Performance never truly had a part of what you get, it is always been based on where you are in the pay scale! I was told during a review once that they gave more money to people lower on the scale to help them catch up while screwing me for a good raise because I already was at the midpoint of the pay scale. Stop believing AT&T ever rewarded performance!
Sad but true. The original poster is @XJJTF6M-1dxg
Know exactly who your referencing. He is NOT a ding dong he is a ding bat double ding dong dip dong
I think I know exactly who your talking about. He is a real ding dong and many wonder how he got to the level he is at. Sadly the 3rd level in NJ who also had part of the group is gone. If ever there was a top boss she was it. Now the dingo from California is back. Talk about a mess.
I told my 3rd level I was not going to play poker with the people who are doing a good job and if he did not like it he could replace me. He was not happy and gave me a poor review but I still got a normal raise and bonus. The id--t is in California and manages ATS with a total lack of understanding on what the people really do every day. His background is marketing and s---ed up so hard he was promoted to a technical job. If the company really had a clue they would start cleaning house and dump some of these id--ts. Very soon all they will be left in upper management is this type.
HR sends the sheet which identifies for each employee based on their yrs of svc and where they are in the salary range what their raise should be,,,,A Manager can move a little money around here and there how they like for salary increase but if too much they made to explain a 7% increase etc in this regard....Same with the IPI as there is a given range for top performers but in some cases mid-level performers can also get an IPI and as one person said above...... in discussions with my senior management they can direct to give a little more to those not at mid-point in the salary range etc.....and of course there are always the case where others are given special treatment etc....It all depends as I have seen everything.....
IPI is based on the rating, only Extraordinary Impact gets it this time around. If you are the best of the group you may get the high IPI, the remainder get the low IPI.
@1pjf, I didn’t this year. They may as well have cut me out of the loop this time around. They told me to go into Amplify and told me exactly what to select for each of my direct reports.
I can’t say if this was the same in other BUs though.
Can someone in a supervisor roll explain how the IPI is determined in a group? Does the supervisor have a direct say in how much money is given to his or her employees?
T claims the marketplace defines the TSR for your job. Once you're at the top, theoretically, you won't be able to get the same job on the outside for the more money, give or take. When the marketplace moves up, supposed to reset the top of the TSR and you'll move up.
And don't forget the pay cut "management" staff took when the high deductible health care plan was introduced.
ozs - I don't necessarily disagree with you. In my example I was giving an "all other things equal" scenario. If someone is at the top of the range and is still exceeding expectations, then I hate to see their pay raises throttled. That said, rightly or wrongly, I generally have higher expectations for someone with 10+ years in the position and at the top of the scale, vs someone who just got promoted into the position but at the low end.
@tqc: thanks for the explanation but I have two issues with it. 1)!you are an exception from what I have seen in my many years in the company and 2) he higher performing people should not be getting the same dollar amount as lower performing people regardless of where they are on the scale. High performers should be rewarded, lower performers should not just to boot them up the pay scale. That kind of logic basically means that you should just do the minimum or average work and progress right up the scale like a high performer. And please don’t start with the merit awards, they have dried up and are virtually nonexistent!
I'm a bit split on the way you described it. I'm a supervisor. Yes, each position has a target salary range (TSR). For simplicity, let's say it's 50K to 100K. They divide it up into five sections of equal size. The middle section contains the salary midpoint.
You are correct in that the "algorithms" used by the BSMA software automatically tries to speed people up until they get to the midpoint, awarding a higher % BSMA, then it gradually slows down the BSMA % once you hit sections 4 and 5.
So say there are two employees, each with the same rating. One is in the lowest quintile, and one is in the highest quintile. All things being equal, the person in the lowest quintile will receive a higher BSMA percentage than the one in the highest quintile.
The person in the highest, by nature of having a higher salary, might still be getting a bigger raise in dollars. In this scenario, the lower person could getting something like 3% of 50,000, and the higher person will get 1.5% of 100,000, i.e. the same amount.
The idea is that people doing the same job by title are 'kinda sorta' doing the same work. Or they should be. There's nothing inherently wrong with that. But to your point, it means that experience of the best people does not seem to pay off as they grow their expertise. The company's answer is for them to get another job in a higher salary band. Obviously that just means that the best people often leave behind what they are (a) good at and (b) like to do.
I had some people who were really great at what they did, but they were stuck in a title that had no progression opportunities. They didn't want to leave, and I didn't necessarily want them to leave. So I tried to do what I think good managers should, and that is create another job title that describes their day to day duties and competencies more accurately, and make sure that job has a higher TSR. It's not impossible. In fact, it's not even that hard to do, if you have a willing HR generalist working with you..which I admit can be really hit or miss. Mostly miss.
But good managers ensure that experience and performance is rewarded. Sorry yours didn't.
I was at the top of my pay scale for my job title and got awful raises that fell below the cost of living the past 3 years. I was told if I wanted a good raise I needed to get promoted to the next management level.
Your raise % was determined in November long before you write your review or have your performance discussion.
A 2% raise for a person making 100k is $2,000. A 4% raise for a person making 50k is $ 2000. Just saying. Look at $ amounts, not percetage.
Learn to kisssaass to get ahead, it is the Only skill you will ever need to be sucesful at AT & T.
The same thing happened to me a few times. I was told I was in the top 5% of the group and I was only given a very small raise, percent wise, so some others could catch up. I objected but I had no choice in this. I didn't think it was right either. I told the 2nd level that if the company wants that person to have more money than they should take it out of a different bucket. This happened a few times with me.
Yep, been told the same many times. It is possible this is also one of the criteria for the surplus. The same was told to me about the key contributor award also, and the same is true for whatever it is called today. It is all driven by the size of the bucket and how it is distributed is often controlled by above - just like the ratings. They want to limit the number of exceeds etc. Just like the surplus list, all decisions made by data in a spreadsheet.