3 ms·
It's the difference between a screw that can be tuned to performance, or a nail that is hammered in place permanently. bonuses differ from raises in that their
by Psyladine 7y ago
It's the difference between a screw that can be tuned to performance, or a nail that is hammered in place permanently. bonuses differ from raises in that their isn't an element of entitlement or a long term commitment from the organization.
It's not about being squeamish about eliminating a position, companies have no concerns with that.
- jagged-chisel 7y ago> It's not about being squeamish about eliminating a position... If that's the case, wouldn't it make sense to offer a 'stable' higher salary to an employee, and then sack them when it's financially beneficial to the company? I think the company does indeed have a concern with that - it becomes known that a particular company just thins the ranks every 18mos, and they'll have fewer folks lining up to take jobs. On the other hand, even if the salary is lower, an employee can be more confident in keeping at least a modicum of income in lean times, and can also 'compete with colleagues' when bonuses are available. The perception (of the employer to the employee) is valuable to some extent.
- rusk 7y ago> sack them when it's financially beneficial to the company? Depends on how onerous a task it is to rehire when things pick up again ... I presume that’s part of the reason foe generous separation packages when a company actually must let people go ... at least you won’t have a bad reputation militating against you!
- SubuSS 7y ago> it becomes known that a particular company just thins the ranks every 18mos, and they'll have fewer folks lining up to take jobs. I don't think this is a thing at the high levels sadly. Both the employer and employees have moved away from the job security concept long time ago.