Subscribe now and choose from over 30 free gifts worth up to £49 - Plus get £25 to spend in our shop
Right.....I can just FEEL the motivation oozing from the friendly staff at Haringey Council each and every time I deal with them.
Jeremy your world view appears to be
Public Sector = Good, verging on sainthood.
Private Sector = Downright evil/deluded Daily Mail reading fools.
Which is why you work in healthcare in never-reformed Scotland, and I left my homeland to seek my fortune.
does anyone actually have an answer to this?
I'm not talking about academies, I'm talking about private. You choose your price to the public, you choose your payscale you live and die by your abilities.
Jeremy your world view appears to bePublic Sector = Good, verging on sainthood.
Private Sector = Downright evil/deluded Daily Mail reading fools.(Except when I need them to manage my pension!!!)
😉
Just different ways of doing things isn't it. Easier to give a bonus when you have a kpi to base it on (such as profit/money which is what most are based on). Harder in the public sector. Pay structure is different in the public sector. Motication comes from more job security, pensions pay increases based on time served (it would seem).
Different people are motivated by different things based on what they place value on. There are many ways to engage and motivate your employees. This is one tool in a large box.
As is always spouted in these threads, if you don't like it move.
FWIW, I don't get a bonus. Provided it was attainable and worthwhile it may motivate me more. Having said that, I currently don't get a bonus, my motivation is based on potential payrises and promotions. I'm fairly mercanary in my attitude to work and my motivation is not at all altruistic, I will do a good job but I will not work for free.
Just different ways of doing things isn't it.
Some people don't have the ability to see it like that though. 😆
Different people are motivated by different things based on what they place value on. There are many ways to engage and motivate your employees. This is one tool in a large box.
And so say all of us
TJ, if you had a bonus maybe you would spend less time on here?
[i]So why do the private sector need bonuses for motivation but the public sector do not?
does anyone actually have an answer to this?[/i]
They don't. It is all on an individual basis. Some people work in the public sector because they are motivated to do that particular job/career/vocation regardless of the reward. Others will do is as it is a safe, lifelong job, with little danger of being sacked, hence you get poor performing staff that are very hard to get rid of.
In private sector, much the same. Plenty of bad staff there too, they are probably treated badly and get quite poor rewards. The there are some that are motivated by money in the same way that the public sector are motivated by doing a great job.
It takes all sorts and there is no "answer"
Personally I think the bonus culture in banking got well out of hand about 10 years ago. 25 years ago, a career in Banking was no more rewarding looking than any other job. Things have changed big time. The base pay is much better, but the Bonus culture is just so wrong now.
I am still awaiting some sort of rational explanation why some groups of employees have to have large sums of money dangled in front of them to be motivated to do their best and it is considered acceptable that they will not perform at their best unless this is done when other groups of employees will apparently perform of their best without any incentives but they are threatened with the sack if they do not perform of their best.
I agree - why should tube drivers get a bonus?
I agree that tube drivers are overpaid (OTOH, I wouldn't' want to do it!)
But all of this stuff about teachers and tube drivers is a diversion - both of those jobs are not out of the ordinary as they are broadly similar to average wages.
What is really corrosive in society are salaries/bonuses that are 100s of times what ordinary people make.
What is really corrosive in society are salaries/bonuses that are 100s of times what ordinary people make.
And this completes the circle in that these people are doing jobs that ordinary people can not do. I've had discussions with directors regarding mass redundancies, 50% of a sales force in one case- 120+ people. Could you do that?
I've had discussions with directors regarding mass redundancies, 50% of a sales force in one case- 120+ people. Could you do that?
No - but I'd argue that being able to do so isn't necessarily a positive personality trait!
question of numbers innit
if someones hard work/exceptional effort brings in, say, 20% more business than you had budgeted for, then maybe giving him one percent of that extra back as a thankyou isn't a bad deal at all for the company/shareholders/country.
There are some companies where that one percent bonus could be a few hundred quid
There are others where that one percent bonus could be millions.
1% would still be a fair deal to reward exceptional performance, just the size of that 1% changes with the size of the profits being brought in.
No - but I'd argue that being able to do so isn't necessarily a positive personality trait!
