Slashdot Mirror
GE Considers Scrapping The Annual Raise (bloomberg.com)
A user shares a report that details General Electric's rethinking of the annual raise. Bloomberg reports: "GE executives are reviewing whether annual updates to compensation are the best response to the achievements and needs of employees. The company may also scrap the longstanding and much-imitated system of rating staff on a five-point scale. Decisions on both issues may come within the next several months, spokesperson Valerie Van den Keybus said by phone." "We uncovered an opportunity to improve the way we reward people for their contributions," GE's head of executive development, Janice Semper, said in an e-mailed response to questions. It will involve "being flexible and re-thinking how we define rewards, acknowledging that employees and managers are already thinking beyond annual compensation in this space." In response to this news, ErichTheRed writes: First it was "stack ranking," the process where GE fires the bottom-rated 20% of the workforce every year. Now, a new HR trend may be brewing at GE that is destined to be copied by MBAs everywhere if it takes hold. Personally, in terms of cargo-cult HR trends, I'd take Google's open office nightmare over this one. What do you think this would do to employment stability if widely enacted? I can definitely see banks rethinking 30 year mortgages, for example...
"This will be great for employees" from the makers of Stack Ranking.
I bet real money the executive compensation packages will continue to grow unabated.
The cockroach that came up with this one will get an extra bonus for the year.
ELOI, ELOI, LAMA SABACHTHANI!?
GE executives are reviewing whether annual updates to compensation are the best response to the achievements and needs of employees.
OK, you first.
The thing about performance appraisals is that they are a process. What is good about process is that while in many cases it's not required its good at rounding up the edge cases. It assures fairness in opportunity. Otherwise the squeaky wheels get 90% of management's attention. it is also a chain. It's a time when middle and upper management communicate about employees. it's a time when every employee gets time with the boss. All of these things of course should happen all the time but they can't. there isn't enough demand or time so instead we have to reserve time for it. Thus even though for most employees the process is perfunctory it's not perfunctory for everyone. Also you get surpises. You hear things you wouldn't have heard about aspirations and frustrations in these 1 on 1s because the framework of telling what you did the last year brings it out. It's a time when a manager can tell you that if you want a certain new job what you need to change to get it.
Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
I wonder if anyone will notice if we just stop paying them entirely!
a well known worldwide business, you didn't get a raise no matter how productive or good you were unless you kissed the managers arse. Most of the managers are idiot slimeballs that knew nothing about product or technology, they were just pencil pushers that made everyone else look bad but themselves.
Isn't it odd how every trend or "fad" in HR always seems to fuck over employees in some way?
Open office is seriously a plague on humanity. At least be honest that it's about cost, or to plump manager ego to see their little people lined up in one room, rather than blowing smoke up my ass about "collaboration".
Hey I'd be OK with this if they granted each employee proportion of stock ownership and eliminated the CEO and board can gave every employee representation on a democratic "leadership council" for big company initiatives.
Otherwise, look to see a mass exodus from GE - you have to have a raise/compensation system.
That's right, it's all about "being flexible and re-thinking how we define rewards." Scott Adams already figured out this system 20 years ago.
"I'm too busy to research this and form an educated opinion, but I do have time to tell everyone my uninformed opinion."
I asked my boss how he scored me 5 on our scoring system which is used to calculate our bonus. He admitted that he didn't do the scoring, and has no idea how the scores work. He also does not know who does do the scoring.
Needless to say I'm not the only person looking for a new job.
Many employees would happily forgo a salary increase over more vacation days, fewer hours or a day or two a week spent telecommuting, but I am kidding myself thinking that their driving factor is their employees best interests
Then they left to get another 5-10% at a new job down the street.
And we laid off the bottom 20%, leaving us staffed at 60% to do all the work.
WTF, and management wonders why we can't get anything done.
As for me? I'd be tempted to cross GE of my list of places to work, except they weren't on it in the first place.
Company loyalty is a two way street. Think of me having a bi-weekly contact at best.
Fine with me. I will be using ALL my sick days.
Also, I'm not taking calls after 5pm.
In at 9, out at 5, no exceptions.
No weekend work.
Every Year, my company laptop/desktop will have an "accident".
Spilling coffee on the keyboard will be a semi-annual event.
I will be actively enforcing software license management, I have the BSA's number on the speed dial.
I will telecomute on days when I feel like it, company needs be damned.
