• cheeseburger@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    5 days ago

    If corpo decides to do this, it is a net benefit to the company and not the employees. I await my own shit corp implementing this in the future…

    • misk@sopuli.xyzOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      edit-2
      5 days ago

      See other comments here. Long term this is what employees prefer. I work in a company that does a bit of universal bonus and doesn’t skimp on salary increases and that’s much better than me getting 20% yearly salary as an arbitrary bonus because I can’t depend on it to be there the next year.

      • cheeseburger@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        edit-2
        5 days ago

        Interesting and with credibility, Misk as I tend to agree with your posts and comments (+20!). I just don’t trust my company even after 20 years and moving into leadership years ago, so anytime I see a corporation making a choice like this I can’t help but be extremely skeptical.

        I would always prefer a base salary increase to my arbitrary bonus, but with the balance between net benefit to employees over the bottom line of the Corp, why would a company do it if it didn’t pay out less in the long run? Or are they counting on merit based salary levels for performant individuals being a better deal over typical company-wide gaming of bonuses being easier to control?

        Reading the article it seems to be related to a shortage of labour in Japan, so not my situation where we have been laying off people for years now. I’d love it if we did this for positive reasons like attracting better talent and increasing average salaries. I guess that’s where my disconnect is.