Conference 7.286::digital

    "Pay for performance"  seems seldom implemented these days. I've just
    recently had a conversation with my Manager wherein I was informed that
    FY90 pay increases were already more-or-less set! (Implying tightly
    constrained rather than absolutely set in granite.) He wasn't happy
    about that, nor was I! :-)
    
    Having said that, my group (UK CSSE) had a policy last year of "put
    people at the point on the salary scale that they deserve", to make up
    for previous years where the fy90 approach was taken. Some people got
    relevelled (up) too.
    
    It's a sad state of affairs, but at least some folk still occasionally
    have the flexibility to be able to "do the right thing".
    
    Andy

    Re: .0
    
    Ah, the clasic case of reverse management!             
    
    Your best bet would be to take your note to your Personel Consultant
    level (i.e., assuming your PSA was not able to help you) because
    you note is real complicated to answer in short.  
    
    Also there are lots of notes already discussing reviews.
    
    Just to answer one of your question thought yes the performance
    and salary can be decoupled.  You can have Salary reviews and
    Performance reviews separately.  Sometime they coincide to reduce
    redundant work.

>               -< See also Topic 789.  Discussion is identical. >-

Maybe I mentioned too many things in .0.  I am interested in the review 
process itself and what goes on behind the scenes when it comes to the
actual rating rather than actual $ amounts.

John

        If my supervisor were around, I'd ask him whether there's a manual
        for the performance appraisal process that parallels the Salary
        Management Manual.  I strongly suspect that there is, and I *know*
        that there's formal training offered as part of the Digital
        Management Education curriculum that's available to all
        supervisors and managers.  The statements "quoted" in the topic
        note do not, for the most part, fit the way things are *supposed*
        to work, but not every line manager does his or her job the way
        it's supposed to be done.  (Many people who are new to Digital,
        especially middle managers who have been hired from other
        companies, continue to do things the way they were done in their
        old companies.) 
        
        Tom

    This was how Salary Review was handled in my district a few years ago
    based on a discussion I had with an ex Unit Manager who was my manager
    at the time.  (If you underswtand the previous statement, the rest
    should be easy.)  This information is a few years old and so some of
    the particulars might of changed.
    
    In the U.S. the salary year ran from April to March, with salary
    adjustments (raises, increases) effective the third week of the month. 
    In january, the District staff would lock themselves into a conference
    room to negotiate the salary adjustments for the following year.  In
    some districts, each UM would request a percentage increase for each
    person in their unit, this would be compared with what Country had
    given the district and adjustments to the increases would be made.  In
    my district (and this may be different as the DM has moved on to other
    pursuits, i.e. he got promoted to an area job) the UMs and DM would
    make a prioritized list of all the people in the district, and then
    assign increases to each one.   After this, the salary reviews were
    done up, sent to personnel and approved.  Then all that was left was to
    inform the person just before the paycheck showed up on the fourth
    thursday of the month.
    
    This informing was also an interesting examination of the way UMs
    worked.  I had one who would write some numbers on a slip of paper,
    fold it in half and slide it accorss the desk to me.  I had another who
    waited for me to open my paycheck, whereupon I walked into his office
    and asked him if he had forgotten to tell me something.
    
    Larry
    

Note 792.0 by KYOA::MIANO "Guns don't kill people...Bullets do."   

> I heard unofficial comments like:

> "...we can only give a 1 to a person who needs to be promoted
> immediately." 

    This isn't quite true. In my last job, I received a 1 on a review.
    I was a J88 (Diagnostic Engineer Aide II) and was performing the 
    work of a J13 (Diagnostic Engineer II). 
    
> "...in order to get a two review all your customers must turn in a ten on
> the customer satisfaction survey"

    In my last job I never got below a 2. See the above for why. That
    alone isn't the sole reason.
    
> 2) Do managers have to fit their groups' ratings to the amount of money
> they have set aside for raises?

    All raises are planned for well in advance.
    
> 4) What part does personnel have in an individual's review process?

    Personnel must sign the review before it goes in effect.
    
    /prc

	As a manager who is always writing performance reviews (17
	direct reports), I'll tell you how I do it.  Note that
	this is the way I do it and my not be the way other managers
	in my organization do it, but this is the method I use, based
	on what have learned from my managers, Personnel, and management 
	training courses.

