The straight A's gets all the plaudits, yet the teacher raising a smile in an otherwise unhappy life for a child gets f'all...

all PRP does is create a society pushing for the highs..The lows get nothing. Segregation and judgemental attitudes surely follow.


 

CDX_EIRE

Vital 1st Team Regular
#9
I think the problem GT is we are perpetuating a broken system... Teaching should be alot harder to get into and get more money... Its crazy that I can earn more than a nurse by fixing broken pipes for instance...


Our world is one setup for consumption and those who produce the most get the highest rewards... There is two sides to every coin...

Taxing for instance
1. Iv read taxes first came into to pay for wars and it was only the rich who were taxed the system was kept in place to raise everyones quality of life and somewhere along the line everyone got taxed...
-or-
2. Those who succeed get punished by having to pay for everyone else...
 
G

Guest

Guest
#10
And if in the incidents I mention above we didnt rely on humanity being the way "I think it is" where would that leave the pupils at the low end of the scale?

Could you imagine a country of money hungry teachers all fighting for the high end pupils because it paid more? Wow, how sad. And Im so glad humanity isnt like this and shocked that politics want to create such.

Can you imagine all the hospitals just targeting the patients that yield them the greatest performance results? Out goes the very reasons they took the profession up in the 1st place.
 
#11
CDX you get it cheers.

Yes of course I am GT, that's life.

We are all in one subset or another. So what subset is more important than the other. Should one subset get greater reward for lack of effort, than a subset who give more effort?

Should a bank employee who miss sells thousands of policies, get a greater reward than a nurse who is happy in their job, doesn't want greater responsibilities because they are happy doing what they do....but gives extra time to talk to patients outside of their normal working hours.

A teacher who gives up their time after school and weekends, get the same subset wage (organised on time served not quality or devotion) as a teacher who teaches by worksheets and pisses off every chance they get??

That's what you're not getting. You are falling into the trap thinking everyone is equal, everyone gives the same.

They don't. Never have done, never will do.

Should a barman who can serve 5 pints in a minute earn the same as somebody who can serve 2?

It applies to all industries....but I wouldn't give performance related pay across the board either. Because some industries aren't time reliant, it's about quality. It's about focus, and you lose focus if you rush to hit targets, or want to be better and seemingly more productive than others and the results you kick out rushing are substandard and get classed as waste.

As for teaching, I'd award a teacher who takes students expected to get D's but helps get them C's more than I'd reward a teacher who takes the easier job of taking students expected to get B's.

The teaching isn't different. The pupil is. That doesn't relate to the performance of the teacher.

And that is the exact problem, but you don't realise it. We have crap teachers taking easy jobs - music, private schools and the like, where the pupils get the support they need outside of school to achieve.

But we have great teachers struggling in comprehensives where a success could even be helping a class not to fail. You kind of allude to that, but don't get it's those teachers who deserve a bonus.

PRP doesn't have to mean 'A grades' just like with Villa experience doesn't have to mean a Marlon Harewood.

You aren't thinking it through, you are taking what you accuse me of doing, and looking at end product - not the work required to get there.

And PRP doesn't encourage that society it's the one we live in where certificates and people who know a text book, know fuck all about the real job.

That is now life.

But congratulations on ignoring what I actually said.
 
#12
Green Tea - 18/10/2013 01:43

And if in the incidents I mention above we didnt rely on humanity being the way "I think it is" where would that leave the pupils at the low end of the scale?

Could you imagine a country of money hungry teachers all fighting for the high end pupils because it paid more? Wow, how sad. And Im so glad humanity isnt like this and shocked that politics want to create such.

Can you imagine all the hospitals just targeting the patients that yield them the greatest performance results? Out goes the very reasons they took the profession up in the 1st place.
You've heard of league tables, and exclusions?

You've heard of patients being turned away?

You've heard of top notch surgeons deciding which operations they will perform based on chances of success?

Have you?

It's been happening for the last decade. Don't pretend it's new.

And no, I don't think it's right either.

But to claim it's a new thing...really. Please.
 

BodyButter

Vital Football Legend
#15
I pay my receptionists performance related pay. It means the good ones earn decent money and the shit ones quit. Everyone's a winner. :D
 
#18
Surely PRP needs to be related to the job, for example, sales commissions and piece work are classic examples of PRP and it working correctly. On the other hand, nursing should not be performance related other than higher levels of experience/qualifications leading to greater responsibility.

As for cheating the system, there will always be those that do that regardless of the system, it's known as dishonesty.
 
#19
Green Tea - 18/10/2013 02:25



all PRP does is create a society pushing for the highs..The lows get nothing. Segregation and judgemental attitudes surely follow.
So you don't believe in setting goals and achieving them? Fair enough but you will never really experience any form of success if that's the case.
 

OnMeHeadFred

Vital Reserves Team
#20
Green Tea - 18/10/2013 01:43

Could you imagine a country of money hungry teachers all fighting for the high end pupils because it paid more? Wow, how sad. And Im so glad humanity isnt like this and shocked that politics want to create such.

Can you imagine all the hospitals just targeting the patients that yield them the greatest performance results? Out goes the very reasons they took the profession up in the 1st place.
Agree! :10:

The history of " performance" incentives is very poor indeed because the idiots who design the schemes have a simplistic view of the people they are trying to manipulate.

Whether it is the examples you cite, or soldiers in Vietnam killing civilians to get their kill-rate up, it has a lousy track record.

The fat cats who sit on each other's remuneration committees, much prefer schemes where they get their bonuses whether they meet their targets or not.

They set the best example to follow.