Back stab everyone on every team.
take credit for everything
save all blackmail material
study all the get ahead schemes
it's every man/woman for themselves.
GE broke with the most unethical sociopathic employees..
multiple product liability lawsuits with lots of "not me" finger pointing
someone steals millions of dollars thru an underhanded plan.
Executives vote themselves a bonus for having some cash on hand before bankruptcy filing.
Millions of people's retirement plans damaged by ownership of GE stock...
Some billionaire buys GE assets at pennies on the dollar and restarts company
(and hires NO ex-GE employees that worked for GE after 2017... The best employees will go find a better job quickly)
This is my opinion based on what little I know and understand of the rumors and lies Thanks, Randal
Exactly. Here is what happens to me in EVERY job with this review nonsense:
First year. Great review! You're a rock star. 5% bonus.
Next year: Good review. 4% bonus.
Third year: That guy's getting paid too much, find a way to screw him because he failed to read one e-mail, even though he saved the company millions. 1% bonus.
Find new programming job: 10% bonus.
Peter predicted that you would "deliberately forget" creation 2000 years ago...
I just feel bad for my friends at IBM, because they'll almost certainly see this and try to double down on it.
About 10,000 years ago, in Honors US History in High School, in scenic New Jersey . . . I had a teacher who we called "Smiling Jane". The 1800's in the US were full of nasty stuff, like children losing arms while trying to couple trains, the US Calvary giving smallpox infected blankets to Indians ("Casino Indians", not "Out-Sourcing Indians") . . . and if you get hungry for a hamburger during class . . . "The Jungle", from Upton Sinclair will transform your ideal of a Big Mac into a pile of weevils and maggots. At any rate, good old "Smiling Jane" would flash a rack of teeth during these lectures, that would put most of Hollywood to shame.
Put the absolute epitome, was her description of the "Molly Maquires":
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
In case you are too lazy to read the article, or didn't have Honors US History in goddamned New Jersey, the big mining monopolies created "mining towns" for poor immigrants (H1Bs?). They were not paid in US cash, but in "script" that could only be used in the stores . . . owned by the monopoly. Sound like Microsoft, anyone?
Smiling Jane flashed her rack during all of this.
At any rate, some of the enslaved created a group called the "Molly Maquires . . . they would relieve a foreman or a manager from his head, and dump it somewhere. A lot of these heads ended up in jars in the windows of funeral parlors, with the note, "Do you know whose head this is?"
Back to "Smiling Jane" . . . she went to a funeral in Eastern Pennsylvania, and told the funeral director her tale. The Director answered:
"Oh, yes, we still have some unclaimed heads in the cellar . . . would you like to see them . . . ?"
A fellow student suggested to me that we should beg, borrow or steal a black Cadillac, drive to the town, and scream, "Show us your heads!"
Getting back on topic, GE executives who rake in millions, while producing nothing of value . . . could in my opinion end up in a funeral parlor in Eastern Pennsylvania.
Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!
Make it a salary and bonus and stock cap of 20 times the earnings of the lowest paid contractor and that sounds fair.
Oh, you meant just for the 99 percent.
Never mind.
Light the torches, boys!
-- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
Just have all your employees bid against each other for what needs to get done. If you can do it in 2 days for $2000 while Larry takes 5 and wants $3000, you win! When people stop winning bids they stop making money and quit, and you hire a new guy.
There was a nine point scale in performance reviews when I was hired. No one ever got more than a five.
Now they switched to the five point scale. No one gets more than a three.
I'm not saying this because I feel personally slighted, I'm the dream employee who erally doesn't give a shit about compensation because I enjoy what I do. I say this because I hear this from extremely capable and well respected co-workers who I think are way better than me (and I hear I'm great).
Firing the bottom 20% of your work force every year is no different than YOU, as a consumer, not purchasing another good or service again because it didn't give you what you paid for. It is assigning value via your wallet.
In the real world people are not equal performers at every task. In fact, some are really bad. Even what some would consider a "net negative" for the team (does more harm than good). Some of those that suck at their current job may not suck doing something else. While it involves some hurtful emotions and short term pain, a job loss can often times be beneficial in the long run.
The issue of not having an annual raise is interesting though. In the US we have gone through a decade of very low inflation. Also prices on many goods has dropped or stayed steady. Companies are not naturally making extra money via inflation to pass on to their workers. The additional money has to come through growth, which is limited in our stagnant economy. So not getting a raise each year might not be such a bad thing in a low inflation economy if it is compensated for elsewhere.