	I rate each person against the job that he/she is expected
	to perform.  I have no quotas as to the number of 1s, 2s,
	3s, or 5s I assign.  (If I have to assign too many 5s, I am 
	not doing my job).  If someone is consistently getting
	1s and 2s, then, yes, I should seriously be looking at
	promoting that person (ie. making their job harder).  However,
	I would promote a 3 performer if I felt that person could
	take on additional responsibilities, too.  My view is that 
	there is nothing wrong with being rated a 3, and I tell 
	people that when I rate them that way.  (I also tell
	hiring managers that when they call me for a reference, in
	case their standards are different).

	Sometimes, Personnel or my manager will push back on a rating 
	that is assigned to someone -- especially if what is written 
	in the review does not seem to match the rating. 

	Salary reviews correspond to performance ratings in that
	the higher your rating, the higher in the salary range you
	should be.
Frank
	

From what I have seen and heard about rules for promotions and salary actions,
I can reach only one conclusion: there are none. Some organizations will not 
promote  someone  in less than 3 years, even if they receieve a 1 rating.
Yet, other  organizations  will  promote people in 1 year. I've also heard of 
people  getting  a  two  level promotion (with raise) just for changing jobs
internally.

One result  of this  is a perception that promotions are not meted out on a
uniform  basis.  Without  some  guidelines  and  corporate oversight, it can
become a favorites game.

Worse though,  is  when  someone is hired from the outside at a higher level
than  someone  who  has  been  doing  the exact same job. This seems to be a
common  occurence  in  some organizations. Is there promotion compression as
well as salary compression going on?

        All kinds of interesting things can, and have, happened in the
        past.  One outcome of the JEC effort should be changes in the way
        jobs are classified, and in the criteria for what we call
        promotions today.  This *may* result in a fairer system with more
        consistency across the corporation, or it may not, if enough
        middle managers try to sabotage it.
        
        Reply .9 expresses an interesting concept, that somehow, because
        you are rated as exceeding the requirements of your current job,
        you should be promoted.  In an ideal world, this might happen, but
        in the real world of the workplace, if your management doesn't,
        can't, or won't justify a position for the "next level" of the
        job, then you're not going to be promoted.  If the group needs a
        person to do a job that's classified as the "next level", and you
        are judged ready to do it, it's reasonable that you should be
        given the opportunity, even if you've only been in your current
        job for a week.  This has nothing to do with whether you're able
        to exceed the requirements of your current job (although it's
        likely that you would), and lots to do with the group's staffing
        needs.  This should not be a mystery.  There's no guarantee that
        you will EVER be promoted if you've reached the highest level
        needed for the work that you do in your group. 
        
        There's also nothing magic about people finding jobs in other
        groups that involve a two-level promotion, and a two-level
        promotion will usually involve a raise.  For instance, I've got an
        earned doctorate in statistics, but in my current job, I don't use
        that knowledge in any direct way.  If a job were to open up in
        another group (or even in my own group) that was rated two (or
        more) levels above my current job, which required the specialized
        training I have, and I was both well qualified for the job and
        interested in taking it, it would make more sense for Digital
        to promote me into the new job than to hire someone from outside
        to do the same job.  
        
        It may be the perception of some people that new people are being
        hired in to do the same job they're doing but it's being called a
        more senior position.  I won't claim that this NEVER happens, but
        I suspect it's less common than some people would like to believe
        (mostly the people who believe they're being treated unfairly). It
        *is* possible that people are not being given, or failing to see,
        the opportunity for promotion.  
        
        Tom
        
        Tom

It has always been my belief that you only get a promotion when you ask for 
one.  They aren't something that pops up one day and hits you in the face.  
You should be discussing what is required to get a promotion (really your 
career plans) frequently with your manager.  In my experience the people 
that ask for promotions either get them or find out what they need to get 
them.

Jilly

        Re: .11
        
> It has always been my belief that you only get a promotion when you ask for 
> one.  They aren't something that pops up one day and hits you in the face.  

        Since I have received promotions without out first discussing
        the topic with my manager, your belief seems to be flawed. 
        My discussions with my manager (and others) have been `how
        can/should I improve', never `how do I get a promotion'. 
        If I improve then appropriate rewards, including promotions,
        should come to me.
        
