The purpose of employee benefits and compensation is to achieve higher levels of employee satisfaction, which in turn affects the employee performance and their retention within an organization (Imran, Arif, Cheema, & Azeem, 2014). The ability for an organization to maintain its workforce reduces the costs that are associated with employee turnover and improves overall organizational efficiency. This paper considers the appropriate employee compensation package for a secretary within an organization.
Research has shown that different reward types will impact employee performance and satisfaction within the workplace. As a result, the employee becomes more goal-oriented and works with existing organizational structures to become more effective (Presslee, Vance, & Webb, 2013). Based on this research, this employee benefits plan adopted a wide range of benefits for the secretarial position, noting that this is one position where clients directly and initially interact with the organization. The following employee grading structure was used to give the secretarial position a grade 3 position:
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
With reference to the above document, secretaries would receive annual total compensation of between $34,300 and $51,500. This is inclusive of all benefits that the employee would receive in the course of the year. Specific importance was put on the fact that the secretary requires to be adequately motivated to present the company well in the course of daily operations of the company. For the purpose of benefit determination based on prevalent practice, the following core and non-core benefits were collected from best-practice organization in the market:
| Core Benefits (Traditional) | Non-core Benefits (Voluntary – Elective) |
| Healthcare Insurance | Dental and Vision |
| Prescription Drugs | Dependent Life |
| Life Insurance | Supplement Life, |
| Vacation and Holidays Benefits | Long-term care insurance |
| Sick leave pay | Auto and home-owners insurance |
| Disability | Mortgages |
| On-site daycare | |
| Tuition reimbursement | |
| Perhaps, even Pet Insurance |
Figure 2 : Core and Non-core Benefits Considered
As a means of becoming a competitive employer in the market and attracting the most talented employees, the organization created a favorable compensation plan that would include all of the core benefits and a majority of the non-core benefits. This would ensure that employees find the organization as a competitive employment agency, thereby giving their best to be employed here (Shields, et al., 2013). All employees would get the various employee benefits and compensation so long as they are grade 3 employees onwards. This way, virtually all employees would sufficiently be motivated to achieve organizational goals within their respective areas of service.
As a result, the following compensation plan was formulated for the grade 3 employees, from where benefits would be rising at a pre-determined incremental rate:
Notably, some benefits here are largely covered by the organization while others are mostly catered by the employee. In the cases of housing, general insurance, utilities, retirement plans and farm commodities, the organization will be catering for the larger part of the employee’s benefits. Nonetheless, continuing education and clothing are examples of benefits that are provided in very insignificant amounts to the secretary. Notably, this farming organization sets aside some of its funds for the purpose of consumed farm produce and farm commodities as a form of employee engagement and motivation. In this manner, the organization makes use of its personal assets for employee motivation.
In conclusion, this plan provides an adequate annual employee compensation and benefits plan for a secretary working in a farm management organization.
References
Imran, H., Arif, I., Cheema, S., & Azeem, M. (2014). Relationship between job satisfaction, job performance, attitude towards work, and organizational commitment. Entrepreneurship and innovation management journal, 2(2) , 135-144.
Presslee, A., Vance, T. W., & Webb, R. A. (2013). The effects of reward type on employee goal setting, goal commitment, and performance. The Accounting Review, 88(5) , 1805-1831.
Shields, J., Brown, M., Kaine, S., Dolle-Samuel, C., North-Samardzic, A., McLean, P., et al. (2013). Managing Employee Performance & Reward: Concepts, Practices, Strategies. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