Ultimately the free market will decide though. And my guess is that GE will make sure their top 20% is really well compensated so they stay and keep being productive making money for the company, while everyone else takes what is given to them. While this doesn't sound great if you're in the 80%, it's really is a fair system.
Scott
Give me what I want and deserve or another employer will. That's worked pretty well for me my entire career. Sometimes they gave me what I wanted. Sometimes another employer did.
Reminding me to feel grateful for a couple percent you gave me at my formal review is annoying. I don't feel grateful. I feel like a cog in the machine.
Moderating "-1, Disagree" is simple censorship. Have the guts to post your opinion.
"We uncovered an opportunity to improve the way we reward people for their contributions," GE's head of executive development, Janice Semper said. "It will involve being flexible and re-thinking how we define rewards, "
Translation: We're always looking for new ways to screw our employees.
No. I thought so at first, but further digging, this makes a lot of sense and is something many companies and contractors have been doing for quite some time.
Typical negotiation with a potential employer (small/mid size company) goes like this. If the company cannot or does not want to give the salary being asked by the applicant, something can be negotiated, such as additional vacation time, or a larger 401K contribution.
I for one could be happier with an additional week of vacation over a 2-3% increase, every per year. Or additional personal holidays, or the ability to take every other Friday off (like the 9/80 programs many government contractors have.)
For single people I wouldn't recommend such a trade-off. You want to earn and save as much as you can when you do not have kids. Once you have kids (like myself), or have to travel abroad to see in-laws (again, like myself), or many other reasons, you might want to have additional vacation time. Not everything has to be a nefarious plot, even in cut-throat corporate America.
I wish I was just being bitter and cynical, but this just seems to be the pattern. Some of the jobs I plain quit, I didn't even hate the job. I would have been happy to stay there -- provided it didn't mean staying there, year after year, doing the exact same job with the same title for about the same money (or a "raise" that barely matches inflation). Not one effort made, not one single finger lifted to retain me as an employee, no matter how many compliments I got on my performance. Quite literally, talk is cheap. So I'd quit, everybody would act surprised, and I'd take my salary increase and my new title at another company down the road.
And it kind of boggles the mind. Imagine if the first company hadn't wasted all the years they invested in training me and me gathering institutional knowledge and know-how. All of that was investment. All of it cost money. And instead of using what they paid for, they let me walk away and apply my skills elsewhere, occasionally with the competition. No wonder they can't afford to give raises.
But that's not just one company, it seems to be every company now. It's the American way of doing business. Human capi^H^Httle management.
Breakfast served all day!
GE is considering replacing the ritual of an annual performance review with having managers constantly give employees feedback. That makes a lot of sense to me - praise or criticize performance throughout the year rather than keeping a file and trying to remember what exactly it was the employee did eleven months prior.
Second, they are considering something similar for pay increases - no reason to wait until the end of the fiscal year to give a raise. The top 20% will still be pampered, the middle 70% will hang around for a while until they get tired of lousy raises, and the bottom 10% better keep their resume up to date
In response to this news, ErichTheRed writes:
First it was "stack ranking," the process where GE fires the bottom-rated 20% of the workforce every year.
Erich has it wrong. Welch advocated trimming the bottom 10%, not 20%. And having worked for GE for several years, I can assure you that those who were let go were never missed. The bigger problem was the top 20% who got most of the raises - they were all either ass kissers, children of managers, or helped along because of their "diversity".
- signed a bunch of lawyers who sue companies for improper layoffs
So let me get this straight, GE is going to act like a startup to try and be hip and attract more young workers with flextime.
Here is the reality of the GE professional workforce, they work you like a dog. Offering flextime and more time off is a total ruse. Even if you take time off you will still be hounded by your peers and India to help solve IT, engineering, and production problems. The main problem at GE is that they have a mature bureaucratic culture full of kingdoms and each kingdom is chronically understaffed. I have several friends and relatives that work their and it is a pressure cooker. Casual overtime is expected and 24-hour access to you is expected.
So the reality is that GE is going to try to appear cool and offer undefined cool perks, which in reality won't actually be perks and the professional workforce will continue to churn and turnover.
From an economic standpoint, this will mean GE like other large companies will not be contributing to economic growth and promoting the global slowdown by effectively hoarding cash by not paying people. This is terrible economic news. I plan to cash out of the market before the end of June. It seems that GE is going to lead the charge to kill the slowly recovering economy. No cash for you, just undefined perks!