        I would only worry about getting a promotion if my salary
        reached the point where I couldn't get reasonable raises
        without a promotion. 
        
        					B.J.

>They aren't something that pops up someday and hits you in the face.

Oh, no?

There was this district meeting some years ago, in Williamsburg, I think.  A
friend and I had been pretty rowdy after dinner, but were now sitting with the
district and regional manager listening to war stories.

After a few minutes, our manager called one of us out of the room.  Later he
came back and called me out of the room.  Both of us were sure we were going
to get a reprimand for the rowdy behaviour.  Instead, we were being told that
our promotions were to be announced during the next day's meeting.  Neither of
us had discussed promotion with our manager before.

/john

>There was this district meeting some years ago, in Williamsburg, I think.  A
>friend and I had been pretty rowdy after dinner, but were now sitting with the
>district and regional manager listening to war stories.

   John Covert  ROWDY????   Naaaa...  I don't beleave it! ;-)


Chris

	John also used to shave, get haircuts, and wear "real" business clothes
when was a specialist in Charlotte!  :>)

Are we talking about the same John Covert???  

					Nigel

	... might even have some PICTURES from District Meetings!

RE: < Note 792.15 by YUPPIE::COLE "Abbie's dead. Will the '60's PLEASE do likewise!" >

>	John also used to shave, get haircuts, and wear "real" business clothes
>when was a specialist in Charlotte!  :>)
 
        OK, now, let's remember the guidelines about speaking poorly
        of identifiable persons in Notes conferences :^)
        
        Tom

    Re: .15
    
    Dressed that way, he's not identifiable, apparently.

Well now that I am back noting I can respond to a few of the previous 
responses.  I would agree that sometimes promotions do get handed to people 
without their asking for them but I would say it is very rare these days 
(ie the last 2 years).  I have always considered promotions a part of doing 
your job to the best of your ability and I submit if you are talking to 
your manager about your job without talking about career goals which 
promotions are a part of then you really aren't *talking* about your job.  
One generalization I would like to make is that if you are in a job where 
the 'buisness' is growing rapidly and constantly changing you have a better 
chance of getting a promotion faster than if you are in a job where the 
'buisness' is fairly stable.

Jilly (who_has_just_started_a_new_job_at_the_CSC_in_Colorado)

    "pay for performance" A term for new hires, dosent exist.!
    
    "promotions as presented in a job plan" it took 5 years until i
    got a job plan.!
    
    The rate of advancment is porportional to the budget divided by
    the I/Q of the unit manager X your angle when bent over.
    

    I suggest you move to a different group. Your experiences do not match
    mine.
    
    Andy

re -.1 < Note 792.22 by LESLIE::LESLIE "Andy ��� Leslie, CSSE/VMS Europe" >
Couldn't have said it better.  


You can get anything that you are supposed to have if you work at it.  Having
no job plan for 5 years is more your fault than your managers since it is a 
plan put together by the 2 of you.  Your manager has the time if you 
schedule it with him/her and if she/he won't make the time take up a level. 

Pay for performance *does* work.
The Open Door policy *does* work.

Jilly

RE: < Note 792.24 by TRCO01::FINNEY "Keep cool, but do not freeze ..." >

Well I'm happy for ya.  One of amazing thing that I have found about
Digital throught reading NOTES and visiting different sites is how
inconsistant/different things can be from one area to another.  I read
quotes here like "This place is great!" and "I absolutely love my job!".
However, I also know of many people who will say that "Digital has been
an absolutely horrible place to work" and believe me there are horrible
places to work in Digital.

John 

    I know of 3 people in my area who *hate* their jobs, and feel as
    negative about DEC as others have indicated.
    
    One is a pure malcontent, I think. No matter where he works, he'll
    be unhappy.
    
    One has been working for DEC since graduating from university 8 years
    ago; not is DEC her first "real" job, she never even worked a summer job
    while at school. I think that the "grass is greener" on the other
    side for her, but why she won't go after that grass, I don't know.
    
    The last said that he *could* enjoy his job more, but is saddled
    with a manager he doesn't like, and the feeling seems to be mutual
    (!). Unfortunately, he *used* to like the company, but now his
    perspective is coloured by a poor relationship to his manager. Its
    like watching dry rot set into a ship. Outwardly, the changes are
    minimal and slow, but in private discussion, he says his productivity is
    70% what it used to be, and incentive to change things around is
    not forthcoming. He gets no recognition and very often his manager
    seems to look for the cloud in the silver lining. I've seen such
    an exchange between them, and it's obvious that he will go nowhere
    while managed by that person. Nowhere but out, that is.
    
