Archived When do we get reviews?

  • Thread starter JimmyTarget
  • Start date
  • Replies 157
  • Views 18K
Status
Not open for further replies.
Life201 said:
So basically you are saying, if a person is content as a TM then you agree once he reaches an arbitrary cap set by a bunch of rich people - he never, ever deserves a raise again no matter how hard he works?
Click to expand...

No I don't agree, but I'm not naïve to how all businesses work. Target isn't the only company that does this. I'm a software engineer. If I choose to stay at this level, like the TM I'm talking about did, my salary cap is $90K. If I want to move up, which I do, when I become a Sr. Engineer that cap increases to $125K. If I want to be a project manager, that cap is $160K and so on. I can't be bitter if I reach my cap and only receive a .05% - 2% increase, especially if I am given the opportunity to advance.

We have Sr. Engineers that love their jobs and don't want to move up to management. They have a cap and know that the most they'll see is a 2% raise. There's nothing wrong with this. Just don't complain that your not making Project Manager or Director pay for Sr. Engineer requirements.

So for a TM who makes $16 an hour, a $.o8 raise should be an expectation for an IE or E rating. The average he'll see as a TM is probably 1% (or $.16) raise, depending on company status. Anything more would be a gift (meaning 2% or higher increase).

Yes, it's wrong that the rich get richer and the middle class stays in the middle. But unless you and a group of the rest of us become the 1% and change things, this will always be the status quo. But just like the poor who become rich, you'll hold on to your money just as tight as the rest do.
 
tgtguy said:
On one hand I can see what you are saying. I have never asked a etl to change my raise amount. I know they cant. I don't even complain about the amount anymore...it just is what is well to put it better it is what it isn't . On the other hand, I think its kinda rude to find it funny that a team members gets upset over their raise or to refer to them as being in "bottom retail position" for such a long time. I know that I have been with Spot for over 18 years and I guess I am what you referred to as "making a career out of a bottom retail position". This attitude of looking down on long term team members is one of Spots many downfalls . Lastly, I know what I make an hour and I know what team leads start at in my area. So, I will just stick with what I have now :)
Click to expand...
Is a TM not at the bottom of the retail hierarchy? Is there a position below TM? I'm an application developer (bottom of the programming totem pole). If I spend 18 years in this position I wouldn't expect to get paid more than the salary cap + a 1% increase each year (help with inflation). There's no attitude here. I just understand how businesses pay their employees; it makes sense to me.

There's nothing wrong with being a TM for 18+ years. You can call it what you want, but it's a career. The humor was in the TM not understanding how raises work. Once you cap out the average raise is 1-2% based on ratings. The higher the rating, the better the %. At $16 an hour, his .05% for an IE rating was $.08. For being a veteran, his backroom score should be 99 consistently. Him having an 93 percent now and then warranted an IE rating.
 
My problem with the capping off people like that and having the only option for getting a raise is to move up the ladder is The Peter Principle.
For those of you not familiar with the concept it's that employees rise to the level of their incompetence.

Now this isn't always the case but here's what often happens, you have someone who is an amazing cashier, best at getting redcards, can charm guests, hits all the marks and has capped out.
So of course they want to make more money.
The solution is to make them a GSA right.
Well it turns out they hate that job, they can't speed weave worth a darn, they panic and start calling for back up the minute there's four people in line, and don't understand why people can't get redcards the way she did when she worked register.
It might even be possible that she could lose her job because of the promotion.

So instead of giving her a decent raise every year and letting her be the best cashier in the world, they want her to move up to a job she will suck at.

I'm pretty sure The Peter Principle explains a lot of STLs.
They started out as good ETLs and should have stayed there.
 
Mhugh220 said:
Is a TM not at the bottom of the retail hierarchy? Is there a position below TM? I'm an application developer (bottom of the programming totem pole). If I spend 18 years in this position I wouldn't expect to get paid more than the salary cap + a 1% increase each year (help with inflation). There's no attitude here. I just understand how businesses pay their employees; it makes sense to me.

There's nothing wrong with being a TM for 18+ years. You can call it what you want, but it's a career. The humor was in the TM not understanding how raises work. Once you cap out the average raise is 1-2% based on ratings. The higher the rating, the better the %. At $16 an hour, his .05% for an IE rating was $.08. For being a veteran, his backroom score should be 99 consistently. Him having an 93 percent now and then warranted an IE rating.
Click to expand...

Apparently I don't understand how raises work either, I have been with Target 10+ years & as a former specialist, I was informed that I was now capped out and would receive no pay increase. This was despite my E rating and the fact that I proactively cross train in different areas of the store. I am currently looking to cross train in Pharmacy and have my tech in training certification. I expect to get no raise again this year, I suppose I should talk to my ETL-HR if that turns out to be the case since I should get at least a cost of living increase. I did feel my review warranted a raise, even if I was "capped out."
 
Some people ( for whatever reasons each person has their own reason) don't want to be in a leadership role. This doesn't mean they are crappy employees or they just don't give a damn...it means they are happy or satisfied with what they do. So, if they bust their asses , show up to work etc...then they should be rewarded The real issue here...is the fact that Spot wants to push " old timers" out the door. They feel if they say ok tgtguy no more raises for you unless you move up...I will say screw this and quit. Then they can bring in someone and pay them $3 less an hour to do the same job. I have also read stories about them pushing out long term employees that are tls, etls, stls etc . Its like sending an old horse to the glue factory...when the horse still has some giddy up and go left in it .
 