From my vantage point GE can't behave like a startup. This gimmick will end up as a bait and switch for young professionals. This is probably less about attracting people and more about cutting costs. Meanwhile their overworked professional workforce will continue to age while trying to support a massive amount of legacy systems and buracracy. Even with hordes of outsourced operations, GE still can't staff operations. Very sad.
Meanwhile, all the young folk are going to SpaceX, Google, Apple, Silicon Valley Startups, and back to automotive (Ford/GM/Tesla) to build the next big thing, autonomous vehicles. I am really looking forward to my electric self-driving vehicle!
For the Microsofters out there, how is Redmond doing on attracting and retaining talent?
B. F. Skinner proved that when rewards are randomly given, it results in the development of superstitious behaviors. Whatever the animal happened to be doing when a reward arrived was mistakenly associated with earning a reward -- so that behavior is repeated over and over. And . . . it works! While performing the superstitious behavior, another reward (randomly) arrives -- success!
In addition, have you ever been to a seal attraction where you can feed the seals? The seals will vocalize, flap their flippers, and engage in all sort of antics to get your attention -- and to get you to fling a sardine to them. Then you run out of sardines and all of that seal behavior you were enjoying stops. The behavior stopped because the rewards stopped.
GE's new compensation system, therefore, will be for managers to continually fling french fries into the mouths of eager and motivated employees.
instead there should be a monthly raise.
Are they doing away with the annual cost of living increases, too?
Getting ready for the new OT rules and the added pay for some people needs to come from some where.
Also this will help us get more H1B's that don't stand up for them self's.
"...he didn't do the scoring, and has no idea how the scores work. He also does not know who does do the scoring."
Translation: he gave you a zero.
Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
I must be rare - hired out of college 16 years ago by the same company I work for now. From entry level engineer to principal.
I have moved between buildings or up and down floors a few times.
... after you factor in inflation.
Well, most of the time anyways - yes, I know the USA has had a recent period of near-zero inflation, but that's not the norm.
Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
Whenever I see HR criticised, I think of this guys hillarious real world trolling of HR.
http://multiversity.blogspot.c...
This whole deal of forcing counterproductive shenanigans on the workforce as a corporate head while at the same time running off with all the cash has happened before. Historically how this was countered was to form unions and collectively say no to the shenanigans and demand your fair share of the pie as opposed to fighting over the left over crumbs. Last time this happened we got weekends off, got to go home after 8 hours on the job, got benefits, productivity went way up because people could focus on doing their jobs as opposed to having productivity killed by the corporate shenanigans, and the American middle class was born. It is not coincidence that with the destruction of unions has come the destruction of the middle class and the formation of a new generation of robber barons.
And giving $50 gift cards as rewards for hitting certain targets, was just not cutting it, so I quit, and eventually everyone on my team quit.
You're not rare. You're a fugitive from the laws of probability.
That'll make the shareholders happy!
It's employee lifecycle management. Your least productive year is your first year so your initial salary is depressed accordingly(knowing they can pay you a fair wage at the end of the year and call it a raise).
Your second year is your most productive, so they have the most incentive to retain you.
After the third year, they figure you probably hate job hopping so they don't have to try that hard.
For the remaining years at the company: you don't feel the same need to hustle anyway, so they'll keep chipping at your salary figuring they have very little to lose with an employee who has demonstrated a tendency to stay in one place and is less attractive to other employers with every additional year he handcuffs his resume by becoming "over-specialized".
If you are in IT, chances are you have shopped around for wage increases anyway. I learned my lesson with a 'career' job long ago when management for said position couldn't be bothered to even give me a raise to the average salary for the position I was working in. 3 weeks later and a 30% salary increase...goodbye.
"GE executives are reviewing whether annual updates to compensation are the best response to the achievements and needs of employees."
Because we all know that the employees really dont need money. In fact we are hurting them by paying them!
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
I'm lucky that I sold a bunch of my GE stock at the opening bell... before hearing of this news.
Just a note but GE has already gotten rid of yearly Vacation time for their employees. Instead of earning vacation you can now take whatever time off you want as long as it's approved by your manager. But managers are not approving time because they are already short staffed and overworked due to many hiring freezes.
Having managed at companies where IT is a support to (i.e. not the focus of) the company, the handling of IT compensation, annual reviews, etc. is always painful.
