Losing a meritocracy

I love being involved in companies that reward people based on merit. It's good to know that those who excel are noticed and compensated accordingly. Not only does it help those people, it actually acts as a motivator to inspire others to do better.

But, what happens when an organization decides that there is an "unfair" range of payments for what on the surface seems like the same work. They deny the differences between those who are excellent, and create a flat fee for a particular service.

So what does that do? It reduces the motivation to excel for everyone - and in short order takes the organization from splendid to ho hum.

Equity v. Equality

Have we gone too far in our politically correct concept of treating all people as "equal" in the workplace? Are we rewarding those whose performance isn't as good as those who perform well? Why do we disparage merit raises? Why do we act shocked when a company like G.E. or Cypress Semiconductor creates metrics to reward those who do better and actually fire those who are on the bottom of the evaluation pile?

If you owned your own business, and there weren't compliance laws to worry about, or as here in California, the Labor Relations Board, wouldn't you differentiate between those that really supported your business and those that merely went through the motions trying to get a paycheck? I think so.