The Conscience of a Liberal
I really like this thought-provoking heading of a Paul Krugman's book (though one I have not yet read) that I would almost certainly be a liberal if I would ever have to be involved in politics (which I won't, and endeavor to stay away from even in the corporate environment). But if politics is about power, the power to change things for the better is what I wouldn't mind at all to strive for.
When I received the endorsement from Head Office of my budget proposal for our local salaries, I was thrilled with satisfaction (though my own salary is not included). A 11% pay rise in today's economic environment of layoffs and salary freeze (if not cut) indeed sounds as unreal as a miracle - and was communicated as such when I announced the good news. But it is not a reckless call of judgement - far from it. It is a mere gesture of appreciation to make up for the hardship which local staffs had endured during the earlier months of exorbitantly escalating oil, food and other commodities' prices and, oddly as it may seem, in consideration of the weird fact that inflation is still a valid official concern nowadays in Indonesia, even when the world, including the "poor" country itself, is reeling from recession. Besides, Indonesia labour market is still one of very low salary base.
Understanding and empathy from the central bureaucrazy, while appreciated if granted, could hardly be taken for granted. There is a fine line between doing the politically correct thing and responding to the call of conscience. In the case of proposing for a salary raise - let alone a substantial one - in hard times, it is far easier to do the former than the latter, where the conscience in question is about the well-being of those people who are far and remote from the centre of power - but whom I face, work together and rely on day in day out in our far and remote places. It is, therefore, my conviction that it is in my premise to look after their interests, though also to align local expectations with the company's direction - therefore, where my power of influence to make the right call of judgement and balance may come in.
Paradoxically and funny enough, being liberal-minded does not necessarily mean an inclination to accommodate the union's voices. It is perhaps lucky that I got away with a non-aggressive local union, but there was no consultation, let alone negotiation, with them prior to submitting my budget proposal. Nevertheless, the union chairman was thankful to the raise and felt his trust in the company well-founded.
By the definition of capitalism, I believe shareholders are generally more conservative than otherwise. As such, I feel lucky that I am working for a relatively liberal-minded employer (judging from our CE's repeated assurance, if not guarantee, that it is the company's intent to keep the team through the current economic downturn). Though nothing is guaranteed in life, the good intent makes a good difference.
It is indeed important to protect staff interests - as to protect the long-term well-being of the company - in hard times (as I wrote a few months ago, before the world recession became a reality). The two priorities do not have to be mutually exclusive: in consideration of the accumulated natural attrition over the previous months, total local salaries are actually reduced, despite the 11% pay rise. And to whet my liberal appetite, I deliberately, though not conspicuously, award slightly high percentages of raise for the base level category of staff than for the more senior ones.
When I received the endorsement from Head Office of my budget proposal for our local salaries, I was thrilled with satisfaction (though my own salary is not included). A 11% pay rise in today's economic environment of layoffs and salary freeze (if not cut) indeed sounds as unreal as a miracle - and was communicated as such when I announced the good news. But it is not a reckless call of judgement - far from it. It is a mere gesture of appreciation to make up for the hardship which local staffs had endured during the earlier months of exorbitantly escalating oil, food and other commodities' prices and, oddly as it may seem, in consideration of the weird fact that inflation is still a valid official concern nowadays in Indonesia, even when the world, including the "poor" country itself, is reeling from recession. Besides, Indonesia labour market is still one of very low salary base.
Understanding and empathy from the central bureaucrazy, while appreciated if granted, could hardly be taken for granted. There is a fine line between doing the politically correct thing and responding to the call of conscience. In the case of proposing for a salary raise - let alone a substantial one - in hard times, it is far easier to do the former than the latter, where the conscience in question is about the well-being of those people who are far and remote from the centre of power - but whom I face, work together and rely on day in day out in our far and remote places. It is, therefore, my conviction that it is in my premise to look after their interests, though also to align local expectations with the company's direction - therefore, where my power of influence to make the right call of judgement and balance may come in.
Paradoxically and funny enough, being liberal-minded does not necessarily mean an inclination to accommodate the union's voices. It is perhaps lucky that I got away with a non-aggressive local union, but there was no consultation, let alone negotiation, with them prior to submitting my budget proposal. Nevertheless, the union chairman was thankful to the raise and felt his trust in the company well-founded.
By the definition of capitalism, I believe shareholders are generally more conservative than otherwise. As such, I feel lucky that I am working for a relatively liberal-minded employer (judging from our CE's repeated assurance, if not guarantee, that it is the company's intent to keep the team through the current economic downturn). Though nothing is guaranteed in life, the good intent makes a good difference.
It is indeed important to protect staff interests - as to protect the long-term well-being of the company - in hard times (as I wrote a few months ago, before the world recession became a reality). The two priorities do not have to be mutually exclusive: in consideration of the accumulated natural attrition over the previous months, total local salaries are actually reduced, despite the 11% pay rise. And to whet my liberal appetite, I deliberately, though not conspicuously, award slightly high percentages of raise for the base level category of staff than for the more senior ones.
Comments