Why am I not surprised at the leader (TMID, 23 October) which spoke about the new government employee who was told to ‘”take it easy” on his job and not to show “too much initiative”?

No matter how much the Prime Minister or his ministers preach, there are still those who hate progress simply because they cannot match the skills and energy of the young, better educated employees, or worse, they have a hidden political agenda.

Before retiring some four years ago, I spent 35 years in the banking industry. I started when everything was hand posted. The system was slow and cumbersome but some time later machine posting was introduced. Those posting machines were the size of a small car and made so much noise that the banks hired night-posters so that the daytime business could be conducted in relative peace.

For the last several years, I have been doing all my banking on-line, at my convenience, except for withdrawing cash from ATMs.

Evolution has changed the banking industry not only in the delivery of services, but more importantly on the handling and continuous training of staff. It used to be that employees were given across-the-board pay rises to match the cost of living index plus a meagre amount based on the bank’s profit for that year.

Today, performance overrules the cost of living and each employee is given what is called a ‘Profit Plan’ for the next year with targets clearly spelled out. This applies to all employees, be they tellers or branch managers. The employee’s progress is monitored and a meeting is arranged with his/her supervisor quarterly – like clockwork. If you don’t achieve targets and there is no justification, you find yourself on the unemployment line irrespective of years of previous loyal service. You achieve your targets and you are rewarded accordingly. The downside of all this is, if you reach your target 100 per cent, you expect next year’s targets to be higher! Annual performance appraisals are agreed to and signed by both the employee and manager. If an employee disputes the manager’s rating, he/she will have an opportunity to state their case and a final ruling given by the next higher authority.

Another innovative and rewarding practice is the ‘Employee Suggestion Scheme’ under which each employee has the means of observing procedures and practices within his or her department and make suggestions on how to improve the system or how to save money. It could be the elimination of a little form which served little purpose or which was missing a detail. Each month, the top suggestions are selected and the employees making the suggestions are amply rewarded for their efforts. Here we are not talking about a free meal at a restaurant. These awards can take the form of several hundred dollars and depend on how much the bank could save or by how much it could improve its service.

Changing the system is not easy and any government move will be countered by resistance from all quarters, including the unions, however the unions have to be convinced that in the end, performance appraisals and rises geared to production often work to the advantage of the employee.

Such a system will also minimise the perception that rises/promotions are given to an employee over another one due to his/her particular political leanings. Numbers become indisputable.

The editor was right when he pointed out that government departments vary in the quality of service they provide and that this is not uncommon in other jurisdictions, but the fact remains that the public service salaries are paid from good money earned by the public and taxed by the government. Therefore the public expects good service for the good money which the government extracts from its pocket.

J. Martinelli

London, Ontario

Canada