Hiya,Just wondering if there are any fixed income traders here making over 500k pounds who can discuss(anonymously of course) their companies apparent or perceived salary grading/band system throughout their career- ie. the standard base ranges available and corresponding bonus ranges along with ceilings for each grade that they may have encountered.This is an attempt to figure out and compare various bank HR grading policies which are generally notpublicized even to managers, recruiters or candidates. It will be helpful for others reading this Board.Also, other than title or managerial control, can you match your promotions with an increase in bonus opportunity?Ie. if your salary was between 40-55k were you aware of any bonus ceiling in that salary range?For example, I know one person who was told that their base could only go to x, because only managers had a base of x and above while a different aspect of the grading meant that their bonus potential was maxed out at 30-40%while those in a grade higher could get a bonus of 50%+? I'm wondering if employers (HR) shouldn't be forced to reveal grading/band salary relationships to staff.Any an all experiences welcome.

QuoteOriginally posted by: CitiVPI'm wondering if employers (HR) shouldn't be forced to reveal grading/band salary relationships to staff.I think that all salaries should be disclosed. Why only the top dogs'? Especially as who really cares about their pay anyway?

I agree that they should be disclosed, but with so many people making career (and dictating the rules) for their social skills rather than techical ones, such a transparency would be very risky for the whole financial establishment.And in fact, I remember that in Citigroup talking about salaries was a sackable offence (as it was pointed out to me by a team leader of our group, the evening that me and a few colleagues decided to declare our pay packages, hoping to show some evident mispricings...)Unfortunately my earnings are nowhere close to the region of £500K, so I won't be able to help you this time ...gc

Where I work it is mildly described as "against the Firm's policy"... But we all know what violating the Firm's policy could mean to our careers, at least locally.Said that, luck often helps with respect to this matter: you may find a fax, something left on the printer or... A recruiting add from your departement that is just too explicit. Human stupidity has no limit. Of course any misplaced document should be reported to your manager - believe me it can only help, especially as after all you are not responsible for what you find by chance!Re: public disclosure, indeed I bet the ones who would be scared are the very ones you mention. But my question to this is: would really the whole financial establishment (there also are a few people of value up there - at least I hope) be threatened? Isn't a bit of Spring cleaning needed from time to time?

Give me even one example of someone who was sacked purely for revealing their pay package/pay structure at a certain corp- that is bs generated by HR to scare people from finding out that they are really being underpaid, and, also probabally to protect them from inequity pay related lawsuits.

... You were working in HR, weren't you

I think it is the case that people who perceive they aren't doing well on the bouns are people whose political positions is not strong, so vague threats are more scary.CitiVP mentions lawsuits, but in Britain, we are lurching to a point where firms are being required to publicly disclose pay levels. I've done work for some firms where every single person's renumeration was public, and it worked well.I think the pain is in the revealing process, not the steady state of knowledge.Personally, I think it would be a good thing for everyone. If you're going to sue the firm, then you can trivially get the data, and a person in that mode will no doubt have mindset to ensure that harm is done with it.One experience I had was a bonus that I thought was pretty crap, and took it up with my boss, and it turned out that I'd had one of the top payouts in difficult times. This was easily resolved, but I could have quite, sued or become demotivated over this, simply because I was wrong. No bank wants to win a sex/race/age discriminations case, they want not to have it at all, even winnin g is a real hassle and pretty expensive.We must also look to why there are bonuses in the first place. A key reason is to motivate people to do the "right" thing. AS long as "right" is observable and mildly well defined poeple will try to move up the scale. If you see that X on the same nominal level gets more, theny you will of course be miffed, but a smart person will try to find out what they're doing "right". My quotes on "right" are of course because bonus allocation even in the most rigorously mathematical part of a bank owes little to any recognised financial algorithm.

Well I don't know If I'm for full disclosure of the exact amount people are getting on an individual basis, that is not what this thread is advocating. The main point is to figure out the mechanism that HR uses to determine the mininum and maximum salaries achievable within a grade/banding. This info is what possibly should be public. Knowing that band associate/30k has a max bonus of 15% and minimum of 5% would help managers manage Bob's expectations. If bob's goal is to be in band associate 40k/bonus band 15-30%, HR rules for getting there should be made available for Bob to see. It is completely unfair for companies to hide such facts from potential hires as hires really need such info to decide which company to work for. There have been so many cases of people claiming the company 'lied' to them around bonus time. An open policy would eliminate this problem.Some banks have a policy of not paying new hires more than x% above their current salary, and placing them in the same band as before or at least no more than one band higher. This policy should absolutely be public knowledge just as a candidate is expected to share and often prove his current income to a recruiting firm. Odysseus is correct, the HR policies/rules pertaining to banding should be disclosed on all levels, not justthose above 500k. My interest in the 500k range is due to the fact that such info would show people how to work their way up 'that high' in an organization, salary wise. Yes, yes, yes - bonuses are based on political strength- but I can tell you, there is a maximum and everyone deserves to know their band's celiing.

Only once sat in on a "big money" bonus discussion - and basically over £200K each case at that firm was decided individually - on the basis of "what would it cost to keep that persons contribution to our P&L". Up to that they had reasonably strict bandings.

QuoteOriginally posted by: DCFCOne experience I had was a bonus that I thought was pretty crap, and took it up with my boss, and it turned out that I'd had one of the top payouts in difficult times.This is really where bands can help. But not just at the last minute... They should also help people to assess whether it is worth spending their night at work or not.Regarding your experience, DCFC, this also happened to me. Well, I had to trust my manager as I did not see the bonus pool allocation. Now, looking backwards I am grateful he was convincing enough - anyway at the time I did not know that you could launch a lawsuit on these grounds.