Will only accelerate attrition. First, who gets what and what's the basis. Second, when the next downturn comes, who will support those exaggerated pay. Pay hike is not the solution to the growing attrition.
11 replies (most recent on top)
speak for yourself, OP
I heard from an L2 manager that one plan being considered is for most areas the CL changes are still required to go to the VP level for approval. Last year I understand why that was the case. This year, fu----g bu-----t. If they go through with that there’s going to be ALOT of attrition of the better talent, half of which already quit.
You got me on 'Planned'.
Do you work here?
@1fjn+1dwf23UX
"...the lower groups are still overpaid": suppose you are talking about the US?
@1inh+1dwf23UX
"When there are no NIs and Gs left next year...": there has ALWAYS been NI and NSI (3% total minimum) - it is a forced ranking system. One would expect that after +35years of working in that company there would be nobody left to put in the bottom group, since we only hire the "highest and brightest". Yet the target was increased to and still is 8% for NI + NSI.
When you say the lower groups are overpaid, do you mean CL or performance e ranking?
Not sure if you’ve ever interviewed anywhere besides EM, but employers have no way to know your performance ranking. And higher ranked people are paid more than lower ranked.
So not sure where you get the idea that higher ranked people are “underpaid” since to the market they look very similar to the lower ranked people (who make less).
Actually attrition is being seen in the higher groups, the lower groups are still overpaid and struggle to get a job with the same pay. The higher groups are the ones underpaid compared to market.
If, however, so many people at the bottom quit, they will go back to lowering the PIP % and increase the size of the upper buckets. The plans are for the total workforce number, the PIP % is just how to get there. If we reach the planned WF number early, then the PIP goes down.
The real problem is that attrition is concentrated among people who received NI & G performance rankings. Those groups will receive nil to essentially nil in salary treatment. When there are no NIs and Gs left next year, the VGs won’t care what their pay increase is.
Under our system, you must retain the people at the bottom. When they leave, the people at the top will want to leave too out of fear that that are in danger of becoming the bottom.
Depending on how big the pay hike is it’ll work. But I don’t think they’ll make it big enough. To match the market, they need to offer me a 40% increase. Highly doubtful that happens.
I used to work for an independent and bonuses and restricted stock were given out quite regularly. Seems like a good idea versus a higher base salary here at ExxonMobil. When times are good, all employees benefit and when not so good there's not so much pressure to cut people and their fixed salary or benefits like 401K. Sadly that's not how we operate.
Yes, chopping off the Dead Woods is the answer.