Big changes coming for Eskom employees

  • Thread starter Thread starter Shaun Jacobs
  • Start date Start date
TheChamp said:
You don't have a performance incentive scheme whee you work? Of course assuming you toil for your wages like most people.
Click to expand...
These schemes usually pay out when the company hits or is close to its targets. I suppose if Eskom's target is looting and destroying the country, then the employees do deserve bonuses.
 
Roger Banana said:
These schemes usually pay out when the company hits or is close to its targets. I suppose if Eskom's target is looting and destroying the country, then the employees do deserve bonuses.
Click to expand...
It's not a one size fit all, there are schemes that tries to strike the right balance between individual performance, department performance and overall group performance.

So it is possible to recognise good individual performance even when the whole group is not doing well.
 
The first step would be to retrench all current staff. Not a single staff member should remain. Then replace each and everyone with people, irrelevant of color, even if employing Westerners abroad, who has skills, education, experience, qualifications and at least 10 years of work experience. Then implement incentives to the new staff.

Current Eskom staff do not have incentive or money problems. They are not suited for the positions they hold and are frustrated and negative because they do not know what is expected of them and cannot do what is expected of them either. They cannot be trained. Get rid of the rot first.
 
rvZA said:
The first step would be to retrench all current staff. Not a single staff member should remain. Then replace each and everyone with people, irrelevant of color, even if employing Westerners abroad, who has skills, education, experience, qualifications and at least 10 years of work experience. Then implement incentives to the new staff.

Current Eskom staff do not have incentive or money problems. They are not suited for the positions they hold and are frustrated and negative because they do not know what is expected of them and cannot do what is expected of them either. They cannot be trained. Get rid of the rot first.
Click to expand...
Hopefully people don't take you seriously.
 
TheChamp said:
It's not a one size fit all, there are schemes that tries to strike the right balance between individual performance, department performance and overall group performance.

So it is possible to recognise good individual performance even when the whole group is not doing well.
Click to expand...
This I agree 100% with you. A good individual performance deserves recognition.

My comment was actually that there will be individuals that will get a bonus/incentive while they don't deserve it.
 
SlowInternet said:
This I agree 100% with you. A good individual performance deserves recognition.

My comment was actually that there will be individuals that will get a bonus/incentive while they don't deserve it.
Click to expand...
That's government for you. One gets praise for doing good work, while his peers on the same post grade gets nothing, but they don't care because they didn't do much.

Not very motivating at all.
 
This is what happens when you decolonise Eskom. Another form of go woke go broke for the entire country who rely on the grid.
 
"Turnaround strategy" and there was some other term for it, I remember when working in a SOE. We dreaded these every time a new CEO arrived. It NEVER meant more efficient services or lower costs. It was always new personnel appointments, changing of job titles, and plunging working processes into disarray.

An example of how I got sidelined in one such operation was a new post was created above me, which I had to apply for and did not get despite my years of experience and recognition from previous CEOs in corporate magazines etc. It did not hurt me financially as I kept my pay grade, but it added costs to the company and plunged everyone into uncertainty.

Another time was us all having to reapply for our jobs as their posts had changed. All that changed was the post names, as the job description functions remained exactly the same. And no, we did not lose people at all, so what was the point of the millions of Rand spent on the consultants doing this "re-engineering"?

One would think there are objective metrics put in place to measure the turnaround on customer requests or tenders, and then you demonstrate after such an exercise the improvement of x%.

One time the staff actually were in revolt about changing the name of the entity as they felt it would not improve anything, and we needed to rather fix any issues we had. It just shows how staff feel about these turnaround strategies - money for strategies, but nothing left for a pay increase.

I retired early, as I was really sick of having to keep re-applying for a job I already did very well (judging by my good performance reviews). Too much time is spent on window dressing, PR, rebranding, turnarounds, etc instead of fixing the actual issues. Ask the staff, as often they know exactly what is wrong and often how to fix it.
 
Danie_V said:
"Turnaround strategy" and there was some other term for it, I remember when working in a SOE. We dreaded these every time a new CEO arrived. It NEVER meant more efficient services or lower costs. It was always new personnel appointments, changing of job titles, and plunging working processes into disarray.

