21. “Job security and salary should be based on employee performance, not on years of service. Rewarding employees primarily for years of service discourages people from maintaining consistently high levels of productivity.” “工作保險和工資應(yīng)該建立在雇員績效的基礎(chǔ)上而非工作年限上。主要根據(jù)工作年限獎勵員工不利于人們保持高水平的生產(chǎn)力?！?BR> 1. 一方面績效工資會促進工人的勞動生產(chǎn)率，使偷懶的工人得到懲罰;使專心工作投入較大的工人得到補償增大他們的激勵.
2. 另一方面,單純的使用績效工資也可能會打擊一部分工人的勞動積極性.因為有一些為公司服務(wù)很久的工人可能僅可能是由于年齡的原因勞動生產(chǎn)率下降.而且社會物價的總體水平也是應(yīng)該考慮的因素之一,當(dāng)存在通貨膨脹時候如果僅依照績效評價,那么工人整體的生活水平會下降也不利于勞動生產(chǎn)率.
productivity productive counterproductive security secure salary solely sole performance length incentive motivation enticement stimulus impetus incitement tenured professor associate professor achievement reward average worthwhile amply ample schedule salary condemn判刑,譴責(zé)
loyal royal loyalty refuse adjust counterproductive attract retain reserve withhold uphold criterion criteria security ignore ignorance
1， 首先，完全根據(jù)年限來看，是不利于生產(chǎn)力進步的。——這樣員工只要在企業(yè)里待著，表現(xiàn)平庸provide third-class performance就可以得到更多的獎勵，這顯然是不利于整個團隊的morale的。一方面，老的不能激發(fā)；另一方面，有才干的年輕人也不會愿意加入這個企業(yè)。
2， 但也不能完全只看表現(xiàn)，還要在此同時考慮到年限。因為老員工又同時非常優(yōu)秀的表現(xiàn)，為企業(yè)付出了更多的力量devote their entire life to the development of one corporation。如果完全一視同仁，也不一定更公平。反而很可能使老員工感到不公平treated unfairly，喪失對企業(yè)的loyalty。
3， 應(yīng)該綜合來看，考慮到表現(xiàn)相同的員工，根據(jù)服務(wù)年限不同得到不同的待遇。
View1. Performance plays an important role in the assessment procedural of employees.
View2. It is true that reward employees solely according to their seniority will affect the overall productivity, however, the year of services do contain some indication on specialty and experience. More over, when conducting work assessment of certain positions such as consultant, in which performance become hard to evaluate, seniority acts as useful supplement
According to the statement, in order to ensure high productivity, companies should base their employees’ salaries and job security solely on job performance, and not on length of service to the company. I agree that salary increases and job security are powerful incentives to high achievement and should generally go to those who do the best work. However, to ensure employee productivity, companies must also reward tenured employees with cost-of-living raises—though not with job security.
On the one hand, rewarding average job performance with large pay increases or promises of job security is a waste of resources—for two reasons. First, complacent employees will see no reason to become more productive. Secondly, those normally inclined to high achievement may decide the effort isn’t worthwhile when mediocre efforts are amply compensated. Companies should, therefore, adjust their pay schedules so that the largest salaries go to the most productive employees.
On the other hand, employees who perform their jobs satisfactorily should be given regular, though small, service-based pay increases—also for two reasons. First, the cost of living is steadily rising, so on the principle of fair compensation alone, it is unjust to condemn loyal employees to de facto salary reductions by refusing them cost-of-living raises. Secondly, failure to adjust salaries to reflect the cost of living may be counterproductive for the firm, which will have difficulty attracting and retaining good employees without such a policy.
In the final analysis, the statement correctly identifies job performance as the single best criterion for salary and job security. However, the statement goes too far; it ignores the fact that a cost-of-living salary increase for tenured employees not only enhances loyalty and, in the end, productivity, but also is required by fairness.
2. 另一方面,單純的使用績效工資也可能會打擊一部分工人的勞動積極性.因為有一些為公司服務(wù)很久的工人可能僅可能是由于年齡的原因勞動生產(chǎn)率下降.而且社會物價的總體水平也是應(yīng)該考慮的因素之一,當(dāng)存在通貨膨脹時候如果僅依照績效評價,那么工人整體的生活水平會下降也不利于勞動生產(chǎn)率.
productivity productive counterproductive security secure salary solely sole performance length incentive motivation enticement stimulus impetus incitement tenured professor associate professor achievement reward average worthwhile amply ample schedule salary condemn判刑,譴責(zé)
loyal royal loyalty refuse adjust counterproductive attract retain reserve withhold uphold criterion criteria security ignore ignorance
1， 首先，完全根據(jù)年限來看，是不利于生產(chǎn)力進步的。——這樣員工只要在企業(yè)里待著，表現(xiàn)平庸provide third-class performance就可以得到更多的獎勵，這顯然是不利于整個團隊的morale的。一方面，老的不能激發(fā)；另一方面，有才干的年輕人也不會愿意加入這個企業(yè)。
2， 但也不能完全只看表現(xiàn)，還要在此同時考慮到年限。因為老員工又同時非常優(yōu)秀的表現(xiàn)，為企業(yè)付出了更多的力量devote their entire life to the development of one corporation。如果完全一視同仁，也不一定更公平。反而很可能使老員工感到不公平treated unfairly，喪失對企業(yè)的loyalty。
3， 應(yīng)該綜合來看，考慮到表現(xiàn)相同的員工，根據(jù)服務(wù)年限不同得到不同的待遇。
View1. Performance plays an important role in the assessment procedural of employees.
View2. It is true that reward employees solely according to their seniority will affect the overall productivity, however, the year of services do contain some indication on specialty and experience. More over, when conducting work assessment of certain positions such as consultant, in which performance become hard to evaluate, seniority acts as useful supplement
According to the statement, in order to ensure high productivity, companies should base their employees’ salaries and job security solely on job performance, and not on length of service to the company. I agree that salary increases and job security are powerful incentives to high achievement and should generally go to those who do the best work. However, to ensure employee productivity, companies must also reward tenured employees with cost-of-living raises—though not with job security.
On the one hand, rewarding average job performance with large pay increases or promises of job security is a waste of resources—for two reasons. First, complacent employees will see no reason to become more productive. Secondly, those normally inclined to high achievement may decide the effort isn’t worthwhile when mediocre efforts are amply compensated. Companies should, therefore, adjust their pay schedules so that the largest salaries go to the most productive employees.
On the other hand, employees who perform their jobs satisfactorily should be given regular, though small, service-based pay increases—also for two reasons. First, the cost of living is steadily rising, so on the principle of fair compensation alone, it is unjust to condemn loyal employees to de facto salary reductions by refusing them cost-of-living raises. Secondly, failure to adjust salaries to reflect the cost of living may be counterproductive for the firm, which will have difficulty attracting and retaining good employees without such a policy.
In the final analysis, the statement correctly identifies job performance as the single best criterion for salary and job security. However, the statement goes too far; it ignores the fact that a cost-of-living salary increase for tenured employees not only enhances loyalty and, in the end, productivity, but also is required by fairness.