Macy's: Outstanding Service
(If you're a customer [sometimes].)
It's review time at work, which is something I really do not enjoy doing. I'd written everyone's reviews a few weeks ago, and it was my first time writing them. We have five ratings for any given category: Outstanding, Excellent, Satisfactory Plus, Satisfactory, and Unsatisfactory. The bottom two are self-explanatory. Satisfactory Plus means the person performs the job meeting all expectations, and sometimes exceeding. Excellent is given to someone who clearly exceeds all expectations and requires no coaching, shows initiative, etc. Outstanding is reserved for the absolute best of the best, so to speak; it, I was told, is unattainable by anyone.
My reviews, I was told after I had written them, were too generous and my scores were too high, and they would need to be reviewed. I hadn't properly understood the rating system, which I understand. I think it isn't quite common sense to have a rating that no one can get, so given that, my ratings were a bit skewed originally. They'd have to be rewritten; that's ok. Only, I was not the one to rewrite them.
Not only was I not the one to rewrite them (they were rewritten by my manager and our human resource manager), but not all of them were rewritten. Ok, nothing wrong with that.. surely not all of them needed to be rewritten. At least some of them had to be modest enough to pass.
Yesterday, I delivered a review to probably the nicest, most genuinely kind lady who works for me. It apparently was her lowest review in 30+ years with the company, by a sizable margin. She didn't even want to know the specifics of her score; the simple fact that she was merely Satisfactory Plus deflated her interest to know anything else about it. That broke my heart.
I didn't catch it at first, but hers was one of the reviews that was rewritten, because her original score was too high. I took a closer look at exactly which reviews were rewritten, and I was astonished. To understand why, let me first explain that not everyone is eligible for a pay increase. People who have been with the company for twelve months are eligible for a full increase, people who have been there six are eligible for half an increase, and people who are newer than six months are eligible for no increase. The amount of an increase is proportional to the overall rating an employee receives.
Every single review that was rewritten was for someone eligible for an increase, and after revision they all fell into the Satisfactory Plus category. This is astonishing, considering I still have reviews that fall well into the Excellent category. Notably, my employees who scored Excellent are too new to receive a pay increase.
How petty and ridiculous is that? The implication is that how high someone scores doesn't really matter, as long as they're not getting the increase to go with it. Corporate cost-cutting at its finest.
I can't wait to get out of that place. I feel my ethics and my pride in them dying every single day.
It's review time at work, which is something I really do not enjoy doing. I'd written everyone's reviews a few weeks ago, and it was my first time writing them. We have five ratings for any given category: Outstanding, Excellent, Satisfactory Plus, Satisfactory, and Unsatisfactory. The bottom two are self-explanatory. Satisfactory Plus means the person performs the job meeting all expectations, and sometimes exceeding. Excellent is given to someone who clearly exceeds all expectations and requires no coaching, shows initiative, etc. Outstanding is reserved for the absolute best of the best, so to speak; it, I was told, is unattainable by anyone.
My reviews, I was told after I had written them, were too generous and my scores were too high, and they would need to be reviewed. I hadn't properly understood the rating system, which I understand. I think it isn't quite common sense to have a rating that no one can get, so given that, my ratings were a bit skewed originally. They'd have to be rewritten; that's ok. Only, I was not the one to rewrite them.
Not only was I not the one to rewrite them (they were rewritten by my manager and our human resource manager), but not all of them were rewritten. Ok, nothing wrong with that.. surely not all of them needed to be rewritten. At least some of them had to be modest enough to pass.
Yesterday, I delivered a review to probably the nicest, most genuinely kind lady who works for me. It apparently was her lowest review in 30+ years with the company, by a sizable margin. She didn't even want to know the specifics of her score; the simple fact that she was merely Satisfactory Plus deflated her interest to know anything else about it. That broke my heart.
I didn't catch it at first, but hers was one of the reviews that was rewritten, because her original score was too high. I took a closer look at exactly which reviews were rewritten, and I was astonished. To understand why, let me first explain that not everyone is eligible for a pay increase. People who have been with the company for twelve months are eligible for a full increase, people who have been there six are eligible for half an increase, and people who are newer than six months are eligible for no increase. The amount of an increase is proportional to the overall rating an employee receives.
Every single review that was rewritten was for someone eligible for an increase, and after revision they all fell into the Satisfactory Plus category. This is astonishing, considering I still have reviews that fall well into the Excellent category. Notably, my employees who scored Excellent are too new to receive a pay increase.
How petty and ridiculous is that? The implication is that how high someone scores doesn't really matter, as long as they're not getting the increase to go with it. Corporate cost-cutting at its finest.
I can't wait to get out of that place. I feel my ethics and my pride in them dying every single day.
Labels: Ethics
posted by Anthony at 12:20 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home