An example of how I got sidelined in one such operation was a new post was created above me, which I had to apply for and did not get despite my years of experience and recognition from previous CEOs in corporate magazines etc. It did not hurt me financially as I kept my pay grade, but it added costs to the company and plunged everyone into uncertainty.

Another time was us all having to reapply for our jobs as their posts had changed. All that changed was the post names, as the job description functions remained exactly the same. And no, we did not lose people at all, so what was the point of the millions of Rand spent on the consultants doing this "re-engineering"?

One would think there are objective metrics put in place to measure the turnaround on customer requests or tenders, and then you demonstrate after such an exercise the improvement of x%.

One time the staff actually were in revolt about changing the name of the entity as they felt it would not improve anything, and we needed to rather fix any issues we had. It just shows how staff feel about these turnaround strategies - money for strategies, but nothing left for a pay increase.

I retired early, as I was really sick of having to keep re-applying for a job I already did very well (judging by my good performance reviews). Too much time is spent on window dressing, PR, rebranding, turnarounds, etc instead of fixing the actual issues. Ask the staff, as often they know exactly what is wrong and often how to fix it.
Click to expand...
The anc governmunt "remodeling " the work place to benefit their cadres
 
If its anything like my company's performance incentives. You can only get a PA rating after your manager got his. If he got a rubbish rating, then 90% of your rating is matched to his.
 
I think our German consultants do not know about ANC CARDRE deployment and may have been fooled into believing that these people are not rewarded for thier efforts, fact of matter they are being overpaid for what they are doing because they are not qualified to do the their jobs in the first place.
Starting at the top Eskom needs evaluate every single manager to see if they are suitable for the position, if not get rid of them. The process needs to move down the ranks quickly. Simultaneously workflo needs to be upgraded for efficiency. Starting with performance bonus would be the wrong thing to do thses people are not doing what they are paid to do at the moment. There needs to be a minimum standard before performance bonus kicks in. Things like housing can follow for those who qualify.
I think the Board Chairmen has left out a lot and chose to highlite what suits him.
 
How about doing your jobs first
All overpaid already and now they still want incentives.
No fukking LOGIC here..
 
Bliksis said:
Yeah salaries is what you get for doing a job. But don't underestimate the morale boosting power of seemingly frivolous things such as a weekly best performer certificate, etc.

Silly as it is, it DOES work.
Click to expand...
Up to the point where the one who does 0% get the certificate, then that system falls to pieces.
 
Danie_V said:
"Turnaround strategy" and there was some other term for it, I remember when working in a SOE. We dreaded these every time a new CEO arrived. It NEVER meant more efficient services or lower costs. It was always new personnel appointments, changing of job titles, and plunging working processes into disarray.

An example of how I got sidelined in one such operation was a new post was created above me, which I had to apply for and did not get despite my years of experience and recognition from previous CEOs in corporate magazines etc. It did not hurt me financially as I kept my pay grade, but it added costs to the company and plunged everyone into uncertainty.

Another time was us all having to reapply for our jobs as their posts had changed. All that changed was the post names, as the job description functions remained exactly the same. And no, we did not lose people at all, so what was the point of the millions of Rand spent on the consultants doing this "re-engineering"?

One would think there are objective metrics put in place to measure the turnaround on customer requests or tenders, and then you demonstrate after such an exercise the improvement of x%.

One time the staff actually were in revolt about changing the name of the entity as they felt it would not improve anything, and we needed to rather fix any issues we had. It just shows how staff feel about these turnaround strategies - money for strategies, but nothing left for a pay increase.

I retired early, as I was really sick of having to keep re-applying for a job I already did very well (judging by my good performance reviews). Too much time is spent on window dressing, PR, rebranding, turnarounds, etc instead of fixing the actual issues. Ask the staff, as often they know exactly what is wrong and often how to fix it.
Click to expand...
I know that feeling. Been through the same BS. You fill in that stack of papers to declare what your performance was for the cycle just so that your manager can scrap it and give everyone the same ranking, because it is less paperwork.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X