HR, like many entities in a company, are usually understaffed for what they are asked to do. They are constantly having to reshop benefits packages (especially medical insurance), organizing workforce morale opportunities (without spending much money) and dealing with the occasional case of sexual harassment, puppy rape, etc. The annual review/raise process is one-size-fits-all by necessity, and it usually works for nobody.
I kind of agree with the idea that annual raises do not meet their objectives (especially when they are small). What would I like to see? Maybe something like an annual bonus (meaningful in size), accompanied by review of salary every two or three years versus current market data ("we see that since we hired you, your salary has fallen on the lower end of the curve of developers similar to you, let's fix that"). As long as the work is interesting and the environment pleasant, I think this would be a more stable option for IT professionals.
"We uncovered an opportunity to improve the way we reward people for their contributions,"
We had this brilliant idea to STOP paying cost of living wage adjustments. Why bother, we can always hire H1B replacements at a meager $65K/year. Instead, we will give merit raises. Most all of these will go to mid-level management who usually impedes work rather than aids it. These are people we want to move up to low level executives.
Those who work hard, are merely doing what we hired them for. So we won't reward them. As they burn out, we will replace them with $65K-H1B employees.
If GE doesn't give raises based on performance or merit, then it will not attract and retain those who have high performance or merit. There is a huge market for talent and if GE doesn't know economics 101 (aka the difference between price and demand) then not only does it not deserve talent, it will lose its place in the market.
This is one of those "fall on your face" draconian cost cutting measures that guts the organization. Let's watch them do it, and then walk back when they substantially under-perform in production, technology, and competitive advantage.
Benefits (pension, retirement plans) are based on your base salary. Bonuses are not part of your base salary, so those can increase without increasing the cost (to the company) of benefits, whereas an increase would increase benefit costs, too. However, bonuses are taxes just as if they were salary. This is the "deferred screw-over" plan.
executives can be removed from reality...
"We uncovered an opportunity to improve the way we reward people for their contributions," GE's head of executive development, Janice Semper, said in an e-mailed response to questions.
Translation:
"We found a clever way to screw over our employees and avoid giving them raises," GE's head of executive development, Janice Semper, said in an e-mailed response to questions.
Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
I am curious
As a GE employee - this sounds interesting. There isn't much room for raises and setting yourself above others. I do receive a bonus - but it isn't clear what my impact is - money shows up in my Spring paycheck - surprise. Sure a few can go "Above and Beyond" and receive $25 - $500 cash cards - or the President's award (I think $1,000). But only 1 or 2 people receive this top award (and usually for "writing a mini-van" and fixing it). So this new idea (while not rolled out nor any details) sounds cool. Back in the old days at a startup I could invent something important and they'd throw big cash at me, or stock options, or dinner out - I actually bought a car with the extra. GE doesn't do this... you get paid. Something that attempts to return to that "start up" model sounds cool - I could tie my work to reward and that moves the needle forward plus aligns everyone along Company goals.
PD - All of this has changed now that PD is here. PD is great - I like it conceptually. But "grading" us is currently gone (haven't been rank/yank for years - but your Grade A,B,C,D, F was used to multiple bonus or determine salary increases - or build a PIP). Nothing has been introduced yet to show the relationship between PD and pay.
Vacation: As for more benefits - all employees now have "permissive" vacation. I've had this plan for a year now and I'm not sure I like it. On the one hand I can take "what I need" with manager approval. Under the old plan I had X weeks of vacation and I could use that as leverage with a manager to say "I still have Y weeks to take before end of year." Now I have to ask permission - and previously I had 5 weeks. Now there's a guilt feeling of wanting to take 5 weeks- and I certainly didn't take 5 weeks last year just because I was busy and nobody was counting. Vacation used may be going down.
I've done some work for GE as a vendor, and pretty quickly saw that I would never want to actually work there. I started to write up why I wouldn't want to work there, but the story just got very convoluted. Honestly, it really comes down to large company politics and the patchwork management structure that occurs after layoffs and reorganizations, which is difficult to avoid if you want to work for a large company.
In particular does it also apply to management? I kind of doubt that the presidents and vice presidents (CEOs, CIOs, CFO, etc.) are going to be affected by this.
Quote from the (largely useless) linked page:
" [GE} aims to replace a once-a-year conversation with rolling feedback."
So if in fact what they plan to do is hand out X% raises (where X >> epsilon) whenever the situation warrants either CoL or pure reward, that's fine w/ me. No reason to wait 'til the next year.
