Effort to Pay Rate
May 23rd 2008 11:02
If you get paid by the hour for your work, do you know how much effort you are supposed to outlay?
I suppose the practical answer is: as much as necessary to achieve the goals of that particular business in what relates to that particular job. This could give you a rate of effort per hourly pay that would characterise your position. Which is all right.
But what if you are asked to increase your efforts by some reason or if you are just hard working? You would be going above your effort to pay rate for the job. I ask whether you should be asking for a pay rise.
On the other hand, what if you are just plain lazy? You would be outputting less than the required effort to pay rate in that job. Should you be imposed a lesser pay on the same basis?
If you work harder than the job requirement, you will be accumulating a job goodwill while, if you work less that that benchmark, you will be risking being replaced.
At least for the hard workers, I would say that, if your boss does not give you a commensurate pay increase, he is appropriating your job goodwill. I could be seen as a communist speaking this way, but I don’t care.
There are a lot of jobs where extra effort conducts to promotion and year end bonuses, but if you are hard working and stuck in a dead-end job you are probably being skinned throughout. The cynical alternative view is that you are redefining the job effort to pay rate. You wouldn’t be getting a cent out of this for your wonderful efforts.
All this just makes me thing that working for an hourly rate of pay is a very poor way to do business. I have approached this topic in the article Paid to be Lazy and The Trouble with Commuting but I would say here and again that we should be all paid for a profit, not for a salary. Giving people work paid by the job, not by the hour, is what I envisage as revolutioning the market place.
I suppose the practical answer is: as much as necessary to achieve the goals of that particular business in what relates to that particular job. This could give you a rate of effort per hourly pay that would characterise your position. Which is all right.
But what if you are asked to increase your efforts by some reason or if you are just hard working? You would be going above your effort to pay rate for the job. I ask whether you should be asking for a pay rise.
On the other hand, what if you are just plain lazy? You would be outputting less than the required effort to pay rate in that job. Should you be imposed a lesser pay on the same basis?
If you work harder than the job requirement, you will be accumulating a job goodwill while, if you work less that that benchmark, you will be risking being replaced.
At least for the hard workers, I would say that, if your boss does not give you a commensurate pay increase, he is appropriating your job goodwill. I could be seen as a communist speaking this way, but I don’t care.
There are a lot of jobs where extra effort conducts to promotion and year end bonuses, but if you are hard working and stuck in a dead-end job you are probably being skinned throughout. The cynical alternative view is that you are redefining the job effort to pay rate. You wouldn’t be getting a cent out of this for your wonderful efforts.
All this just makes me thing that working for an hourly rate of pay is a very poor way to do business. I have approached this topic in the article Paid to be Lazy and The Trouble with Commuting but I would say here and again that we should be all paid for a profit, not for a salary. Giving people work paid by the job, not by the hour, is what I envisage as revolutioning the market place.
| 49 |
| Vote |
Shared on
Subscribe to this blog
