These new pay schemes--lump sums, profit sharing, gainsharing, pay for knowledge, pay for skill, etc.--seek to divorce workers from the long-held and easily measured practice of paying workers for the time they are on the job.
Let's look at traditional wage compensation which we all understand. Wage compensation is straightforward and an easily measured system of payment for workers. It is a system wherein the workers' wage and benefit packages can, with a fair degree of accuracy, be costed-out for present and future value. Unlike profit sharing, gainsharing or other pay for performance plans, a wage increase is "money in the bank."
Over the long haul, a nontraditional lump sum payment will never equal the economic value of a general wage increase. Wage increases produce a constantly growing income stream which is rolled up each and every year. Since many of our benefit plans are tied to our hourly wage, a real wage increase translates into a better deal on our pensions, saving plans, stock purchase plans, etc. Albert Einstein once said, "The most powerful force in the universe is compound interest." Wage increases, in reality, are compound interest for our paychecks.
Profit Sharing has a great disadvantage for workers. Many factors that contribute to profitability are beyond the control of most employees. Management decisions and general economic conditions play a much larger role in bottom line profit or loss financial results. In addition to this uncertainty, in the present economy high profits are not always good for workers. Many companies post huge profits in large part due to plant closings and layoffs.
Gainsharing is rarely a good deal for workers. In many cases it leads to cutbacks in staffing levels as workers transfer their knowledge to their bosses to increase productivity. Remember, piece work is giving workers whips so they can beat themselves. Gainshairing is giving workers whips so they can beat each other.
Pay for Knowledge, in most company plans, is no more than cross-working, which is management's plan for increased worker flexibility and the breaking down of job classifications. These programs usually lead to reduced employment and increased job stress for the surviving workers as they hurry to become the "jacks of all trades and the masters of none.
Pay for Performance is just another name for merit pay systems. These systems breed favoritism and manipulation by management. Merit pay plans defeat the very principles of economic fairness upon which the union movement was founded.
Virtually all of these nontraditional pay schemes have a common denominator of a large initial pay-out with smaller and smaller cash rewards as time goes on. This is due to the fact that workers must continue to squeeze efficiencies out of a production or other goal-related system which has already been cut to the bone.
1. Avoid accepting such schemes wherever possible. If
not...
2. Educate the membership as to the pitfalls of the
alterative pay system in question. Especially try to
avoid lump sums, profit sharing and pay for performance
(merit pay). Make the members aware of the dangers of pay
for knowledge and gainsharing. Make certain they
understand the typical pattern of such systems: Large
payouts are front loaded. Expose the myth that such
systems will guarantee their jobs.
3. Make certain that such alternatives are in addition to
a negotiated wage rate increase and not in lieu of it.
4. Negotiate a guarantee that the alternative pay system
does not diminish health and safety or job security.
Negotiate a guarantee of the size of the bargaining unit
complement as opposed to "no lay-offs because of the
program." The latter allows for downsizing the staff by
offering "early outs" and/or attrition which reduces
union power and raises health and safety problems.
5. Make certain that the design of the alternative pay
system is a total joint union/company effort. Be aware of
how much control the union has over factors which affect
the pay-out.
6. Assure that the pay-out affects all the members of the
bargaining unit equally so as to avoid setting the
members or groups of members into competition with each
other.
7. Look out for and avoid negative effects upon other
bargaining units in the same company, for the same
reason. Be wary of negative effects upon mandatory
bargaining policy.