Payraise.. how much do you expect? how much did you get?

[Freefaller]

I'm not going to get one as I joined mid financial year. My LM is going to put a case to see if I can achieve pro rata bonus but we'll see.

Having taken a 30k+ pay cut hasn't been as bad as I thought but it's not something I'd want to repeat. But sometimes you need to take a step back for a leap forward.

It's nice to read people succeeding in this thread

 

[Bear]

As a contractor I dont expect any rise in pay unless Im renewing my contract and negotiating a new rate but Im part way through this contract and my agent got me a raise to cover the increase in employers NI which was a nice surprise as I was expecting to absorb it myself

 

[Moley]

Just got my annual merit increase. 3.5% which isn't huge, but seems standard across the board at our company this year.

 

[jaybee]

THB, IMHO bonuses are a better way of keeping and rewarding staff than an outright payraise.

I've been in companies before where staff would get a set payraise regardless of preformance, this causes less able staff to keep getting payraises when the high (gucci belt) preformers are bounded by what the company can offer to all members of staff. So they get fed up an leave.

Don't get me wrong, obvs nearly everyone should get a payraise to keep up with the cost of living, but rather than give two people 5%, if one is under preforming and the other is over preforming, give both 3% and use 4% to give to the over preformer.
That with reward shares, then the company has pretty much handcuff you to the company.

It's even worse than that at my current place. Not only does everyone generally get the same company wide percentage pay increase, everyone gets bundled into the company wide performance bonus. We don't have individual ones!

So if the company do well, everyone gets the same bonus. It did not used to be like that. It used to be a bonus made up of about 75% individual and about 25% company. So for the cruisers that do the bare minimum, they'd be more incentivised to try to get a better individual one. Consequently loads of people don't really push themselves. Why would you? It breeds an environment where a lot of people "do their job" but that's about it. There is no push to drive innovation or change for the better.

 

[danlightbulb]

It's even worse than that at my current place. Not only does everyone generally get the same company wide percentage pay increase, everyone gets bundled into the company wide performance bonus. We don't have individual ones!

So if the company do well, everyone gets the same bonus. It did not used to be like that. It used to be a bonus made up of about 75% individual and about 25% company. So for the cruisers that do the bare minimum, they'd be more incentivised to try to get a better individual one. Consequently loads of people don't really push themselves. Why would you? It breeds an environment where a lot of people "do their job" but that's about it. There is no push to drive innovation or change for the better.

Do have to be careful with performance bonuses in a big company though, as it needs to be equally possible for all role levels to get an equivalent bonus. I think that would be a main reason why we don't get them. How do you give a cleaner an equivalent opportunity for a performance bonus compared to a strategic manager level.

Performance monitoring at my place is almost non-existent now. They've tried various performance review systems over the years and none have stuck.

The company wide bonus was at best only ever a few hundred quid (was predicted only to be £100 this year before they abandoned it), applied to all, and now that's gone too and just been consolidated into the percentage pay award offer.

 

[Worthy]

Everyone is at 2.6% at our place at the moment as we’ve been bought out and it’s the bare minimum on that side of things whilst the TUPE process happens. Doesn’t affect my bonus though so I’m happy enough for now.

 

[Grim5]

Everyone is at 2.6% at our place at the moment as we’ve been bought out and it’s the bare minimum on that side of things whilst the TUPE process happens. Doesn’t affect my bonus though so I’m happy enough for now.

Better than being fired at least, which is common in buyouts

 

[EvilRob]

Do have to be careful with performance bonuses in a big company though, as it needs to be equally possible for all role levels to get an equivalent bonus. I think that would be a main reason why we don't get them. How do you give a cleaner an equivalent opportunity for a performance bonus compared to a strategic manager level.

No it doesn't. Why would you think this?
You usually have a target bonus % depending on level. How much of this bonus you get (over or under achievement) depends on your performance. A low level employee might have a 5% target bonus. A director might have 20%.
A junior employee earning 40k would have an target of £2k
A director earning 150k would have a target of £30k

Both can get more or less than this depending on their performance modifier (and, probably company funding for the year).

 

[jaybee]

Do have to be careful with performance bonuses in a big company though, as it needs to be equally possible for all role levels to get an equivalent bonus. I think that would be a main reason why we don't get them. How do you give a cleaner an equivalent opportunity for a performance bonus compared to a strategic manager level.

Performance monitoring at my place is almost non-existent now. They've tried various performance review systems over the years and none have stuck.

The company wide bonus was at best only ever a few hundred quid (was predicted only to be £100 this year before they abandoned it), applied to all, and now that's gone too and just been consolidated into the percentage pay award offer.

