Formal Complaint Against a Global Bank

As an employee of a prominent global banking institution, I have been inundated with rhetoric regarding how diligently the corporation strives to be recognized as 'the best place to work'. Enticed by promises of a 'pay for performance' policy, wherein employees are evaluated regularly and given monetary recognition for their efforts and labor, I became an employee of The Bank (which will remain nameless, for my own protection) approximately one and a half years ago.

To begin, let's start with a basic synopsis of my contribution to the company, and what I have been provided in return.

I began as a single-skilled employee, trained to service customers submitting account applications Online. Within only a matter of months, I was invited to partake in four training classes, ranging from two weeks to three months in length, to enhance my skills and broaden my knowledge of Bank products, policies, and procedures. I began in one department, and am now employable in four. I moved between three different departments within the past year and a half, each with additional duties, responsibilities... and, of course, heavier work-loads.

As I progressed in my banking career, I have been given a beautiful, black wooden plaque on which to place 1"x1" gold-toned, plastic pins received when I do something worthy of recognition. I have received numerous awards for providing exceptional service to customers. (Clarification is in order here: "Award" = fancy piece of paper with my name on it). I have been featured on the Bank Intranet as an exemplary employee. My managers have been issued letters by other bank employees and managers, commending my hard work and commitment to assisting them, even when it was something outside the scope of my regular work duties. Customer compliments were submitted to management regularly.

I was evaluated at the end of my first year with the company. If the 'pay for performance' policy truly existed, as I was so confidently assured it did when I was hired, I could anticipate a fairly significant pay increase, along with the potential for a yearly bonus. I worked hard, excelled in all aspects of my position(s), and received regular 'recognition' throughout the year (albeit, a somewhat fluffed- up and superficial brand of recognition). Finally, I was ready to really cash in.

And boy, did I ever! Why, my $0.36 per hour raise... that really just had me head-over-heels. I couldn't thank them enough for their more than generous pay increase. Surely, I hadn't worked hard enough to deserve an extra $14 (pre-tax) per week? I made sure that I confirmed with my manager that this was not just a fortunate mistake on the part of management- if a raise of that magnitude was given to me, it would undoubtedly have a massive impact upon the Bank's budget? But no... The Bank's budget was not a matter of concern when it came to rewarding employees. They were so thankful for my hard work, just as they promised, and were glad to offer me such a generous amount. As expected, the Big Bosses stood by their 'Pay for Performance' policy, and truly showed their commitment to their employees.

(Need I make clear the abundant sarcasm?)

The Illusive Implications

'Pay for Performance.' The meaning of these words is not difficult to discern- the harder you work, the more you make. 'Awards and Recognition Program.' Again, not a complex concept- do your job well, and we'll notice. These two phrases are tossed around regularly, as the CEOs and management team does all they can to keep their little hamsters running in their cages. But how well are these principles truly integrated into corporate policy and the daily experience of company employees? Actions speak louder than words. And, when coming from a global corporation, empty words often signify more than laziness or lack of concern. The existence of these surely aids the lack of action on their part, but is not necessarily, nor likely, the root cause.

It is, in my opinion, a concerted effort to exert as much labor as possible from employees for as little monetary compensation as possible- unfulfilled promises indicate more than a lack of follow-through, but rather a deliberate intent to deceive prospective and existing employees into thinking they can truly 'make it big' in the company. As a result, they manage to keep everyone working hard to achieve something they (likely) never will.

'Work harder, you'll get somewhere... Nope, not hard enough. Keep trying.'

'It will happen eventually. I swear. Come on, you can do it. Don't you want a raise?'

'Increase your productivity and quality, learn a few more departments... the training is free! If you do x, y, and z, of course you'll get a raise. No, I don't know how much... but yes, a raise is definitely in order. You're doing a great job. Keep it up, this is what we like to see!'

Yes, it's exactly what they like to see. Underpaid employees jumping at opportunities to do more work- the raise is coming someday, someday soon.

$0.36 per hour. That's what you're hard work is really worth. But the pins, the certificates, your face on the company website... doesn't that just totally make up for it?

How it 'Works'

My position at The Bank has encompassed two main responsibilities: responding to inbound phone calls and responding to e-mail inquiries. As I obtained additional skills through training, the nature of the inquiries and requests received inevitably changed, yet these were the two mediums through which I communicated with customers.

Every phone call is recorded, and every e-mail archived. Over the course of one month, I would respond to approximately 1,300 phone inquiries, of which twelve would be randomly monitored. My ability as an employee was based upon those twelve phone calls- less than one percent of the number of calls taken. If any of those one percent of recorded calls were sub-standard (i.e. the customers name was used twice instead of three times), my quality rating would suffer. This very minute sampling of calls became a projected generalization of my overall performance. Similarly, if by some chance that less than one percent of monitored calls revealed that I exceeded the customer's expectations, I would (possibly) receive recognition in the form of a gold pin for my plaque and a $20 gift card to Walmart. This was not guaranteed, however. It was, from that point, a game of luck as to which of the best-performing employees would actually be chosen, at random, to receive an 'award' (again, award = piece of paper. Hooray, hooray.) Employees have better chances of winning the lottery than receiving an accurate performance evaluation in this manner.

