tug of war.
I don't like talking to our company's higher management. Mainly because I'm not the type of person who actively point out some issues or give pointers on things that needed improvement or just simply being kiss-ass. I work because I can, because I need this job. I would likely spare the drama part to those who have the will to communicate properly. I believe the management have all the senses to take cues from movements within the company specially as obvious as chronic employee resignations.
So when our line manager asked if I could have a talk to our CEO, I'm almost pretty sure I could have declined at that very moment. As expected, nobody stood up to take the challenge. For some reason, my manager saw me and almost helplessly tossed me up despite disagreeing to the whole idea.
I entered the CEO's office yesterday with a whole lot of reservations. After a few lame hi's and hello's, we're down to business. Along the conversation, he asked me what are my concerns in my department. I gave him two. First I wanted to be in another department which mainly focuses on software development and not mainly supporting clients' crap in which I am currently in. Second, I said the new incentive program for support employees is not really attractive considering how demanding the job could get at times. I swear, he grunted on this second part as he left his chair and approached the white board in the corner. He said there was a miscommunication and that the proposed incentive program will be revised accordingly. He then proceeded to explain to me the incentive program on top of the annual performance bonus we will be getting if the company performs well.
After a lengthy lecture about compensations, he got back to his chair and said something that bothered me the whole day. He said he was not sure why compensation was a big deal in Manila. In our Singapore and European offices, he said, compensation is hardly an issue by employees. He talked about people having sufficient salaries to raise their families is simply enough for them. Yeah, I've had a WTF moment in my unexpected time of the day. I hear him talk more, but what really registered to me at that moments are nasty compound words as mukhang-pera and patay-gutom - to my freaking face.
When the meeting was finally over, I wondered if that was a generalization. Were our European or Singaporean counterparts were more contented financially? Or for some reason, they loved their job so much that money was never an issue. Are we the enterprising motherfuckers who would grab every single opportunity involving money?
I felt horrible. Not guilt, though. Horrible because I was actually out of words. I knew there's something wrong along the lines, but I chose to keep mum. I'm pretty sure if I try to talk him out of that kind of thinking, it would not sound good. I know because a few of such rebuttal were swirling on my head unable to take its form as spoken words.
Our country can be classified as an easy choice of outsourcing companies because of our relatively minimal wages, fluency in English, and technical competency. But companies must understand that people might have the slightest idea where they belong in the market, salary-wise. And I believe it is just normal if we exercise our liberty to question the very method of determining the appropriate salaries especially if we felt we were grossly underpaid. Aside from that, with the very demanding task as client support, what's with the few incentives to motivate the people? It even doesn't necessary in the form of monetary rewards. It's the role of the management to come up with something that greatly recognizes the role of their employees in the overall success of the company.
Mr. CEO even claimed that the management have been brought to attention the alarming rate of resignations in our department. Talking to the affected employees would be a valuable first step into recognizing the areas for improvement. You cannot take the money talk out of the agenda. After all, we worked because we knew we will be compensated - properly, according to market standards, and according to our job descriptions.
Now, is our management's idea that Manila employees are the most unsatisfied with our salaries a generalization of Filipino sentiments towards our respective jobs? I don't have the statistics. I don't know anything psychological or sociological about the whole idea. But here's a known fact: people tend to be dissatisfied with their job if there's not much growth coupled with a meager salary. This is especially the case if one knew that there are better attainable options somewhere. That's it. No more complicated regional classifications. People normally looked at their immediate vicinity. And if there's something lacking, we put our grievances in proper perspective.
Did I mention I hated my job? Yes I do. There's limited growth in my department. The new incentive scheme they are planning is a huge step back from the currently implemented and more cutbacks and restrictions of previous benefits. They should have known that people are rarely loyal to the company. People leave because there are other palatable companies. Supply and demand. Simple as that.
We throw emotions aside. After all, we are all enterprising motherfuckers.
--
So when our line manager asked if I could have a talk to our CEO, I'm almost pretty sure I could have declined at that very moment. As expected, nobody stood up to take the challenge. For some reason, my manager saw me and almost helplessly tossed me up despite disagreeing to the whole idea.
I entered the CEO's office yesterday with a whole lot of reservations. After a few lame hi's and hello's, we're down to business. Along the conversation, he asked me what are my concerns in my department. I gave him two. First I wanted to be in another department which mainly focuses on software development and not mainly supporting clients' crap in which I am currently in. Second, I said the new incentive program for support employees is not really attractive considering how demanding the job could get at times. I swear, he grunted on this second part as he left his chair and approached the white board in the corner. He said there was a miscommunication and that the proposed incentive program will be revised accordingly. He then proceeded to explain to me the incentive program on top of the annual performance bonus we will be getting if the company performs well.
After a lengthy lecture about compensations, he got back to his chair and said something that bothered me the whole day. He said he was not sure why compensation was a big deal in Manila. In our Singapore and European offices, he said, compensation is hardly an issue by employees. He talked about people having sufficient salaries to raise their families is simply enough for them. Yeah, I've had a WTF moment in my unexpected time of the day. I hear him talk more, but what really registered to me at that moments are nasty compound words as mukhang-pera and patay-gutom - to my freaking face.
When the meeting was finally over, I wondered if that was a generalization. Were our European or Singaporean counterparts were more contented financially? Or for some reason, they loved their job so much that money was never an issue. Are we the enterprising motherfuckers who would grab every single opportunity involving money?
I felt horrible. Not guilt, though. Horrible because I was actually out of words. I knew there's something wrong along the lines, but I chose to keep mum. I'm pretty sure if I try to talk him out of that kind of thinking, it would not sound good. I know because a few of such rebuttal were swirling on my head unable to take its form as spoken words.
Our country can be classified as an easy choice of outsourcing companies because of our relatively minimal wages, fluency in English, and technical competency. But companies must understand that people might have the slightest idea where they belong in the market, salary-wise. And I believe it is just normal if we exercise our liberty to question the very method of determining the appropriate salaries especially if we felt we were grossly underpaid. Aside from that, with the very demanding task as client support, what's with the few incentives to motivate the people? It even doesn't necessary in the form of monetary rewards. It's the role of the management to come up with something that greatly recognizes the role of their employees in the overall success of the company.
Mr. CEO even claimed that the management have been brought to attention the alarming rate of resignations in our department. Talking to the affected employees would be a valuable first step into recognizing the areas for improvement. You cannot take the money talk out of the agenda. After all, we worked because we knew we will be compensated - properly, according to market standards, and according to our job descriptions.
Now, is our management's idea that Manila employees are the most unsatisfied with our salaries a generalization of Filipino sentiments towards our respective jobs? I don't have the statistics. I don't know anything psychological or sociological about the whole idea. But here's a known fact: people tend to be dissatisfied with their job if there's not much growth coupled with a meager salary. This is especially the case if one knew that there are better attainable options somewhere. That's it. No more complicated regional classifications. People normally looked at their immediate vicinity. And if there's something lacking, we put our grievances in proper perspective.
Did I mention I hated my job? Yes I do. There's limited growth in my department. The new incentive scheme they are planning is a huge step back from the currently implemented and more cutbacks and restrictions of previous benefits. They should have known that people are rarely loyal to the company. People leave because there are other palatable companies. Supply and demand. Simple as that.
We throw emotions aside. After all, we are all enterprising motherfuckers.
--
Comments
Post a Comment