Justification
Praise and pay raises are fickle things. As humans, we crave and need reassurance that we are doing a good job. We would bathe in praise if it was possible.
But should we expect a pay raise when we do what we are being paid to do?
From time to time we receive accolades at The Record for doing our jobs. We all enjoy knowing we are doing things that people appreciate but we shouldn't expect pay raises just for doing our jobs. We should expect pay raises for going above and beyond, adjusting to changes and adversity, accepting additional responsibilities, hanging in there when the going gets tough. That's when we should expect pay raises.
I was told many years ago by a former supervisor that a person is expected to do what he or she is paid to do. If that person performs those tasks as expected, then there is no need for extra pay because he or she is doing just what they are being paid to do. Period.
As a greedy society, we expect to receive money or compensation for everything we do. Before we take on a task we ask, "What's in it for me?" "Why should I do this if there isn't something for me?"
I hope government leaders who are responsible for the spending of our tax dollars think about this when it's time for pay raises. Merit raises should be based on merit, not longevity or because that person did his/her job or is threatening to resign if he/she doesn't get their way.
Merit is merit. Either it's deserving or it isn't.
At one time, the cities of Marion and Hillsboro, and Marion County were firm believers and followers of the League of Kansas Municipalities pay plan which included job classifications and job performance evaluations. The City of Peabody doesn't follow that particular model but does have a way to justify pay increases.
Entities can make those evaluations as easy or as difficult as they want but the end result should be the same — merit equals pay increases. Status quo does not.
Sometimes supervisors become consumed with one little piece of the employee puzzle. When one employee receives a pay increase, it can skew the entire process. Soon entities find themselves giving raises to employees for no particular reason other than trying to balance or equalize the initial pay increase that started the whole domino effect.
No pay increases should be given without looking at the entire pay paradigm and how it's going to be effected.
Longevity pay should reward those who have hung in there for the duration — shown up for work every day and performed their jobs. Cost of living raises should be paid to all employees to help offset the increased costs of fuel, food, and shelter.
The bottom line is public entities are responsible for figuring out the best use of my money and your money. Pay increases cannot be taken back and should be given with extreme discretion.
I'm not a human resources expert by any means but a little horse sense can go a long way.
— SUSAN BERG
