Trust of management

[openview]

The bonuses you speak of are limited to a very small percentage of the at-will group.

Not true. The few at the top receiving the large amounts is all that many ever see or understand. Those get the print or make the best press headlines. I don't agree with the extremes of many bonuses at the top. But a few thousand employees are at will. You will never infuse a company with good college grads, if year after year you will never see a bonus or raise, even for exemplary work, just because the union groups didn't also get one.

 

[careerfurloughee]

You will never infuse a company with good college grads, if year after year you will never see a bonus or raise, even for exemplary work, just because the union groups didn't also get one.

And just exactly who do you want the union groups "infused" with. How arrogant!

 

[openview]

And just exactly who do you want the union groups "infused" with. How arrogant!

I'm not following what you mean. I'm also not arrogant.

 

[careerfurloughee]

And just exactly who do you want the union groups "infused" with. How arrogant!

I'm not following what you mean. I'm also not arrogant.

Well let me break it down for you. You stated that it would be difficult to attract "good college grads" if "year after year you will never see a bonus or raise, even for exemplary work,". Now I am asking you do you want to attract "good college grads" to the "union groups"? If you do then (and I assume you would) by your own logic it would seem that management might want to spread those raises to more than themselves.

 

[Dog Wonder]

Not true. The few at the top receiving the large amounts is all that many ever see or understand. Those get the print or make the best press headlines. I don't agree with the extremes of many bonuses at the top. But a few thousand employees are at will. You will never infuse a company with good college grads, if year after year you will never see a bonus or raise, even for exemplary work, just because the union groups didn't also get one.

You are talkig theory instead of practice.

A perfect example of my point is the retention bonuses sold to the judge as being for the management group, in addition to severance pay. It was an incentive to get those valued managers you speak of to stay until their release date.

Furloughed managers were then told across the board there would be no retention bonuses, stay until your release date or you forfeit your severance pay.

The only group I, or anyone I have talked to, am aware of receiving retention bonuses were senior management.

Of course, they were the ones that needed it most.

 

[john john]

Lack of trust has been/will be the constant for some during any merger, or with every leadership team. Its the nature of the beast so to speak in any large company that has unionized workgroups.

The price of job security (union) often comes at the cost of less pay than the at-will groups in terms of a bonus or an increase for another group. Many will never understand that part of the concept.

Your concept does not apply to the agent group at US/EAST and US/WEST when they were "at-will groups"