Agreed, but life isn't a bed of roses, but also indirectly we are all making these decisions on a day to day basis. By going to CRC we're closing the LBSs, etc.
There are others where that one percent bonus could be millions.
Typically in industries where exceptional performance is more a matter of luck than judgement 👿
And this completes the circle in that these people are doing jobs that ordinary people can not do.
Rubbish.
1% would still be a fair deal to reward exceptional performance, just the size of that 1% changes with the size of the profits being brought in.
Also rubbish.
Rubbish.
That's what I like, good constuctive discussion. 🙄
That's for your contribution, it's being repeated so it must be right.
So nurses are getting a 15% effective cut in wages ( pay freeze / inflation / increased pension contributions) over the next couple of years. Then also a cut in deferred benefits ( reduced pensions). do you expect this to improve the healthservice?
So nurses are getting a 15% effective cut in wages ( pay freeze / inflation / increased pension contributions) over the next couple of years. Then also a cut in deferred benefits ( reduced pensions). do you expect this to improve the healthservice?
I think that the current salary levels should be maintained, the only problem with this is that 15% of the workforce will have to be cut in order to pay for it.
Stop whinging and start providing real world solutions TJ.
In just about every large organisation I've ever dealt with there have been people in the management below board level who I've thought to be equally, or more competent than their bosses.
Think about it for one second and you must surely know in your guts that that is true.
The reason that most CEOs get to where they are is a combination of luck/who they know or just hanging around long enough.
I'm not saying that they're not good at their jobs, but most of them are just people with the same mix of skills and talents as a whole raft of others who don't quite make the top of the pile and they are eminently replaceable.
If ever there was a company that was made in the image of one brilliant man it is Apple, and what has happened to Apple now that the irreplaceable genius has gone?
No whinging Don simon - merely asking questions.
I'm sure TJ's solution runs along the lines of tax the rich much more. Whilst I agree with this principle I'd be a little concerned about what would happen to the rich if we did that.
The reason that most CEOs get to where they are is a combination of luck/who they know or just hanging around long enough.
A little bit of an exaggeration, correct in essence but fails on the fact that these people do have something different that makes them stand out.
Most people can kick a ball, yet there are very few Beckhams.
There is something that sets them apart and it's not always knowledge or skill related to their company.
and what has happened to Apple now that the irreplaceable genius has gone?
Too soon to tell 🙂
No whinging Don simon - merely asking questions.
You can start providing solutions instead of complaining then. 15% cut in workforce, just to balance out with the job cuts in the private sector??
Actually, I don't mind how much we pay the top people, so long as we tax them at 100% above about £500,000
I'm sure that a distribution of take home pay that gives the top earners about 25 times more than the bottom earners is reasonably fair.
I'm sure TJ's solution runs along the lines of tax the rich much more. Whilst I agree with this principle I'd be a little concerned about what would happen to the rich if we did that.
Me too. They might not be able to afford to eat caviar every night.
rightplacerighttime - Member
Actually, I don't mind how much we pay the top people, so long as we tax them at 100% above about £500,000I'm sure that a distribution of take home pay that gives the top earners about 25 times more than the bottom earners is reasonably fair.
Yuck. Socialism.
Just as bonus's have led to failing banks they don't work for teachers in New York either :-
"Weighing surveys, interviews and statistics, the study found that the bonus program had no effect on students’ test scores, on grades on the city’s controversial A to F school report cards, or on the way teachers did their jobs.
“We did not find improvements in student achievement at any of the grade levels,” said Julie A. Marsh, the report’s lead researcher and a visiting professor at the University of Southern California. “A lot of the principals and teachers saw the bonuses as a recognition and reward, as icing on the cake. But it’s not necessarily something that motivated them to change.”
or NASHVILLE — "Offering middle-school math teachers bonuses up to $15,000 did not produce gains in student test scores, Vanderbilt University researchers reported Tuesday in what they said was the first scientifically rigorous test of merit pay."
Everyone knows bonuses are at best ineffective and at worst counter productive but given that those who chose to award bonuses get bonuses then the destructive cycle continues
Now that we are all in the mood for bonuses...
[url= http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-16748912 ]let's go spend it...[/url]
I don't need a bonus to motivate me nor was it any part of my reason to accept my current job, given I rarely get even a 4 figure bonus though it's an order of magnitude different to banking bonuses.
