Thread regarding Elevance Health (Anthem) layoffs

How about those people who have one manager but work under someone else? Will the AIP and raise be divided fairly for them when they have no contact with their actual manager?

@2cj yes bring on the points! Rather be at the mercy of math than a manager who is unable to be objective. Do you really think they are going to "make up" for not giving you exceeds by slipping you more money? Not when there are favorites involved they aren't. They'd rather give the cr-ppy performer more money. You seem to think all these managers are operating with a moral compass. I can assure you, they are not.

@29j sounds like you are advocating for a points system. Every metric in your performance has a worth. Add up the points and get a score - have the score equal a rating. But that only works on objective data, not able to apply it to anything subjective. "
Were you a preceptor - yes = 1 point, no = zero point, no new hire to precept - then what - still a zero.
Present at a staff meeting - yes = 1 point, no = zero points - did you present well - who cares get your point or don't
Were you an effective preceptor? How is that measured. Sounds subjective - no points. Worked hard to solve a problem for a member - 1 point? Worked kinda hard to solve the problem - 1/2 a point - seriously. Not everything can be measured.

Ugh - involve HR - that is a swell idea - have you ever met with them?

Honestly there are alot of people who are trying to tell the truth on this string without posting their actual name and title. Lots of inside information that only a manager or director would know - but you bash their attempts at telling the truth. They should not bother. I know for a fact that this is true - I was one, left in December and the information they are breaking down is absolutely factual.

Take your meets - enjoy your small 1.5-2% and your short AIP. Or bust your a-s all year have all the "proof" and still get the same result.

@a3 but they could still give a high performer an exceeds instead of giving an underperformer a meets. It's a favorites game, it has nothing to do with ability and what's fair. Too much power for one person--- it should be a more democratic process. Let the results and self evals speak for themselves -- heck I'd rather have HR decide -- and stop letting managers protect and reward poor performers because they are buds.

@ax I bet you hang out together and are besties too! I'm sure you love and defend your manager as they unfortunately have the power to protect you and propel you. And if you "go way back" lucky you! try being a new person on a team so far up eachothers rear ends you feel like you're rushing a sorority or fraternity. I can't stand being at the mercy of one person. It's terribly unfair and reeks of nepotism. Hanging out and being babysat at a company for decades is not something to be proud of. How about getting some experience other than just anthem?

@q9 Line staff, about 25 total on the team including manager and leads, and everyone has been at the company for at least 5 years.

@kf Wow - no disrespect but 3 years of significantly exceeds - never saw that happen in all the years I have been here as a manager. I am frankly shocked - typically you need to hang the moon to get that.

I really wish you told us what job class you are in - line staff, manager, director etc. And how many people are on your team - I would think a very low amount and mostly newer than you - I just am stunned.

@kf Very nice! For this you'll receive the highly coveted 0.1% merit increase.

When I was in Customer Service I had a cr-ppy manager who only ever gave me “Meets expectations.” Since being in a new department, I’ve had either exceeds or significantly exceeds.

2022 - Exceeds expectations
2023 - Significantly exceeds expectations
2024 - Significantly exceeds expectations
2025 - Significantly exceeds expectations

I’ve gotten many overall exceeds in my years here. This year with a new manager was basically told you can’t get that anymore and I got a meets across the board. It was a hard pill to swallow but whatever. Just don’t sc--w us on AIP again like last year.

@a3 This right here. I was literally told this by my manager who then apologized.

So many excellent descriptions of how the process works by clearly ex or current managers. The separate buckets of money, the limit in each bucket, the minor discretion the manager gets and the bean picking by directors/VP to approve the submitted sheet.

The one thing I will say that caught my eye and further proved all points is a poster saved who shared they saved the job of their manager and the company million dollars and got an exceeds. The following year they got a meets - seriously how does that make sense? Did the employee peak the year before then become average? Hardly. Like said earlier, exceeds used to be rightly earned, not averaged but here we are.