Last edited:
tgtguy said:
Some people ( for whatever reasons each person has their own reason) don't want to be in a leadership role. This doesn't mean they are crappy employees or they just don't give a damn...it means they are happy or satisfied with what they do. So, if they bust their asses , show up to work etc...then they should be rewarded The real issue here...is the fact that Spot wants to push " old timers" out the door. They feel if they say ok tgtguy no more raises for you unless you move up...I will say screw this and quit. Then they can bring in someone and pay them $3 less an hour to do the same job. So in the end that's what this is all about .
Click to expand...

Exactly, I don't want to be a TL and every time I think I do I just remember what they have done in the past to performance out the TLs they didn't like. One got fired because their spouse used the TMs discount card instead of the dependent card. That is really scraping the bottom of the barrel. I am happy with my job most of the time, just not around review time.
 
Mhugh220 said:
For being a veteran, his backroom score should be 99 consistently. Him having an 93 percent now and then warranted an IE rating.
Click to expand...

I don't recall ever seeing a backroom score by TM outside of the "% errors by TM" report. That one has always been a bit flaky.
 
tgtguy said:
I don't think they pay what the job is worth....if that's the case then the job isn't worth much....
Click to expand...
That may well be true. All I'm saying is that the hourly pay is not an indication of a person's value. It's an indication of supply and demand. Obviously there are lots of people who are willing to do that job at the rate advertised. If they couldn't fill the jobs at this pay level, they'd have to raise the pay level.
 
RedMan said:
That may well be true. All I'm saying is that the hourly pay is not an indication of a person's value. It's an indication of supply and demand. Obviously there are lots of people who are willing to do that job at the rate advertised. If they couldn't fill the jobs at this pay level, they'd have to raise the pay level.
Click to expand...

Sure there are people willing to do the job for less. That doesn't mean your getting a better deal though.

Its like sure I can go get my botox from the cheap sort of creepy guy down the street OR I could spend a bit more and go to a place where I won't get face poison.

Target can get people to do the job for minimum wage OR they could spend a bit more and get people that they can depend on to work hard and do a good job.
 
It's the perceived value of the title. Why pay a TM $40 an hour after 30 years of service when a TM for $16 an hr can do the same job? That's why you cap positions, so one position, Mr. TM, isn't eating up more $$ than needed. Hey we could use a TL but we're spending all of our money.

A GSA or TL has a higher perceived value because the have more responsibility
 
Signkitty said:
Sure there are people willing to do the job for less. That doesn't mean your getting a better deal though.

Its like sure I can go get my botox from the cheap sort of creepy guy down the street OR I could spend a bit more and go to a place where I won't get face poison.

Target can get people to do the job for minimum wage OR they could spend a bit more and get people that they can depend on to work hard and do a good job.
Click to expand...
But they do the job well enough. And that's what counts.
 
Signkitty said:
Target has not been doing so hot lately, maybe well enough isn't enough. Plus it saves money in the long run. Less training due to turnover and more productive workers save money.

Look at Cosco it has its pick of employees due to good pay and its doing great.
Click to expand...


Costco also doesn't have the huge pay disparity between it's workers and the CEO.
 
Target is also doing great. It's paid dividends steadily for the past 47 years. Dumping Canada gives Target an opportunity at huge growth in the US where the economy is strengthening. Right now, Target's stock is around $77 per share, up 28% from a year ago and up 50% in the last three years. Yes, Target had a rough 2013 but it's poised to get stronger, not weaker.
 
So here's something I'm wondering, are the reviews based on your primary workcenter alone or do they factor in other areas? Last year's review all I heard about was flow from my flow TL, but then again I hadn't been on instocks too long at that point.
 
At the end of the day it comes down to this. If you treat your employees well (whether they have been with the company an hour or twenty years) You will find productivity and morale will go through the roof. Which will add to a more profitable store, district and company in general. What does treating your employees well entail? Well, each person has to answer that for themselves. For me, it has nothing to do with an annual raise or review. All I want out of Spot ( or any employer) is to be treated with common courtesy and respect ( both of which are free btw so it doesn't affect their profit margin) and some sense of security with my benefits ie insurance. Yes, Spot could find someone to work for less per hour than I do. However, I know for a fact that I do twice the amount of work as some of these new team members ( I am working while they are standing around talking about getting drunk last night) so in the end Spot could be paying me per hour...or two people to do the same job. Two people doing the same job would cost them more. Spot spends all this time and money to treat the guest right ( which they should because without the guest no one has a job) too bad they cant spend a fraction of that treating their employees correctly
 
Signkitty said:
The US economy is only doing really well if you work on Wall Street
Click to expand...
That's not true. The economy is strengthening. Unemployment is around 6%. 1.5 million jobs were created in 2014. The housing markets are coming back to life.

Look I'm not on anybody's side here. I'm just trying to explain why Target pays what it pays.
 
Target should focus on more fulltime TMs and a higher starting pay. But caps on salaries will be around until Jesus returns or aliens invade.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Sushi2Go
Do we still set entertainment all standard???
Replies
10
Views
721
countingsheep
C
T
Who do I contact? We need a better myDay
2
Replies
33
Views
2K
happygoth
happygoth
Dream Baby
You know what time it is at Target when..
Replies
7
Views
994
animalcrossing
animalcrossing
essie
In-person reviews?
Replies
11
Views
1K
essie
essie
D
Did I get fired? TL went up to HR
Replies
24
Views
3K
tram
T
Back
Top