I support private sector bonuses, they're not really about motivating but rewarding the employees when a company does well. We only get a bonus if the company globally meets it's target as well as we meet our regional targets, my part of the pot also depends on my performance review. I just view it as helping me get out of any Christmas spending hole I've dug myself into (15 years ago it was a 10% flat bonus, unfortunately that's no longer the case so I don't treat it as part of my salary).
Banking bonuses do need addressing though as they encourage risk taking beyond what you'd do if you didn't have the potential reward and given the punishment for failure is small (at worst a P45 assuming you haven't done a Nick Leeson) there's basically no point playing it safe (with other people's money). It's like walking into a casino and being told the worst outcome you can have is to break-even, you may as well bet £100 a hand rather than the £1 a hand you would do otherwise.
but the public sector do not
Just so you know - the Civil Service have bonuses. I'd hate for you to bang on about something when you haven't quite got all of the facts straight. 😐
Tootall at what grades?
Not Just the Civil Serpents
The NHS do bonuses too...
[Jim Bowen][url= http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-16748912 ]Let's look at what he could have done...[/url][/Jim Bowen]
Lothian and Borders Police do bonuses. Any other police authorities do the same?
The Council-owned organisation "in charge" of the Edinburgh Tram network paid out bonuses too.
Just so you know - the Civil Service have bonuses.
What, £1million??
The NHS do bonuses too...
What, £1 MILLION??
Lothian and Borders Police do bonuses.
WHAT *£1 MILLION?????***
Never have I seen such a concerted effort to willfully miss the point.
Comparing Public Sector pay conditions with private sector is by the very fact missing the point.
Public sector is about starting off with a pot of cash and hopefully not overspending by the end of the year. Whilst private sector you start off with nothing and generate as much as you can.
So - where does a bonus payment come from - someone else losing out?LHS - Member
Public sector is about starting off with a pot of cash and hopefully not overspending by the end of the year.
RBS - 80 odd % owned by the state IIRC?
Just makes me laugh - teachers and nurses "think yourselves lucky you have a job" Never mind the cuts in take home and deferred benefits. Apparently thats all the motivation they need to give of their best
Banker - "here - have this large sack of cash to motivate you as you will not do your job properly without it"
2 🙄 🙄
So, you haven't actually read the thread then TJ? Shame as you try so hard to be intelligent.
Just makes me [s]laugh[/s] jealous - teachers and nurses "think yourselves lucky you have a job" Never mind the cuts in take home and deferred benefits. Apparently thats all the motivation they need to give of their bestBanker - "here - have this large sack of cash to motivate you as you will not do your job properly without it"
FTFY
Jealous? Nope - not my style.
It just amuses me the complete lack of any rational reason why bonuses are the right way for one group but not another.
Now the personal attacks start as the paucity of the argument for bonuses is shown up
It just amuses me the complete lack of any rational reason why bonuses are the right way for one group but not another.
And their lies your problem. But, probably not worth discussing any further as I get the impression that you don't want to understand.
Yes LHS - thats your problem.
No one has made any sort of rational case for bonuses being needed for one group but not for another.
Now the personal attacks start as the paucity of the argument for bonuses is shown up
where are these attacks TJ?
No one has made any sort of rational case for bonuses being needed for one group but not for another.
You are aware that people respond to different motivations, aren't you?
[url= http://www.inc.com/guides/hr/20776.html ]
[/url]Unfortunately, motivating people is far from an exact science. There's no secret formula, no set calculation, no work sheet to fill out. In fact, motivation can be as individual as the employees who work for you. One employee may be motivated only by money. Another may appreciate personal recognition for a job well done. Still another may work harder if she has equity in the business.
No one has made any sort of rational case for bonuses being needed for one group but not for another.
Plenty of people have explained this to you but you are unwilling to listen, and I generally think you will always be unwilling to listen as you are pre-dispositioned to loath anything related to the private sector. No criticism, we are just all wired up differently.
No criticism, we are just all wired up differently.
And please don't behave like a spoilt child by trying to call any criticism any form of personal attack, it's a bit of an insult to our collective intelligences, or follow your convictions and report the offending posts.
Really LHS - where - cos there is no rational explanation this thread.
