Home
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
Latest activity
Members
Current visitors
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Home
Forums
Brown Cafe UPS Forum
UPS Discussions
The Concept of Constructive Dissatisfaction
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="JustTired" data-source="post: 301466" data-attributes="member: 10234"><p><span style="color: black"><strong><em>Taylor believed in finding the right jobs for workers, and then paying them well for the increased output. He advocated paying the person and not the job and believed that </em></strong></span><a href="http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/goldman/peopleevents/e_iww.html" target="_blank"><u><span style="color: black"><strong><em>unions</em></strong></span></u></a><span style="color: black"><strong><em> would be unnecessary if workers were paid their individual worth.</em></strong></span> </p><p> </p><p>Paying the worker and not the job could have been the original concept behind the bonus program. I see nothing wrong with that concept (with the possible exception of safety issues). Safety aside, it rewarded those that exceeded the expectations of the set standards. </p><p> </p><p>The problem is that as time went on those standards were changed. Supposedly to reflect a change in technology 5-6 years after the fact (DIAD). In my opinion, those changes in standards didn't accurately reflect that change and I think it was apparent in the performance numbers of all drivers (bonus and non-bonus). Basically it was a reversion back to a "pay the job" concept. It relieved the company of a good deal of "bonus" payment, but it was also reflected in the overallowed nationwide.</p><p> </p><p>I suppose that the thought was that those drivers making bonus (having grown accustomed to that money) would work even harder to maintain that income. Unfortunately, in most cases, those drivers were already "topping out" at max effort. So the company is left with standards that do not accurately reflect the job being done. This leaves drivers with more work being dispatched than can be done....... and the company with numbers that not only look bad but are virtually meaningless in reflecting the "real world" parameters of the job.</p><p> </p><p>JMO</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="JustTired, post: 301466, member: 10234"] [COLOR=black][B][I]Taylor believed in finding the right jobs for workers, and then paying them well for the increased output. He advocated paying the person and not the job and believed that [/I][/B][/COLOR][URL="http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/goldman/peopleevents/e_iww.html"][U][COLOR=black][B][I]unions[/I][/B][/COLOR][/U][/URL][COLOR=black][B][I] would be unnecessary if workers were paid their individual worth.[/I][/B][/COLOR] Paying the worker and not the job could have been the original concept behind the bonus program. I see nothing wrong with that concept (with the possible exception of safety issues). Safety aside, it rewarded those that exceeded the expectations of the set standards. The problem is that as time went on those standards were changed. Supposedly to reflect a change in technology 5-6 years after the fact (DIAD). In my opinion, those changes in standards didn't accurately reflect that change and I think it was apparent in the performance numbers of all drivers (bonus and non-bonus). Basically it was a reversion back to a "pay the job" concept. It relieved the company of a good deal of "bonus" payment, but it was also reflected in the overallowed nationwide. I suppose that the thought was that those drivers making bonus (having grown accustomed to that money) would work even harder to maintain that income. Unfortunately, in most cases, those drivers were already "topping out" at max effort. So the company is left with standards that do not accurately reflect the job being done. This leaves drivers with more work being dispatched than can be done....... and the company with numbers that not only look bad but are virtually meaningless in reflecting the "real world" parameters of the job. JMO [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Home
Forums
Brown Cafe UPS Forum
UPS Discussions
The Concept of Constructive Dissatisfaction
Top