Well the point is that you reward staff through an individual bonus system as a percentage of their pay (outside of commissionary bonuses which is a different thing). Then it meets your criteria of being "equivalent" because Mr Manager can get up to say 10% bonus, and Mr Cleaner can also get up to 10% if they seemingly deserve recognition of their efforts/achievements within the scope of their roles. You can't say it's unfair that Mr Manager gets loads more total bonus pay because his base pay is more. How else would you do it? You can't give the cleaner a £500 bonus as the top end amount, and expect the manager to be happy with the same. Different experience and skill levels.

If you mean there is less opportunity with some roles. I agree. There absolutely is. Bonus systems are never perfect but should be designed and aligned to encourage good performance. Individual bonus award can be a bit of a grey area as a lot of them are caveated with "at your managers descretion", but they should allow people to get a kind of rating as to how well they have met objectives and/or gone above and beyond them.

 

[slinxy]

Do have to be careful with performance bonuses in a big company though, as it needs to be equally possible for all role levels to get an equivalent bonus. I think that would be a main reason why we don't get them. How do you give a cleaner an equivalent opportunity for a performance bonus compared to a strategic manager level.

Performance monitoring at my place is almost non-existent now. They've tried various performance review systems over the years and none have stuck.

The company wide bonus was at best only ever a few hundred quid (was predicted only to be £100 this year before they abandoned it), applied to all, and now that's gone too and just been consolidated into the percentage pay award offer.

I think that's worse.. a cleaner on min wage could get 50% bonus if they did a smashing job, which is unlikely to be anything near a C grade member of staff's 5% bonus..

Our bonuses are bracketed depending on grade (aka salary), then it's up to the local manager on what we get on that within that bracket on two different types of requirements.
No one decided the bonus knows the amount, just the percentage.

Say person A has done an amazing job on requirement set A and will get a 100% of that..
but they done ok on requirement set B and will get 50% of that.

Then HR will say that set A for that grade will get a bonus between 4-8K and for set B it's between 2-4k for the last year/

They will basically get 8K + 3K...

 

[danlightbulb]

No it doesn't. Why would you think this?
You usually have a target bonus % depending on level. How much of this bonus you get (over or under achievement) depends on your performance. A low level employee might have a 5% target bonus. A director might have 20%.
A junior employee earning 40k would have an target of £2k
A director earning 150k would have a target of £30k

Both can get more or less than this depending on their performance modifier (and, probably company funding for the year).

Assuming its built into your contract already then sure this would work. If not, then it wouldn't be fair to retrospectively award different percentage bonuses depending on level because I think quite rightly a cleaner could say they don't have the opportunity to go the extra mile within the scope of their role compared to someone more senior.

If everyone in a company of 1000 people was eligible for say 10% bonus, that is a massive impact on the wage bill. Outside of a few sectors where its the norm, most companies don't offer anything like this.

There's a big pushback on bonus culture in my sector currently at the director level. Normal workers don't get much as far as I can tell. So I do think that if a company makes bonuses available then a) it should be across all roles fairly and b) it is likely to effect the wider wage settlement because given a revenue of X, the company can only afford a wage bill of Y which has to be made up of normal wages plus bonuses. If bonuses are higher then are normal wages lower to compensate? I.e what im saying is does the base wage tend to be lower in companies that offer big bonuses.

 

[danlightbulb]

You can't give the cleaner a £500 bonus as the top end amount, and expect the manager to be happy with the same

That's exactly what my company used to do - a fixed (low) annual bonus payment not a percentage. Obviously it was higher value for lower earners than high earners where it was barely noticeable.

Outside of directors there is no contractual bonus at my company.

Past messaging has been that there is a range of role levels across the organisation that all have an impact on company performance, and a bonus system that was a percentage would favour those already earning more in their base salary (and so already being remunerated more highly for their more senior positions). I can understand this perspective really, although clearly for the company it has been an excuse to not offer any decent bonus settlements.

Question is, is our base pay higher than comparable roles that do come with bonus? Who knows.

 

[EvilRob]

Assuming its built into your contract already then sure this would work. If not, then it wouldn't be fair to retrospectively award different percentage bonuses depending on level because I think quite rightly a cleaner could say they don't have the opportunity to go the extra mile within the scope of their role compared to someone more senior.

If everyone in a company of 1000 people was eligible for say 10% bonus, that is a massive impact on the wage bill. Outside of a few sectors where its the norm, most companies don't offer anything like this.

There's a big pushback on bonus culture in my sector currently at the director level. Normal workers don't get much as far as I can tell. So I do think that if a company makes bonuses available then a) it should be across all roles fairly and b) it is likely to effect the wider wage settlement because given a revenue of X, the company can only afford a wage bill of Y which has to be made up of normal wages plus bonuses. If bonuses are higher then are normal wages lower to compensate? I.e what im saying is does the base wage tend to be lower in companies that offer big bonuses.

