ANOTHER PEANUT STORY.

Read this.

Do you agree?

In my humble opinon, the pay should commensurate with the job. That’s all.

If a PhD holder wants to do the job of a clerk, then he should be paid for doing the job of a clerk, not for being a PhD holder. If an SPM holder does a brilliant job as a manager, perhaps due to the experience he has garnered over the years, by all means he should be paid in pari passu with the current market rate for a manager in his field, and the fact that he does not have tertiary qualifications as most managers are expected to have should not prejudice this.

There is some justification to wanting an employee to prove his salt before enhancing his remuneration package. I certainly would be hesitant to recommend my teammates for a raise or a bonus if they have not shown accomplishments of agreed targets, or initiative to make visible improvements in weaker areas, or have not completed a project/probation period. A carrot should just be dangled in front of the employee, not served him on a silver platter with salsa dips.

There are also people who do love the work they do and money becomes a secondary consideration, if at all. As long as they are paid enough to bring food on their table, they are content. They may be willing to forgo monetary compensation if their job brings spiritual fulfillment, such as working for charitable organizations or NGOs that serve the community. Some look for job security or a happy working environment, and once they’ve found it, whether or not they get a raise or a bonus becomes less important. Not everyone is motivated by money, and not everyone gets up in the morning to go to work because of it. There are other pursuits in life which people seek to feel and become richer, and the concept of rich is wider than just fiscal opulence.

What about you? Why do YOU work?