But if "rolling feedback" means a $10 DunkinDonuts card, then yeah, I'm outta there yesterday.
https://app.box.com/WitthoftResume Code: https://github.com/cellocgw
This entire thing is total bullshit. GE does not do annual raises. They have an annual review process that is only tangentially related to the timing of your salary increase. One of the reasons I left was because only the "top talent" (basically the ass-kissers) got a raise in 12 months. For the common folk it was 16 to 20 months. And of course for the bottom ten percent (or if you pissed off your boss) there were no raises. So basically you get 2 or 3% every year and a half. Not even close to covering inflation. That was a decade ago, so maybe they do things differently now.
What GE has discovered is that annual raises are permanent. Once you give someone a 5% raise that rate of pay carries on forever (or as long as they are an employee at least). And the next raise compounds on the last one. So if you have a good year this year and a poor one next year the company is still compensating you in year two (as a result of the pay raise in year one) as if you had two good years.
A bonus, on the other hand, only lasts for this year. The base pay does not change. Each year is a blank slate.
The other thing is that salary reviews are always thought of in an upward trend. Any decrease in salary, or no increase, is seen as a punitive measure or even an insult.
So clearly GE has a financial incentive to do away with annual raises. The question then becomes....what will it be replaced by? If, as some suggest, it will be replaced by other non-monetary benefits (more time off, flexible work schedules, etc.) that might be welcome by some. To me it seems more likely that this is a further progression towards the temporary employee. The first step was to do away with pensions. Next was the offshoring trend. Now the trend is moving towards employment based on a fixed duration, or contract based employment. Workers have predictably responded by changing jobs more often.
In my own case, it seemed like the best way to get a raise was to change employers.
I'm the original poster; didn't even notice it was accepted!
The thing about GE is, for whatever reason, every single MBA program teaches that anything GE comes up with in terms of management strategy needs to be copied. Same thing with Google; our big company is now in the process of taking away offices and cubicles because Google does it and "collaboration." GE's stack ranking or elements of it have been replicated in basically every big company. Microsoft famously implemented it and immediately set up a back-stabbing office culture because even people who did a great job would eventually have to be fired or at least not get a raise. We had an ex-Microsoft VP of HR a while back, so stack ranking was in place for 2 years until they realized they were losing a lot of qualified people for no reason.
What I don't get is this -- unless it's forced, basically nobody gets the lower ratings anywhere I've worked. Are there really people out there who don't do their jobs properly and actually get an honest-to-god crappy review? I'm no genius, but I haven't really experienced this. I've seen it used as a tool to manage people out, or reward favorites, and it's easily gamed. But I've never worked anywhere where someone has been fired simply for doing a bad job.
So, the problem is that generations of MBA classes will be taught this new "no predictable raises" trend as dogma. Those MBAs will go get jobs at Accenture, McKinsey, Boston Consulting Group, or maybe even the HR departments of large companies. Instantly, employees will be turned into day laborers and have no yearly raise cycle. Even in times of low inflation, I can see that having a huge knock-on effect. Mortgages are designed to be painful up front but tolerable in the long term because the payments are fixed and people (should be) earning more over their lifetimes.
Check! Don't work for GE in the future.
They won't have to worry about firing 20% of their people every year. Without raises they'll quit.
Coder's Stone: The programming language quick ref for iPad
We won't be giving raises, bonuses or any other monetary compensation for exceptional performance, because that hurts our profits.... I mean those things have been determined by our employees to be ineffective. We won't be giving reviews either because those limit our ability to arbitrarily lay you off... I mean that has also mean determined to be an employee dissatisfier. Instead we will layoff the US workers and transfer those jobs to India and China unless they increase their productivity and volunteer for salary reductions that make them competitive with third world hell holes. We have decided that their really isn't anything our US workers can do to compete with countries that have a standard of living slightly above the Stone Age and so rewarding performance simply is pointless. Additionally we see no need to offer bonuses or raises to our foreign workers either. Instead we will bring foreigners to the US from the Shit hole countries of the world under the H1 visa program and if the complain we will ship them back to whatever hell hole they came from. We feel these policies best serve our shareholder and thank everyone for their service and loyalty.
book titled "how it felt to work at GE and expose on their patent violations, software license abuse, customer fraud issues, and personal secrets of their executives and board members"
best seller and potential movie
Mandatory OT for all salaried employees. Read this as: pay cuts. (They would be paying you less per hour.)
I bet you could make more money if you looked someplace else.