enviroian

Exactly. I really don't understand why people on here are upset. They are just another company. If the employees don't like what they get then move to another company. I could careless about United's employees comp plan--it's of total irrelevance to me. Do I check out the bonus plans of Toro Mfg when I buy a lawnmower? When I buy a pair of Levi's should I be concerned if Tom Smith got his quarterly bonus? Of course not. What a bunch of silly responses on here.

mahasamatman

Even worse, scenario B is more like "Employee E gets $200".

Some people actually have empathy for others, and prefer companies that don't abuse their employees.

KDS777

Definition of bonus. : something in addition to what is expected or strictly due: such as. a : money or an equivalent given in addition to an employee's usual compensation.

-------------------------------------------------------

I used to work for a company that had a "quarterly bonus" program.

6 weeks into the relevant quarter you received your bonus (and you had 6 weeks to do it, not a quarter) which consisted of 20-30 hours of extra work you had to do to get paid $750. In addition to travelling, working 60 hours a week onsite, and usually 230+ hours per month total.

Now, their "bonus" program was "optional" so near the end of my time there, a lot of us would just walk away from it, and not complete anything at all. It drove our managers nuts, as we figured out that they assigned us the critical work that they had to do to get their bonus money.

When you give someone something on a regular basis, and treat it like a salary as was probably done in the UAL case, you shouldn't be taking it away and replacing it with this lottery scheme.

Then again, if you can afford to, you can just quit if it's really "that" big a deal.

enviroian

Abuse? LOL good lord please. Perhaps they should call Gloria Allred while they're at it. Equating a company's bonus program to employee "abuse" is so ridiculous I don't know where to start.

halls120

I meant it - they are useful to Kirby's attempts to increase senior manager paychecks at the expense of line employee morale.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Useful_idiot

ContinentalFan

schley

UA it appears is taking back some of what they gave to the employees in the recent negotiation. The unions didn't include any bonus in their contract, and UA is now changing that elective aspect of compensation. Pretty typical and not collectively bargained, so if it was that important did they didn't collectively bargain this into the negotiations? My guess is they knew UA would perhaps change this and is why they were heavy on $ compensation. If I was one of the bargaining team, I would lay out what is and isn't collectively bargained in terms of compensation and assume any elective compensation on behalf of the employer may be at risk.

mrt88

This is awful, service will suffer and it is unfair to the employees! How the hell will a random lottery incentivize the right behavior?

fumje

I suspect the motivation for this memo / initiative was research suggesting higher opt-in per incentive offered rates for surveys that do lotteries vs. fixed rewards. E.g., offering $1 to each respondent might get 100 responses and obviously cost $100, but offering $10 to ten lucky respondents might get 200 responses for the same cost.

However, UA management is evidently overlooking the opt-in part. You don't want employees electing to opt in (or not) to job performance.

Ber2dca

Personally, I can see why employees wouldn't love this idea, but the hyperbole in here is pretty funny. Quarterly performance bonuses are by no means standard in the service industry. In fact, a large company I am very familiar with doesn't given any bonuses to frontline employees and only annual bonuses to managers. Having an extra perk cut sucks but it also doesn't mean you're a galley slave suddenly.

Now in my ideal scenario, employee A who is the best performer in their group gets a bonus, employee B who is runner-up gets a smaller bonus and the rest can try harder. If there was a culture where *everyone* regardless of actual merit expects a bonus, then getting rid of the system as is would be a great decision in the interest of the business and the customer. Now, I don't know how the UA bonus system worked, so I won't comment on it. Do I think a 'lottery' instead of bonuses is great? No, especially not with very expensive prizes that ensure only very few will win while most go home empty-handed. Nothing with wrong with an employee raffle but keep prizes sensible so it's good fun rather than the cause of envy and resentment.

bocastephen

Many people, especially younger ones, do in fact check out the working conditions of companies before buying their products and avoid companies that abuse employees through sweatshops, abusive labor practices, dangerous working conditions, etc. So yes, it most certainly matters to many people, and need I resurrect the ghost of the old SaveSkyMiles campaign where an airline made the mistake of taking on customers and employees at the same time? How did that work out for them? Hint: not good, especially when one remembers the near mental breakdown of Delta's then-CEO on the steps of the Plaza Hotel while taunted by an advertising banner. An airline can make employees happy at the expense of customers, or vice versa, but if they try to screw both at the same time, it sows the seeds for blowback, and not just with people taking their business elsewhere or quitting their jobs - but rather by joining together to take on management and winning.

keitherson

Is management delusional?

And the prizes for the raffles, a Mercedes C class car? What's a person making $12/hour going to do with a brand new Mercedes?

bballdad175

This sort of mismanagement is what is making me decide to move to a different carrier for my business. Yes the big three (or four) are basically all the same, but United is going downhill faster than Delta. I dont like that Delta only gets 4 upgrades per year on international, but Uniteds management just really has no clue what the employees and customers want.

bballdad175

Employee satisfaction and how the company treats their employees is highly correlated to a "good business."

Pissed off employees don;'t tend to handle irritated customers well either.

beachmouse

Because nothing says a customer is valued like encouraging sick employees to come to work and spread their plague to the customers sharing close quarters with them?

Yes, I do want the flight attendant who is battling influenza pouring me a drink?