Was told today that my manager was only allowed to give 25% of my team a 4 rating. Got a 3, less than 100% for individual performance. Been a 4 since 2018 and 100%-150% performance since 2008. The company undoubtedly is low balling high performers.
19 replies (most recent on top)
Of course they are. This organization uses 1950’s stack rankings. Works about as well as the IT systems do.
If you get a relatively high "merit-based raise", chances are it's only because you've been grossly underpaid for years, much more so than your peers. Expectations were set low this year, so they'll take every chance to aggressively lowball as many people as possible, regardless of performance ratings.
This is my 11th year. The first 10, I got a 4. This year, I got a 3. I'm a people leader myself and have been the entire time. I know all too well how this works. This past year was a highly successful year, more so than others in recent year. However, I was more outspoken in questioning my leader's projects and decisions last year. Actions have consequences with vindictive and fragile ego men.
The people leader resources HR pumps out shows they expect 80% of employees to be 3s, and budget dollars allocated to people leaders don’t consider high performing teams. You get the same pathetic budget to split among high performers as your people leader peers with mediocre or worse teams get. Any 4 ratings have to be viciously defended in calibration, so you can hopefully award an extra .75% in merit, which justifies the system warning for why someone else on the team (rated a 3) gets less than the “recommended” amount.
Been here 4 years…two 3s and two 4s. The pay difference is modest.
In financial terms, the difference in being rated a 3 or 4 is practically negligible. You might get a few extra points in bonus or maybe an extra quarter point in base wage. Busting your hump isn't worth the return...trust me.
No one I. Management has the same story. I too asked years ago what I could do and was told nothing. They reserve it for people they don't want to leave. Even if they do nothing.
On my team, our manager is only allowed to give out one 4 per review cycle. Always goes to the biggest su-k-up.
I've been with the company for XX years. I've only gotten a 3. A few years ago I even asked my boss at the time what I could have done better to have gotten a 4 - I had no occurrences, never complained during times of mandated OT (many others did, I was happy to have it), and I ended up being the one who would be repeatedly asked to do special projects because they knew I'd do it well.
He said that a 3 was the highest they gave, don't take it personally. That was frustrating.
You mean a friend or relative.
Recognize high performers? That’s funny.
if you’re performing at a high level, you should just move on, you’re wasting your time. Unless of course you’re one of the favorites.
If you were really a high performer, maybe you'd be the manager
Got mine as a three
Asked and it sounded like “best he could do”
Raises have not kept up with inflation for past few years
That is the problem
Been like that in many companies since the 90s..
My managers told me they aren't allowed to give a rating over 3.
I was told 3 is the highest they can give. That 30% bonus was a joke it was less than paycheck and then they take 45% for taxes so it will be a couple hundred bucks if that
Sears did this all the time.
Basically grading on a curve instead of recognizing all high performers. The goal should be to have as many high performers on a team as possible and keep them, not sow a "there can only be one" culture.
Ya think? Managers have their favorites they want to keep. This is not a meritocracy. Sometimes there are outside relationships
I remember one manager who got all giddy like a teenager when her employee moved closer to her. That employee got a 4 and special assignments.