RE: pandering to the mediocre
JAMES MICHAEL KUSACK (KUSACK@SCSUD.CTSTATEU.EDU)
Wed, 16 Jul 1997 13:25:44 -0400
Date: Wed, 16 Jul 1997 13:25:44 -0400
Message-Id: <970716132907.20246956@SCSUD.CTSTATEU.EDU>
From: JAMES MICHAEL KUSACK <KUSACK@SCSUD.CTSTATEU.EDU>
To: Multiple recipients of list <conntech>
Subject: RE: pandering to the mediocre
I am forwarding this message for someone who wishes to remain anonymous.
JMK
>Are our libraries pandering to and protecting the mediocre?>
. . . [A] lot of that seems to go on at my place of
employment...Supposedly of course the "annual review" or performance
evaluation is used to identify those employees who will achieve their step
increases; actually, anyone who has a satisfactory evaluation and is not
already at the top step of their classification gets one. This makes it much
easier for newer employees to get raises than for older ones who have devoted
more years to their jobs--once they reach the top step, they're out of luck
unless they change job classifications.
Sometimes, of course, dedicated, hard-working employees are denied step
raises and even threatened with termination just because they constitute some
sort of vague threat to their mediocre, protected supervisor...what kind of
incentive system is that?