Go on - just for my amusement explain it again.
Teh question is in two parts:
Why do teachers not need bonuses to motivate them to do their best at work whereas bankers need bonuses to motivate then to do their best?
Why is it acceptable for bankers to not perform at their best for their basic salary but for teachers it is not?
If you are for introducing performance driven pay across the public sector I am all for it.
Are you?
TandemJeremy, from what I can see in the link above - different people have different motivatons. I understand that teachers are not just motivated by money. There are other people who are motivated by money.Some people are motivated by power others by fame.
I think it has been explained quite clearly and simply so even a thick git like me can understand.
And why do unions reject performance related pay awards for teachers so they can't be incentivised like bankers?
Why do teachers not need bonuses to motivate them to do their best at work whereas bankers need bonuses to motivate then to do their best?Why is it acceptable for bankers to not perform at their best for their basic salary but for teachers it is not?
[img]
[/img]You're taking the pi55 now, aren't you TJ, even you aren't that obtuse.
Don - care to make an attempt at answering the questions or do you simply make the personal attacks?
Why are you always banging on about personal attacks TJ? Argue your point or dont. You were shouting racism at me last week which was utter garbage as well.
Be a grown up for goodness sake.
Don - care to make an attempt at answering the questions or do you simply make the personal attacks?
When you answer my question, what personal attacks? Laughing because you choose to ignore stuff that doesn't fit with your ideas. Re read the thread, you'll find the answers in there. Turn of the killfile first as maybe you will have missed something.
Bless you sweetheart.
Mcboo -Is that intentional irony?
TJ - I've already pointed out that there has been clear efforts to try and introduce a bonus scheme for teachers.
The headmasters are for it
The Government is for it
I'd be happy to put money that the parents are for it
Even the Teachers are for it
Who's against it?
Your mates in the union, thats who!
Wonder why 🙄
Don simon.
don simon - Shame as you try so hard to be intelligent.
LHS - MemberJust makes me [s]laugh[/s] jealousdon simon - Membereven you aren't that obtuse.
don simon - Bless you sweetheart.mcbooBe a grown up for goodness sake.
don simonSome people don't have the ability to see it like that though.
and so on - and still no answer to the question.
Mcboo -Is that intentional irony?
You have now reached to point where you can not add anything positive to the thread except trying to wind people up. Please re-read and try to learn something, you'd be surprised.
You have simply sat there trolling and asking questions without proposing solutions, dismiss anything constructive said by anyone else and when you run out of destructive argument cry the [i]I'm being bullied [/i] card. Grow up hombre if you want people to respect you. If you think that those are personal attacks, best you stop calling people [i]fool[/i] then and learn to MTFU.
Out.
Because the unions object to performance related pay.
i'm not gunna read the thread, but its got enough pages for me to assume this will apply somehow:
[img] 
[/img]
Don Simon - I have read the thread. No one has proposed a rational answer to the questions I have posed. If they have please quote them
I amm not crying I am being bullied - I am laughing at they way people like yo resort to insults when they have no argument left.
A brief synopsis philc.
[img] 
[/img]
It just goes round in circles, sometimes a different circle but nonetheless always in circles that will never end.
don simon best you stop calling people [i]fool[/i] then
Please post a quote where I called someone "fool" the name calling is all from you
I take it you are unable to answer the questions I asked?
Because the unions object to performance related pay
Wonder Why?
I mean, TJ's here telling us that it so just so [i]unfair[/i] that heachers and nurses don't get a bonus, but when the unionista's get offered one, they turn it down... Maybe because they realise that the ones that are likely to get the bonus, are the ones who knuckle down and do their work, rather than the work shy union reps and barrack room lawyers like TJ 😉
Zulu-Eleven
I mean, TJ's here telling us that it so just so unfair that heachers and nurses don't get a bonus,
Really? where have I said that? Could you please post a quote?
This is the question I have asked that no one has answered
Why do teachers not need bonuses to motivate them to do their best at work whereas bankers need bonuses to motivate then to do their best?Why is it acceptable for bankers to not perform at their best for their basic salary but for teachers it is not?
No one has proposed a rational answer to the questions I have posed. If they have please quote them
Where is your answer to the point that different people have different motivations?