In my role as an e-mail processor, the 'recognition' received is even less generous. To be honest, it's more along the lines of non-existent. The expectation is approximately 100 emails to be processed per employee per day. 500 per week. 2000 per month, 16 of which are randomly monitored for quality. That is, again, less than one percent of my actual work, assumed to be a sufficient basis for evaluating the overall quality of my work as a whole. A typo can spell disaster. No recognition is given for performing well- but you are made very aware of your errors.

Why Change What Isn't (Totally) Broken?

Among the most basic reasons to alter the existing program within the company is the simple fact that irregular rewards result in inconsistent effort. For those who thrive on public recognition and are more hot-air than human, then the current system is flawless- no one hesitates to tell you how great you are. These people can sit happily in their cubicles, gossip with their neighbors, and fawn over themselves when someone comes by to drop off another pin to stick on the piece of wood prominently displayed on their over-crowded desks.

For those who can see beyond the propaganda and empty words, recognizing that the company has merely found an effective way to keep the majority of their underpaid employees passified- it's truly enraging.

Words too often serve as a substitute for something more concrete. An extra pin on my plaque does not put food on my table. Increased visibility on the company intranet does not correlate to increased dollars when my direct deposit comes through every other Friday. Why push yourself to excel for nothing more than a pat on the back? Pride in ones work is the only reason I can conjure up.

I have always been a firm believer that if I'm doing something, I may as well do it to the best of my ability. Yet, in time, that mentality fades as well, for the simple reason that if you don't respect the company for which you are employed, you take less pride in the work you do as a representative of that company. A logical progression, I believe. When you see through the manipulative techniques used to keep the herd quiet and finally recognize the avoidable truth (that you are doing nothing more than speeding in place on a corporate treadmill)- pride in your work tends to diminish rather quickly.

What Would the Impact Be?

More regular monetary incentives would, guaranteed, provide employees with the necessary ambition to do their jobs well. If the chance of a raise comes up only once per year, how likely is it that an employee will be giving his all throughout the entire year in anticipation of a raise? Is it not more likely that quarterly raises would be more effective in producing employees who are focused on excelling? When a goal is too far in the future, it is easy to lose sight of. The closer the goal, the hard one works to achieve it.

In the same vein, if the reward for which one is working is not concrete or functional, how diligently will one strive to obtain it? I, somewhat naively, believed that I would be truly rewarded for my hard work. I came home exhausted, stressed, and put in countless hours of overtime to impress upon management how truly dedicated I was. And I got a gold pin for my plaque, a card at Christmas saying 'thanks for the hard work,' and a $0.36 per hour raise. Needless to say, I no longer do anything beyond what I am paid (poorly) to do.

A Way to Make Things Right Again

My main responsibility at work right now is to process e-mails 40 hours per week. My daily quota is 100 e-mails per shift. I can do that in about three hours, easy. The remainder of my day I spend Online, reading, writing, researching topics of personal interest... and writing articles like this one.

While some may perceive this as an indication of laziness or lack of work ethic, I must object to such sentiments. It is simply the natural response to a lack of appreciation. It is a complete and firm refusal to allow myself to be taken advantage of. I work for a BANK. A huge, multi-billion dollar, global BANK. Do they just not have the money? That seems like a rather foolish excuse to try on us, doesn't it?

I am not, and never will be, satisfied with an employer who pats me on the back with one hand, while his other hand is buried deep in his pocket, holding tight to his stack of money. It is already enough of an insult to my intelligence and ability that I must devote 40 hours of my week to monotonous and repetitive tasks to enjoy the luxuries of life, such as food and a roof over my head. To be forced to do so by a company that brags about how wonderfully they pay and reward their employees is sufficient to make my blood boil. I need to rectify the injustice here the best I can.

If I am employed for a company that professes to pay employees according to their skill, effort, and accomplishments, but this is not being done, it is up to me, the employee, to bring these corporate 'goals' to fruition, correct? After all, as a dedicated employee of The Bank, it is only right to help move The Bank towards the accomplishment of the goals it sets out for itself. My solution really is the only way, apparently, as The Bank cannot seem to manage this task on its own.

My hourly pay is $13.60. In an eight hour day, I earn approximately $108.77. Now, if I am here for eight hours, but only contributing three to four hours of labor... why that increases my hourly pay considerably, to an average of about $36 per hour. I'd say that, with this minor adjustment, I'm being compensated quite generously, as I was assured I would be.