It's probably a bit lower than it would be if bonuses didn't exist, but likely not much since the bonuses are discretionary and the pool is usually funded based on company performance. If the company isn't doing well, they reduce the funding. If everything is going great, they fund at 100% or more. So having a target bonus average of 10% across your workforce isn't the same liability as having an extra 10% on your base salary bill.

 

[Richie]

If not, then it wouldn't be fair to retrospectively award different percentage bonuses depending on level because I think quite rightly a cleaner could say they don't have the opportunity to go the extra mile within the scope of their role compared to someone more senior.

On the flip side, its more likely that the cleaner doesn't have the same "opportunities" as a senior employee in wrecking the business and being sacked.... The size of the carrot should really match the size of the stick.

 

[danlightbulb]

It's probably a bit lower than it would be if bonuses didn't exist, but likely not much since the bonuses are discretionary and the pool is usually funded based on company performance. If the company isn't doing well, they reduce the funding. If everything is going great, they fund at 100% or more. So having a target bonus average of 10% across your workforce isn't the same liability as having an extra 10% on your base salary bill.

How does your management/company prevent the shareholders from just taking this extra performance as extra dividends?

On the flip side, its more likely that the cleaner doesn't have the same "opportunities" as a senior employee in wrecking the business and being sacked.... The size of the carrot should really match the size of the stick.

Why shouldn't your base salary just reflect your responsibilities? Why need bonuses at all?

 

[EvilRob]

How does your management/company prevent the shareholders from just taking this extra performance as extra dividends?

The board will have agreed a company wide bonus program like that. The board wants the company to succeed, including attracting, retaining and rewarding the best talent. I've seen a board approve bonus pool funding at 200% when a company smashed its numbers.

 

[danlightbulb]

The board will have agreed a company wide bonus program like that. The board wants the company to succeed, including attracting, retaining and rewarding the best talent. I've seen a board approve bonus pool funding at 200% when a company smashed its numbers.

So why do you think this isn't universal across all types of company? Surely every Board want's their company to succeed and so if its proven that a good bonus structure does this, why don't they all implement one?

I can kind of understand it in my sector (regulated) but lots of private (non regulated) companies don't do it either.

I wonder if you just have a forward thinking and fair Board. Other boards of some probably quite big companies will just take the profits themselves and hope that the majority of workforce just accept it, and they usually do.

 

[EvilRob]

So why do you think this isn't universal across all types of company? Surely every Board want's their company to succeed and so if its proven that a good bonus structure does this, why don't they all implement one?

I can kind of understand it in my sector (regulated) but lots of private (non regulated) companies don't do it either.

I wonder if you just have a forward thinking and fair Board. Other boards of some probably quite big companies will just take the profits themselves and hope that the majority of workforce just accept it, and they usually do

I've always worked for US HQ'd tech companies, and they tend to lean heavily into performance based rewards systems. So I think the answer is partly cultural.

 

[danlightbulb]

I've always worked for US HQ'd tech companies, and they tend to lean heavily into performance based rewards systems.

Yeah a cultural thing then.

My range of experience is limited having worked at the same company for 25 years, but I don't think a lot of big UK companies do bonuses really.

Company's like BP, Shell, Virgin, BT, big steel companies (when they were profitable), big retail chains, train companies, even banks for the majority of their employees (i.e not the trader types). I bet there are no/limited bonuses for normal workers across these organisations.

Our UK shareholders just pocket the outperformance whilst constraining salary growth and pleading poverty on cost pressures most of the time.

 

[slinxy]

Why shouldn't your base salary just reflect your responsibilities? Why need bonuses at all?

Unless your role is individual to you, which is highly unlikely in today's work environment to cover and segmented duties. HR and hiring managers won't setup an employee profile just for a member of staff.
There are things like market value that would in a person's contract but most people's contracts will not go in to the fine details of staff's BAU tasks.

I worked at one place where we could apply for an enhanced raise per year and a board approves it based on your performace. The catch was that you could only apply for it twice forever.
I got it two years in a role and then left... lol

Where I'm currently working, there's a business grade.. which is really down to legal responsibilities. How what you do can affect the company business and legal wise
and a techinical grade which is down to how techincal they deem your role is/how hard is it to replace you with someone else, the market rate of the job.

The pay is worked out on a venn diagram of sorts based on those two grades and you will get paid in the scope of the cross over area.

It's pretty cool for me as pay does reflect anti bribery policy and the fact that most of my team mates that are in the UK are based in London, so I get the "London" bonus without having to live there.

There's serveal of us with the same "official" role, but the person logged into a global server all day isn't expecting the same pay as the person is telling users to remote their computers, or the person designing and setting up solutions to world wide MIMs.