Where is you answer to privatising the health service so you can run under the same conditions as banks?
Where is your answer to privatising schools for the above?
Where is you answer to changing the structure to giving Hestor a 2 million GBP fixed salary?
Where is your answer to the suggestion that teachers and health workers are put under time and motion studies?
Where is your answer to the fact that the unions block these studies?
Where are your suggestions for solutions?
Simply not asking the questions then crying that people don't answer you questions is quite pathetic, isn't it? (Pathetic isn't an attack because I've seen TJ use it).
Please post a quote where I called someone "fool" the name calling is all from you
Previous threads. 🙄
Don - is that supposed to be an answer to the questions I have asked?
Is that supposed to be an answer to his questions?
TJ,
Within most organisations you will have set pay-grades, where most likely, in general on those pay grades people will be paid within about 5% of each other.
Now before you jump to conclusions this could be in pretty much any industry.
1. Common across all industries is that inevitably you get people who will do the bare minimum but get paid the same amount of money as some of their peers who are out to go above any beyond. This is proven to be very demotivating to those high performers. So what is the incentive to work harder? Why should the high performers continue to put that extra work in when they aren't getting any more?
2. Alongside all this, a company will have financial and strategic objectives each year to meet, whether its growth, cost savings, acquisitions, profit margin, health, safety..... you get the picture. The success of the company meeting these objectives is down to the employees and in turn would usually mean that those employees need to meet their own personal objectives in order to perform at the level that is required by the company. But what incentive is their for the employee to change their behaviours and how they work? They get paid the same either way so why not just do the bare minimum? Also, why should improve their performance for the company to earn more money when they won't see any of it themselves?
3. Alongside this, in many industries you will have specialists, outstanding performers who can turn around a companys fortunes whether it is with unique designs, new technology, outstanding financial acumen, incredible inter-personal skills, wealth of knowledge... you get the point. So how do you attract them to your company? Large salary? Maybe, but how do you guarantee that they will perform if you pay them up front? How do you guarantee that they will provide the benefits you require?
Answer to all 3 are measurable objectives / goals / milestones / results, with an incentive attached to them.
What an unusual thread 😀 😀 😀 !!!!
Why is it acceptable for bankers to not perform at their best for their basic salary but for teachers it is not?
Nobody is claiming that it is - I'll go further and say that its not acceptable - In fact I think that opinion on the thread is pretty unanimous that Teachers and Bankers and a whole myriad of other workers should have access to a performance related bonus scheme, in addition to their basic pay, to reward exceptional performance 😀
The only person arguing against this, is you TJ!
Tell me, is that because you're worried that if they introduced it for nurses, it would be the others getting the bonus, and TJ would lose out 😉
LHS I understand that However that does not explain why this motivation by bonus does not work with such people as teachers nor why its acceptable for these people ( the bonus receivers) not to do their best work for their basic salary
LHS I understand that
I don't think you do.
LHS - thats the argument for using bonuses and I understand and accept that.
It does however not answer the questions posed above.
Why do teachers not need bonuses to motivate them to do their best at work whereas bankers need bonuses to motivate then to do their best?Why is it acceptable for bankers to not perform at their best for their basic salary but for teachers it is not?
Why do teachers not need bonuses to motivate them to do their best at work whereas bankers need bonuses to motivate then to do their best?
How does different people needing different motivations NOT answer the question?
Why do teachers not need bonuses to motivate them to do their best at work whereas bankers need bonuses to motivate then to do their best?
You're arguing a straw man TJ
Teachers Bonuses, great idea! Nurses Bonuses, great idea!
[u]Teachers need bonuses to motivate them to do their best work[/u]
There, we've said it!
Bring it on, everyone's happy with the concept - us evil right wingers are more than happy for the best teachers to be rewarded accordingly.
We're all for it!
[url= http://singletrackworld.com/forum/topic/why-have-bonuses/page/4#post-3441587 ]Offered and ignored on page 4[/url], Z-11, twice infact as he's just re-read the thread.
Teachers should not have bonuses when put on bonuses pupil results go down . Bankers should not have bonuses as they make poorer investment decisions when they factor their own short term gains into their equations. Bonuses are a recipe for failure.
Employee participation and sharing in profit does work in small to medium companies.