    Oddly enough, most of those that have quit the company, that I knew,
    quit because of the old cliche: "to pursue greater challenges" or
    whatever, and I never saw a single disgruntled leaver "slam the
    door on the way out".
    
    
    Scooter

Work, like life, has its ups and downs.  If it didn't, the monotony
would drive us ALL crazy!  8-)

Those people who think Digital is a horrible place to work should look
elsewhere (internally or externally.)   Maybe they're more cut out for 
the IBM or GE mindset.  Maybe they just have a bad impression of Digital 
due to local factors.   But nobody should stay in a job that they think
is "horrible!"

Its easier to look around within the company if you're in NE,  but that 
option becomes less available when you are in the field.  If the local
management is giving you the impression that the company is terrible,
then you are forced to relocate to stay with Digital, or find a different
company to stay in the area.

A locally "horrible" Digital does not imply that Digital is horrible.

I've been on other sides of the fences ... greener pastures can be an 
illusion!  8^)

Bob

P.S.  Congrats Scooter... that Comanche gets a little closer now, eh?

    RE: .26
    
    I think that if you slam the door on the way out, your chance of
    coming back into the company in the future, if you decide to, is
    almost nil.  If you leave quietly, then the chances are better than
    good to come back.

    
    
    
    
    
    Re: .21,
    
    >"pay for performance" A term for new hires, dosent exist.!
    
    >"promotions as presented in a job plan" it took 5 years until i
    >got a job plan.!
    
    >The rate of advancment is porportional to the budget divided by
    >the I/Q of the unit manager X your angle when bent over.
    
    I would say that you are experiencing one of the things about
    career planning at Digital that makes Digital unique.  For some it is a
    major stumbling-block.  For myself it has worked out just fine.
    
    What I am talking about is the fact that at Digital, career
    planning/advancement is something that you, the employee drive.
    It is not something that will just "happen to you", no matter how
    long you wait for it.  If, however, you take a look around, decide
    where you want to end up, and start working in that direction, my
    experience is that you stand a pretty good chance of ending up there. 
    This implies that you take the responsibility for wrong decisions.
    Don't have a job plan?
    Write one up that suits you, and ask your manager to sign it.
    If it is reasonable, they probably will.  If its not, they will
    probably counter it, and you're on the way.  If its out in left field
    and sarchastic, it will be dumped in the round file.  You have to work
    with your manager if you expect them to work with/for you.
    
    Kevin
    (who_ONCE_went_9_months_without_a_job_plan_before_figuring_this_out)

    I have to agree whole-heartedly with what Kevin said in .29; you
    have to drive it yourself.  *YOU* are responsible for guiding your
    career, your manager is only responsible to help you get there,
    but not to drive it.
    
    However, I think the point is well-taken that Digital is unique
    in this regard.  It's not at all intuitively obvious to a new hire
    that this is the way it works.  It's certainly not something that
    is presented in the new hire orientations.  (At least in the
    orientations that they had 8 years ago).
    
    Jon
    who_once_went_for_over_3_years_without_a_performance_review_because_
    he_was_waiting_for_his_manager_to_initiate_it

    There are lousy situations within Digital, and I knwo of many people
    stuck in them. From what I understand, your current manager "owns"
    you for two years. Unless they provide a release, it appears there
    is no choice other than stick it out or leave DEC.
    
    There seems like there should be a better way.
    
    Pat
    

        No one ever "owns" you.  You're never "stuck" in a lousy situation
        unless you choose to stay.  That's true whether you leave Digital,
        or move to another position.
        
        Yes, there is an expectation that you will investigate a position
        before you accept it, and be reasonably sure that it's what you
        want.  That's part of taking responsibility for your career.  And
        there is an expectation that once you take on a position, you'll
        stay long enough to learn the job and be productive.  The usual
        guideline for this is two years.
        
        If a situation changes, or turns out to have been misrepresented
        (but did you really look carefully and ask hard questions?), then
        all bets are off, and you should consider yourself a "free agent". 
        
