I assume that when you speak of seniority-based compensation, you are
referring to automatic increments based on longevity. There is no
necessary conflict with a performance-based compensation system if you
follow a simple pathway:
1) Acknowledge the status quo. The starting point for all future
compensation is the present system.
2) Establish a formula which assures a longevity-based relationship
between exempt and non-exempt compensation (to preclude performance +
longevity from overtaking performance without automatic increments). This
would probably be a programmed increase in the "floor" for all exempt
levels until seniority compensation goes away.
3) Establish a cut-off date for automatic increments, with suitable
grandfathering (something like the next scheduled increment - or the one
after that, which in some systems could be ten years downstream for some
people - is the last, regardless of where you are in the ladder).
4) Institute performance-based compensation as soon as possible in the
form of "bonus" payments. These should be proportional to the
contribution, not to the base pay.
I'm sure you've all thought of this all already, and the situation is just
more complicated than I'm allowing for. But the underlying principle
would hold, I think. Perhaps I need more details about the situation
before opening my big mouth.
>Re: Performance Evaluation Systems LO7781
>Recently I posted the progress of a team tasked with improving our site's
>performance evaluation/development system. Our scope has expanded. We
>have since been tasked with defining the relationship of this system to
>the compensation system. The scope includes developing one system for
>both exempt and non-exempt.
>We have been given a constraint. For various reasons, we can not change
>the seniority system (the site is non-union, a union campaign is
>Some of the questions we are dealing with:
>* can some kind of contribution-based compensation system work along with
>a seniority system, or must one choose between the two ?
>* we are working to separate the performance evaluation and development
>system from the compensation system - can one expect to have an effective
>evaluation/development process existing alongside a seniority system ?
>One school of thought is we should drop the non-exempt from the scope
>until we can get the OK to address seniority issue, ie, keeping the
>seniority system in place is a "no-win" situation for our task.
>Any thoughts on how to effectively integrate these systems would be
>Geof Fountain TFYY93A@prodigy.com
Jack Hirschfeld How many years must some people exist email@example.com before they're allowed to be free?
Learning-org -- An Internet Dialog on Learning Organizations For info: <firstname.lastname@example.org> -or- <http://world.std.com/~lo/>