Mr. Minder informs me that it looks like he will be receiving his semi-annual bonus next month. It will probably be less than it has been previously, but he will be getting something nonetheless. We weren't expecting anything so this came as a surprise.
I have mixed feelings about this bonus. It was only a few months ago that I watched my husband struggle through laying off part of his workforce in response to the economic mess the investment banking industry was in. I can't help but wonder, could some of those jobs have been saved if bonuses were reduced/axed instead?
Don't get me wrong, I am grateful for the bonus, and Mr. Minder has worked very hard (too hard, I think) in the last 6-8 months (partly because of the corporate restructuring), and suffered more stress than usual. I have been worried about his health more in the past few months than I ever have before. He deserves the recognition - in my opinion. But is it at the expense of jobs that have been lost?
Should bonuses/incentives/pay raises be given a moratorium during tough economic times to save jobs, or should it be survival of the fittest, where those that keep their jobs get to continue to reap the rewards? What do you think?
Posts
2 hours ago
5 comments:
I'm of two minds on this matter. If I were in charge, and I had all good or motivated people (ie: performance isn't an issue), I'd eliminate bonuses if that meant keeping everyone on board until the economy was better. All else being equal, if I had underperformers that I couldn't get rid of any other way, and times were tough, I'd prefer to lay off the deadwood and reward the high performers.
Though, I guess that's not being of two minds as much as viewing the situation from two different perspectives.
I think companies will decide according to what they feel will keep morale high in tougher times. If the bonuses were taken away, then the ones who are left working harder may feel short changed. Perhaps companies should allow their employees to vote on it? Who knows if the bonus amounts added up is enough to keep everyone there?
Bonuses are great, but at what cost? In a tight financial situation it should lead to people being more responsible with money. I think that if a moratorium (temporary) were placed so that people could keep their jobs, then that would make the most sense. There are some benefits that should not be axed, though, like health insurance. However, Revanche makes a good point... if layoffs are a chance to get rid of terrible employees, and improve the company as a whole, then maybe that is the best!
Jerry
bonuses should definitely be axed during uncertain economic times. It is usually the big wigs who still maintain their bonuses, it drives me crazy.
Post a Comment