        For example, the recent "ALL HANDS ON DEC" program gives almost
        every person a chance to investigate opportunities.
        
        Complaining for the sake of complaining may make you feel better
        in the short run, but it doesn't make things better.
        
        Tom

re .23:

> You can get anything that you are supposed to have if you work at it.  Having
> no job plan for 5 years is more your fault than your managers since it is a 
> plan put together by the 2 of you.  Your manager has the time if you 
> schedule it with him/her and if she/he won't make the time take up a level. 

re .29:

>    I would say that you are experiencing one of the things about
>    career planning at Digital that makes Digital unique.  For some it is a
>    major stumbling-block.  For myself it has worked out just fine.
>    
>    What I am talking about is the fact that at Digital, career
>    planning/advancement is something that you, the employee drive.
>    It is not something that will just "happen to you", no matter how
>    long you wait for it.

All this is true, and well and good. And everyone who reads this conference
should now be clear about it, too.

BUT... believe it or not, there are naive souls walking about who expect an
organisation to manage their career paths for them. At school you get watched,
assessed, put through exams, and promoted or channelled or whatever according
to your performance. It's easy enough to think that the way to get ahead is
to do your job to the best of your ability, and leave your manager to recognise
your contribution by giving you a rise and/or promotion - or even by suggesting
an appropriate career step to a higher-level group.

Some people will say this is facile and irresponsible. Besides, it tells you
right there in the Policies and Procedures!

OK, there's no better way to crack this one than to tell my own story. I joined
DEC in 1974, after working for two years as a Field Service Engineer for another
company. I turned down a job offer from IBM which paid more, because I thought
Digital would offer more opportunity. The guys who hired me promised me the
moon - all I wanted. They even promised they would get back to me in a year or
so to put together a career progression plan.

Of course, none of this ever happened. They changed jobs by then, anyway, even
if they could remember my name. Meanwhile, I worked as hard as I could - got
a good reputation with the customers and my colleagues. Funny thing, I just
couldn't get a promotion in this "big opportunity" company - well, I got ONE
promotion in the next 13 years. Never once, in all that time, did my annual
review say anything other than "exceeds" or "meets expectations". But it
wasn't until 1982 - after 8 years with DEC - that I even SAW a P&P manual.
I thought they were for managers only! No one told me different.

Since I left Field Service and joined SWAS in 1986, I've been making reasonable
progress, to the extent that I don't even feel unfairly treated any more. And
due to the good raises I've been getting, I'm actually earning 43% MORE in
real terms (inflation adjusted) than I was in 1974. Life is good...

The big turning point was that when I joined SWAS, I started drinking beer with
Sales types and consultants. These people knew what it was about and told me.
But remember, there are plenty of intelligent, hard-working, committed people
around who are NOT getting what they deserve. To do so, they need to back off
a little on the hard work and commitment, and spend maybe 5% of their time
furthering their own careers. But - please don't BLAME them for losing out
because they thought that if they worked hard for Digital, Digital would see
them right.

--Tom

ps A good friend gave me a cartoon yesterday which sums a lot of this up
perfectly. I hope others find it amusing - and a few of the people I was
just describing might find it illuminating too.

The scene is in a London finance house; two yuppies are talking in the
lift/elevator.

Senior Manager: "I circulated a memo to the Floating Rate Note team suggesting
that those who wanted to do well in the City might benefit from an
'Outward Bound' course. You know, when you get dropped on Exmoor with just a
tin of spam and a box of matches to survive for a weekend"

Junior Manager: "Yes."

Senior Manager: "I thought it would be a good test of their initiative and
decision-taking - sort out the leaders from the wimps. Five of them went on it."

Junior Manager: "I hear only Hodges showed he was made out of the right stuff."

Senior Manager: "That's right. He just laughed and threw the memo in the bin."

RE: .32

>        No one ever "owns" you.  You're never "stuck" in a lousy situation
>        unless you choose to stay.  That's true whether you leave Digital,
>        or move to another position.
>					...
>        If a situation changes, or turns out to have been misrepresented
>        (but did you really look carefully and ask hard questions?), then
>        all bets are off, and you should consider yourself a "free agent". 


