When writing civi reports I remain professional and write them to the same standard that an untrained civi writes an sjar/ojar ..flickin' shoite...good luck getting the bonus! 5 written this year..
nil recommended for bonus. The bonus system is another argument, all 5 thought they should get it
despite average/good performance, they didn't do anything over and above. It came down to the fact that the bonus system has been normalised and our civi colleagues expect it as an extention of their wage..WRONG.
DT_Xtremez_30:
Sorry mememe...
How can you say you remain
professional yet write them to "the same standard that an untrained civi writes an sjar/ojar"?
Equally, I'm not defending untrained civvies in the reverse scenario; either way the Line Manager/Reporting Officer should not allow himself to be left ignorant. Further, his management chain should not allow an RO to be ignorant/untrained.
Haven't you done the
required (mandated) training? If not, you shouldn't be writing the reports, regardless of position.
With respect to "
nil recommended for bonus" "
despite average/good performance", I'd suggest that you might like to look at the criteria for bonus recommendation - at the very least.
Line Managers no longer actually make a formal recommendation for bonus. If staff have provided satisfactory performance - "
performing to the standard expected in all respects", the 12 "Aspects of Performance" on the PAR (boxes) should result in a Line Manager's overall Evaluation of Performance of a "B - to the standard in all respects" marking - this could be B+ or B- dependent on whether their performance was "to" or "above" the standard and in "all" or "most" respects.
Obviously, the narrative must support the box marking and Award Managers should be on the lookout for inconsistencies.
For Skill Zone staff (Industrials) there are 3 criteria for an Award Manager to NOT award a skill zone share:
1. Absence
2. Restoring Efficiency (unsatisfactory work performance)
3. Job Holder has not reached or maintained the expected level of performance
"Every job holder who has demonstrated consistently satisfactory performance throughout the reporting year will receive at least a basic Skill Zone Performance Award" (quote from Guidance in Completing Performance Assessment Report - available on Intranet - PM me for link if you can't find it)
The above is broadly equivalent for Non-Industrials with similar criteria for an Award Manager to NOT award a basic bonus.
For both there are then further criteria to be applied for the consideration towards a higher bonus award - e.g. where they have done "over and above".
As for "our civi colleagues expect it as an extention of their wage..WRONG".... actually, the
basic award is effectively just that - an award for
satisfactory performance.
I think you're being a little precious and judgemental. Maybe you have some civvies like that working in your area, but the greater majority have accepted this scheme as an unfair, divisive system, imposed by the Treasury with the sole intent being to minimise the wage bill (and ultimately the pension bill).
Regardless that the bonus scheme is (and always has been) divisive, this is no excuse for Line Managers copping out (Service or civilian), even though the bonus will barely pay for a month's groceries!
DT_Xtremez_14:
