|
Hi everyone, I've found myself in an unusual situation, and couldn't find anything online relevant to this particular scenario so I thought I'd turn here to see if anyone has experienced something similar. I work for a small company (15 people) and I am head of my department with three people under me. Two of them only joined us 5 months ago and are in entry-level positions that are essentially just research and data entry. The two new people were hired to basically just churn through data in preparation for a big project we’ll be releasing soon. One of them is only here until the end of November, while the other is staying permanently (I was aware of this when hiring, and it fit within our timeframes for this project). Their bonuses are $5,000 each, and based around a pretty simple structure of “Complete X by this date for 15%, Y by this date for 20%, etc” with everything being able to be completed by the end of the year and then paid out. Due to unexpected reasons outside our control, the release date of this project has been pushed back by several months. The tasks in the second half of my incentive structure can’t be completed until after this project has been released. For most of us this isn’t an issue, we’ll simply renegotiate the due dates of the remaining tasks to something reasonable given the delays. However, for the person that is leaving in November, this is a bit of a problem, as they won’t be here to complete half the incentivised tasks. What are my obligations to this person in this situation? When we first set these out, I was confident they would be able to hit at least 80% of the targets/payout, and I can see it being lovely from their point of view that they don’t even get a chance to achieve them now due to no fault of their own. Do I just say “Sorry it didn’t work out, here’s your payout for what you did manage to achieve”? They are a good worker and I’m confident they would have hit these targets had this delay not occured. On the other hand, it seems weird to be like “Hey here’s money for the work I’m sure you probably would have achieved”. It’s not a huge amount, but for someone fresh out of uni and about to move to a different city, the difference between $3k and $5k can be significant, and I’d be lying if I said I wouldn’t feel a bit lovely about hardballing them. Any advice appreciated, thanks
|
#
¿
Sep 27, 2018 07:17
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 22, 2024 03:01 |
|
|
Sorry you feel this is a scam. This was not brought up during the hiring process, so it's on top of their normal salary, which is honestly above average for the position and industry. It's not like I'm personally paying them from my own pocket, so I have no reason to want to prevent them getting the whole thing, and we have obviously budgeted for it. I just don't think that would get cleared by my boss. My own standpoint is that I would like everyone to get as much money as possible because I like them all. I just don't really have a way of justifying that to the people I answer to. If it was up to me I'd just say "Here's the whole thing, enjoy your christmas, it was great working with you." Sorry if that wasn't clear from my post.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 27, 2018 12:32
|
|
|
Good! Thankfully we ended up paying out the whole $5K, which is what I wanted. It didn't end up being an issue at all, I was worried about nothing 
|
|
#
¿
Dec 14, 2018 02:48
|
|