    Not true, Tom.  I was in a position three years ago where the job I had
    been in for a year *totally* and *completely* changed on July 1.  I was
    a manager at the time, and I was given a new boss, new metrics, a new
    organization, a new territory, a change in direct reports, and a change
    in my customer base. The only thing that didn't change was the physical
    office I reported to each day. My performance the previous year had
    been as good as you can get in Digital.  I was unhappy with the change,
    and, with the full support of my manager, set about finding another
    job. And I found a good one:  no more money immediately, but a
    promotion and a *far* brighter future than where I was at the time. I
    was prevented from taking the job by an Area Manager, whose only reason
    was that I owed him another year in my current job.  I fought it up
    through Personnel at the Country level.  The story I got from them was
    that what happened was un-Digital and *certainly* was not the "right
    thing," but technically (according to P&P) the guy had a right to do
    it. 

>        
>        For example, the recent "ALL HANDS ON DEC" program gives almost
>        every person a chance to investigate opportunities.

If you're already in the field, AHOD isn't of too much use in achieving 
mobility.

>        Complaining for the sake of complaining may make you feel better
>        in the short run, but it doesn't make things better.

I agree, but I also think pointing out the negative aspects of the way we 
work at Digital is as much a part of the purpose of this file as pointing 
out the positive aspects.  After all, recognizing our shortcomings is the 
first step to making our company better!

							Pat
    

    >pointing  out the positive aspects.  After all, recognizing our
    >shortcomings is the  first step to making our company better!

    Where is it written that you can't love parts of your job but still
    recognize that THERE ARE PROBLEMS?  I think it is repugnant to
    characterize anyone that is realistic enough not to be a total mushroom 
    as a "malcontent".  Our strength is the ability to recognize problems
    AND FIND WORKABLE SOLUTIONS TO THEM rather than ignore them.  

    When did this company become more afraid of having employees that give
    a damn point out failings than to become unmotivated and "work-to-rule"
    or operate at 70%?  When did an employee that cares enough about his or
    her job to see the problems become a "malcontent" for pointing out
    those problems?  Does that mean that only the fair-weather employees
    that say the right things, and make the right moves are "good"
    employees?  I sure HOPE not.  I hope that somewhere out there are
    managers that see through the bull....
    

    From the discussion thus far, it seems that several problems related
    to reviews have been raised:
    
    (1)  Reviews are not performed using any uniform guidelines. The
    result is that some people are treated well, and others poorly.
    
    (2)  Promotions also are received/not received according to no
    know guidelines.
    
    (3)  Career planning can help make promotions/reviews more 
    predicable, but new employees are not informed of this. Therefore,
    many of them wait for someone to do it for them.
    
    (4)  When an employee is in a situation that he/she can not tolerate, 
    there is no option to change to another situation unless their two 
    years is up.
    
    There are ways to solve all of the above problems. For example,
    the review process can be much more scientific as it is in many
    companies. In this system, a manager performing a review is first
    required to supply a list of people who have worked for, with, and
    over an employee. Each person on the list 
    is then required to independently rate the person being reviewed. 
    The various reviews are then compiled to determine the mean rating
    for this person. If someones rating falls far outside of the norm, 
    they are called in by personnel to explain why.
    
    This is just one idea of how things could be handled differently. What
    do other people think?  
    
    Pat
    

    re -.1:
    
    Frequently that method is used during salary planning.  In that way, a
    particular supervisor/manager who is a high rater and another who is
    generally a low rater meet at the same table with managers who are
    middle-of-the-road raters and compare notes.  It helps to normalize
    the plans for all the groups.  This, of course, doesn't mean that each
    individual contributors plan is the same, just that the overall
    department or unit or group plans are equivalent.
    
    Marge

    RE: Career plans..
    
    I also know of one employee who spent the time making a very elaborate
    career plan, down to when he needed help from his boss to meet an
    objective, when he needed education, be it inside or outside (he
    was working on a degree)..  His boss was quite impressed.. told
    him so even...  then proceeded to place it in a drawer - and not follow
    it, no matter what the guy did to attempt to have him follow it.
    Even a trip to personnel did not help this person.
    
    My advice to that person -- get another job... which he promptly
    did as soon as his 2 year commitment was up....

    Moral of the story?
    
    Even when you know about them, plan them, work your heart out...
    if you have a manager who could give a flying leap, it won't do
    you any good...
    
    Now my side question is:  When your boss doesn't get a promotion
    that he was after, what can you do to prevent him from taking it
    out on your career plan? 

