Skip to main content

Abstract

This slogan expresses two ideas that are basic to compensation administration in the United States. The first is that work, in the form of the job, should be the major criterion for determining proper wage differentials within organization. The second is that fairness or equity is the major goal to be achieved by compensation administration. Both of these ideas are being called into question today by new ideas in compensation administration and pressures on organizations.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

eBook
USD 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Bibliography

  • Belcher, D.W. and Atchison, T.J. Compensation Administration, 2nd Ed., Englewood Cliffs, N.J., Prentice-Hall, 1987.

    Google Scholar 

  • Belcher, D.W. and Atchison, T.J., “Compensation for Work” in Dubin, R. Handbook of Work, Organization, and Society, Chicago, Rand McNally, 1976, Pp. 567–611.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hamner, C.W. “How to Ruin Motivation with Pay” Compensation Review, Third Quarter 1975, Pp. 88-98.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jenkins, G.D. and Gupta, N. “The Payoffs of Paying for Knowledge,” Labor-Management Cooperation Brief, U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor-Management Relations and Cooperative Programs, 1985.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lawler, E.E. “What’s Wrong with Point-Factor Job Evaluation” Compensation and Benefits Review, March–April 1986, Pp. 38-45.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lawler, E.E, Pay and Organizational Effectiveness, Reading, Mass. Addison-Wesley, 1981.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meyer, H.H., “The Pay-for-Performance Dilemma,” Organizational Dynamics, Winter 1975, pp. 71-8.

    Google Scholar 

  • O’Dell, C People, Performance, and Pay, American Productivity Center, Houston, Texas, 1986.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schuler, R.S. “Human Resource Management Choices and Organizational Strategy” in Readings in Personnel and Human Resource Management, 3rd Ed., St. Paul, West Publishing, 1988.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 1990 Plenum Press, New York

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Atchison, T.J. (1990). “What Should We Pay for?”. In: Niehaus, R.J., Price, K.F. (eds) Human Resource Strategies for Organizations in Transition. Springer, Boston, MA. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4684-5757-5_9

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4684-5757-5_9

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Boston, MA

  • Print ISBN: 978-1-4684-5759-9

  • Online ISBN: 978-1-4684-5757-5

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics