021 Job security and salary should be based on employee perf

[Erin]

21. “Job security and salary should be based on employee performance, not on years of service. Rewarding employees primarily for years of service discourages people from maintaining consistently high levels of productivity.”

 

Discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the opinion stated above. Support your views with reasons and/or examples from your own experience, observations, or reading.

 

[aabp]

Hi, im doing this one in 35 40 minutes, waht obs do wyou have? thanks

 

When analyzing the extend to which employees should be compensated based on their performance, there are many topics to consider. On the one side are the multiple benefits this measure would bring, but in the other side, are the effects of this mechanism on veteran employees of a company. Nevertheless, at the end, I agree with the given argument because it constitutes a fair measure to improve employees commitment and corporative success.

 

 

A strong reason that supports this position is that it is common to see people with different levels of commitment towards their job. Not everybody considers job as important, and because of this, a person that values his or her job more that other person is more likely to be a better employee. In this order of ideas, to reward with better job security and salary to those ones to are more committed with their tasks is a fair procedure. Moreover, this compensates hard work and dedication for a given task. Therefore, by doing this, employees not only are going to perform better because of the pecuniary stimuli, but also it is an incentive to do better what they are supposed to do.

 

Another reason that buttresses the orientation of the statement is the fact that with this type of measures a company would immediately increase its productivity. Its well known that people work better for more money. For instance, the competition within employees, that is beneficial for a company, would boost the profits of the same company. Additionally, these new profits would support the employees new salaries, making the system of paying employees based on their performance a reliable corporative model.

 

A different position about the given statement might be found with those ones who argue that people who have been for a longer period of time with a company should be compensated more because the bigger knowledge they have of the company. Consequently, if this measures are applied, this workers would feel discouraged when finding that there is no consideration about their permanence with their job. However, this position overlooks the fact that a person should not be paid for how much he or she knows about a company, nor by the time of permanence.

 

In addition to the statement, it can be mentioned that by adopting this performance based remuneration, veteran employees would be stimulated to give more and to fell more productive. It is recognized the fact that after a certain amount of years and employee does not work in the same way as in the beginning of the position. In office environments, for instance, it has been demonstrated that after a couple or years an employee instead of being contributing to the company with previous working experiences, becomes a mechanical worker with routine tasks. Thus, a mechanism that stimulates production would be beneficial for employees with certain years of experience in the same position and for the company as well.

 

In conclusion, I recognize the fact that implementing a performance based payroll mechanism generates certain inconvenient, but the benefits are invaluable for both employee and company. As implied before, competence and rewarding people’s commitment is a fair mechanism, and ultimately, a reliable economic model.

 

[gulliver_ind]

Please grade my essay..

 

*************

 

 

Statement asserts that an employee's job security and salary should be based on employee performance, not on years of service. In an organization where promotion and salary are dependent on employee's years of service, employees will be waiting for the time to pass to get their next promotion or salary increment. This will lead to a stagnant and dull work environment where every body waits for the stipulated number of years to pass to get their next promotion without any concern about the future of the company. So, I support this statement as mere contributing years of service without any significant achievements or contributions for the development of oganization should not be a criterion for to promote or to decide salary of an employee. Further, such criterion will discourage people from achieving high levels of productivity or increasing their productivity. In the below paragrpahs I have given examples to support my stand.

 

First, An employee's years of service in an organization is not a valid criterion based on which management can decide whether to promote him or not. Years of service could signify an employee's loyalty towards the organization but there coulde be other reasons also like he might be in his home town or home state etc. Further, an employee's years of service does not spell out his achievements or contributions to the organization. So, decisions based merely on years of service are not justified. And, organization will be come less efficient, if such promotion policies are followed. Indian Public Sector companies are a good example to illustrate this scenario. Indian governement has established manufacturing companies in 1950s to make India self sustained in the fields of power, steel etc. In these companies "years of service" was the criterion for promotion and salary. By 1990s these comapanies were

making losses and productivity in these companies was low. Organization structures of these comapnies become a oval which should be a pyramid in ideal scenario with more people being promoted based on their years of service in the company.

 

Second, When performance is the critreion for promotion and salary, employees will strive to achieve better result and improve their productivity. This wil also give them an impetus to learn new skills etc to give better performance. Further, employees will also be motivated to undergo various training programs organized by the company. Indian software companies are a good example for such scenario. Most of the software comapnies in India were established in 1990s. In these companies, perforamnce was the primary criterion for promotion and salary. So, employees were eager to deliver their best to grow in the organization and were quite in active in learning new skills in the ever changing field of computers. This contributed a lot to the growth of Indian software industry and its services are highly valued all over the world.

 

To conlude, I feel that job securtiy and salary should be based on the employee's performance but not on the years of service in the organization. Years of service as the criterion for salary and securtiy will make people lax in their duties and productivity levels of the people will drop. Indian Public sector comapnies make a good example for that.

[tirumalai]

Erin pls grade my essay and let me know where are the mistakes so that i can perform better next time . Thank you.

 

Job security and salary should be based on employee performance, not on years of service. Rewarding employees primarily for years of

service discourages people from maintaining consistently high levels of productivity.”

Discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the opinion stated above. Support your views with reasons and/or examples from your

own experience, observations, or reading.

The proposition that job security and salary should be performance based and not on years of service is a debatable one. However in the

final analysis i would support the former.

Motivation is to an employee what hot air is to a baloon - the more the hot air administered the higher the baloon goes similarly more the

incentives in the form of motivation greater is the dedication of an employee towards his job. Motivation in the form of hgher pays and job

security provides self satisfaction and helps the employee achieve his ever incresing material desires.

The desire to perform the best and at times beyond ones capacity can only come when the employee feels sufficiently remunarated for his

perforemance - what can be better incentives than job security and better salary in todays world where everything material is acheivable

unlike the past days where one had to be satisfied with the local grossery shop which had limited choice? On the other hand if job security is

based on the number of years an employee puts in, the desire to move a step further is washed away since the employee knows that however

better he performs he will be remunarated only wnen he has completed some yeras of service rather than the performance he puts in.

Moreover in this highly competitive world the existance and profit making ability of the company is dependent on better performance which

can be achieved by the combined efforts of each indivijual in the company. Thus paying a higher pay to keep the employees motivated can

go a long way in saving a company and enabling it to achieve a edge ove the other competetors.

Insurance companies pay a minimun basic salary to it's employees and more business the employee can bring to the company more the

remunaration in the form of incentives the employess gets.This type of perfarmance based salary helps not only an indivijual by gettng more

pay but also the company as a whole by getting the larger share of business than it's competetors who do not have this type of pay structure.

Coming from a shipping career I have noticed that performance based pay and promise of job security helps in maintaning a safe and

sound ship ,and at times fight tough conditions while at sea and facing a breakdown.

Last but not the least the viability of a performance based pay can be furthur justified by understanding the fact that every indivijual has a ego

or in better words self esteem and would not like to see the co-employee working at the same grade getting higher pay and having better

position as far as job security is concerned. The only alternative left for the employee with the low pay wold be to perform better and thus prove

his point in ganning equal or higher pay at the same time profiting the institution by his perfomance.Thus I would like to conclude that

employees performance should be the deciding factor for better pay packs and job security.