OK, so when you hire the person to sweep the floor, take out the trash, move
the dirt, dig the hole, carry the bricks or whatever other non skilled job
you can think of. You hire the guy because he looks like he has the ability
to do the job. After 6 months it becomes obvious that this person is not
going to be able to do any job except the one you hired him for, do you
recommend he be fired even though he is able to do the job you hired him
for?

Now what if you hire a salesman and he is able to do the job, and is able to
sell the average number of cars that is sold on your lot. After 2 years it
becomes obvious that he is never going to become a manager, and 50% of your
employees will always sell more than he does. You know in your heart that
he will always be an average performer, do you fire him?


"Gould 0738" wrote in message
...
Now, what if a person does not want, or does not have the ability to
learn a
skill that will increase his value, should he be given salary increases
automatically.

He should be shown the door. An entry level job is a way to introduce
unskilled
people with a lot of potential to a workplace. You make a lot more money
off
the skilled help than off the unskilled. Why should the other workers have
to
"carry' a mini-wager? The lower corporate profits that result from
employees
producing marginally or inefficiently tend to be reflected in less
generous
wages and benefits across the board. Get the guy or gal into a position
where
he or she can make a good wage and make some serious money for the company
at
the same time- and if they cannot rise or will not rise to the opportunity
a
good manager will replace them as soon as possible.

The most expensive position to a progressively managed company is probably
the
one that only justifies a minimum wage.