    My response to all this Reviews for the most part aren't worth the
    paper they are printed on. Perception plays the biggest role secondly
    where you are in your "Pay Scale". I have had some really "good"
    PAs and gotten S%*!! for raises. When I ask my mgr why the lousy
    raise he goes off on a tangent. I believe that managers aren't taught
    to manage in DEC. When faced with an employee they are taught to
    distract,lie and otherwise avoid a straight forward answer no matter
    what the consequences. If you should find a mgr with backbone then
    you ask him why a T4 with a 3 or 4 rating gets a better raise than
    a T5 with a 2 rating  they go back to range in pay scale.
    
    
    
    WHY HAVE A TOP TO A PAY SCALE IF THEY WON"T PUT YOU THERE IF YOU
    HAVE EARNED IT ?
    
    
    Mike Turro
    

    	
    	This leads me to remembering something that we have talked about.
    	And that is, 1. why couldn't management be PA'ed by their piers.
    		         Include this rating in their total PA.  The
    			 Field's PA includes what the rest of his piers
    			 in that office does.  By the managers piers,
    			 I mean the engineers that they manage.  
    
    		      2.  Schedule each manager to work in the field
    			 with his engineers for a period of time.  This
    			 would enlighten them as to the real world.
    			 Do this on a yearly basis. ( Let them handle
    			 their own repeat calls though. :-) )
                                                             
    

re Note 792.40 by USHS09::DOWDA:

"why couldn't management be PA'ed by their peers. ... By the managers peers, I
mean the engineers that they manage."

        Indeed, why not?
    
        Bob

    re.note 792.40
    
    Please note in my 792.40 that I misspelled pier for peer.  Spelling
    has always been my bad point.  Thankgoodness that I was good in
    math.  I just hope that the idea was understood and not the
    spelling.  Please thank the person that mailed the message to me
    about my mistake for pier/peer.  
    Thankyou again, Ron.
    
    ps.  Thankgoodness for 'decspell'.
    

From what I hear, there is now a Q1-long pay freeze. Any more details?

Andy

    Re: .43:
    
    See note 818.

re .39

Again we hear someone comparing their raise to someone in a different job 
(ie T4 to T3 etc.).  As it has always been explained to me (and I believe 
in the system) your raise is determined on where you fall in the salary 
range and how your performance rates to other persons in the same job code. 
There is a maximum to the range because DEC figures out the most a position 
is worth to the company.  If a T4 is constantly rated a 1, and gets 10% 
raises every salary review, should we really expect that after 20 year that
person could be paid $100,000, NO.  There are ranges to let you know that 
when you reach the maximum you can expect little to no raise if you choose 
to stay in that position.  I know many people who are in that position but 
they enjoy their job and the lifestyle they live with that job and pay.  If 
they want more money they know they have to move to a job with a higher 
range.

To the question on why have a top level if you can't get there.  I know of 
many people that are at the top but they have also been in the same job for 
10-15 years.  How long do you think it should take to get there if you 
start in the bottom quarter ??

Consider this, if pay was tied to company performance would you be happy to 
take 15% to 20% raises during good times and 15% to 20% decreases during 
bad times?

Jilly

    reply .39,.45
    
    Well, work used to be great but not any where near as rewarding
    as it was 4or5 years ago. Not monetarily or personally. The same
    crap,waste,and management decrepitude exists and in my opinion is
    getting worse. Managers can't manage and engineers stil cant fix.
    Names pop up again and again yet they still pay these people salaries
    because And this is a quote from a DM. "DEC policy is as long as
    there is a small glimmer of hope no firing can take place "...
    
    My raises get smaller and my job responsibilities get bigger. Where
    will it end I believe the Economy and Company politics are now putting
    the brakes on...
    
    	I hope something positive comes out of this.
    
    I wish I could get $100k per year but Im realistic too. They do
    raise the Ranges every year or so but why do that where is the
    incentive for employees ????
    
    Mike Turro
    

    This note is slowing down, but I thought I'd share something I
    noticed earlier this year.

    All of my (three) raises here at Digital have been fine.  No
    complaints, really, but I had to laugh when I realized that all
    three were exactly the same amount.  Literally $X (pre-tax) more per
    week each time.  No raise this year, so I guess I'll never know what
    would have happened.

David