Bust yourself for a year for 2% - do the minimum and stay under the radar and get 2% - not a hard choice.

@OP What took you so long?🫤

@b4 At one time, exceeds weren't as rationed. My first few years here, I got exceeds. But at some point around 2017 (think of who took up the c-suite mantel then), it's been meets all the way down, while my multiple managers over the years have told me how amazing I am in their written reviews and apologized for meets and 1%.

@b9 It also matters if one's manager is willing to give others "partially meets" in order to give you the exceeds.

A "secret" here I've been trying to tell people for years is that ultimately, HR/SLT decide this. Managers have very little say.

There are very few exceeds available. If you get an exceeds, it means you’re ready for the next level. It’s not about how much work you stamp through but how well you do it. Is your quality better than the overwhelming average or do you just do more volume? Has to be both…from experience.

Only a handful of times have i gotten above meets in over 20 years. Mangers have to justify giving someone above a meets. Example, when I saved my bosses job and saved the company 1 million dollars... that year I got an exceeds expectations. the year after? a meets.

Meets is a very good rating. It means you're doing your job well. 90 percent of staff will be a meets or a 3.

@a3 yep! I have a great relationship with my manager and I’ve been with the company over 20 years - they have little to no control over our raises -

To OP. From what I have heard and seen, the same people on a team receive Exceeds rankings year over year. Some of them complained until the manager finally gave it to them. I can't tell you the number of years I heard the same thing, that I deserved an Exceeds for extra effort and going above and beyond in the position, but they could not give it to me because of limitations imposed by HR. I know, it was all BS. That could be what put a target on the Exceeds people in another post on this site. It put them way higher in salary than their teammates. I will be retiring soon and putting all of this BS in the rear-view mirror.

Former people mgr here. Here’s exactly how the system used to work (percentages may be lower now). Your mgr is given two buckets of money to divide among their direct reports. One bucket is for salaries. The other bucket is for AIP. The dollars cannot be interchanged between the two buckets, they are separate.

Let’s say the mgr has 3 direct reports. Person A earns $100k and got an exceeds rating. Person B earns $100k and got a meets rating. Person C earns $150k and got a meets rating. Your mgr gets a bucket of money that is approximately a 2.5% raise for each meets, and a 4.5% raise for each exceeds. Percentages are filled lower for salaries above MRP. So, in this example, that is $4,500 in the bucket from person A, $2,500 in the bucket from person B, and $3,750 in the bucket from person C. So your mgr got $10,750 to split among the 3 people. There are some guidelines given, such as person A who got the exceeds must get at least 3.5%. But beyond that, your mgr uses their discretion to spread that $10,750 between the salaries of the three people as they deem most appropriate. The AIP bucket works much the same way. Essentially you get 80% of whatever level of AIP is funded as a base. The other 20% is given in this bucket that your mgr may split as they deem appropriate. So one person may get 120% of their funded AIP while another person may get 80% if a mgr chooses to reward one employee over another.

If you were the mgr, how would you award that $10,750? What if person B did a better job than person C? Is it fair that the salary disparity becomes larger year over year?

@a3 True that the number of exceeds and significantly exceeds are mathematically determined by % of staff. 80% need to meet - has been this way for years.

Your manager can give you a meets rating and give you and exceeds raise, they can also give an exceeds a lower raise - its a shell game. You know what gets the next level approval attention is how much they make and will make with the raise.

Also remember you can only cut a pie so many ways - so you have no idea what the total merit budget your manager had to work with to start with. The more you get the less others get.

Time to quit

I have stated this on another thread, but please understand that in our current climate, your manager has limited control of your rating.

The number of “Exceeds” and “Significantly Exceeds” are rationed. Some leaders can hold onto the rating they give you while others will get overruled by Organization Leaders. (staff Vp and above). It is entirely probable that your leader wanted to give you an “Exceeds” but was then told to lower the rating to meet quota.