Related Posts
Is EY GDS providing any joining bonus ?
Raise your hand if you just cannot do it today.
More Posts
Please DM if interested asap
(I have recently joined IQVIA bangalore. I will receive my first month salary on 25th this month. Payroll portal got just created for me. So, I opened.)
In my reports -> My current CTC section. It has details of Current annual & Monthly AGS. My question is what is AGS? It is showing half of my CTC. Should I raise this to HR or it is just something else. And where can we get the actual CTC reflection? Pls help. Thanks in advance.
Additional Posts in Law
How do you wind down after a rough day?
New to Fishbowl?
Download the Fishbowl app to
unlock all discussions on Fishbowl.
unlock all discussions on Fishbowl.
My firm did that a few times because it exceeded its financial goals for the year.
It might be reverse-engineered from the surplus. They have $X above prediction for the year, so they pick a special bonus amount of $Y, divide X by Y to get the number of people who can get the bonus (Z), and then figure out what percentage below target gets you Z number of associates. Prorated special bonuses for people who miss target would fix this, but it does seem necessary to have SOME cutoff. Does someone who hits 20% of their target hours really need to be considered for a bonus? Again, don’t nitpick people getting more money. Today it’s them, tomorrow it’s you. The solution, shitty as it is given the reality of BL life, is to not miss target.
It's like a lower billable target, which is arbitrary (as is the original billable target, fyi - the industry picked a random number and firms rallied around it, which is why you have full bonus targets that vary -- 2000, 1950, 1900, etc.). Anyway, if the firm has a surplus, and figure they have enough to give a smaller bonus those who hit, for example,1800 instead of 2000, and you only hit 1750, there is no reason for you to expect the special bonus. It sounds like you're mad the firm didn't set the discretionary secondary threshold (in this example) at 1700 so that you could make the bonus. But all this is 1) discretionary and 2) dependent on the amount of the surplus. Associates not hitting the original target are not promised bonuses, so it seems like the firm did the decent thing by spreading more money around because they made more.
And I quote directly from OP "I don't think I'm entitled to a special bonus. I had a bad year. But why should other associates that will also miss the billable requirement but only billed 25-30 hours more than me be given a special bonus? The threshold seems flawed to me."
Hence my explanation about thresholds being arbitrary/discretionary and dependent on the amount of a surplus, and the analogy to illustrate. OP wanted the threshold to be lower so they could get the special bonus they weren't entitled to.
But if you didn’t hit that percentage you not only don’t get a raise or a merit bonus but you also don’t get the special bonus. It seems bizarre to me to differentiate between associates that will not hit the billable goal. It seems more reasonable to say either all associates get a special bonus or only those that met the billable requirement get the bonus. They also don’t do this special bonus every year.
What do you think? Is this common?
AA, realization rate and revenue are bad ways to measure this because (1) realization in BL is almost exclusively a function of the partner, not the associate; and (2) revenue is a combination of realization (which is flawed for the previous reason) and billable rate, ie year, and I don’t see why a sub-target senior associate should get a special bonus over a sub-target junior associate who bills more. Percent below target is a perfectly fine way to capture some extra associates for a little extra bonus cash.
Rising Star
Yeah i think it should have been given to everyone even if they hit their billables and got a merit bonus. Maybe they should have made the special bonus smaller for each person so everyone could get it.