21. Job security and salary should be based on employee performance, not on years of service. Rewarding employees primarily for years of service discourages people from maintaining consistently high levels of productivity. 工作保险和薪资应该打造在雇员绩效的基础上而非工作年限上。主要依据工作年限奖励职员不利于大家维持高水平的生产力。
1. 一方面绩效薪资会促进工人的劳动生产率，使偷懒的工人得到惩罚;使专心工作投入较大的工人得到补偿增大他们的勉励.
2. 其次,单纯的用法绩效薪资也会会打击一部分工人的劳动积极性.由于有一些为公司服务很长时间的工人可能仅可能是因为年龄是什么原因劳动生产率降低.而且社会物价的总体水平也是应该考虑的原因之一,当存在通货膨胀时候假如仅根据绩效评价,那样工人整体的生活质量会降低也不利于劳动生产率.
productivity productive counterproductive security secure salary solely1 sole performance length incentive2 motivation enticement3 stimulus4 impetus5 incitement6 tenured professor associate professor achievement reward average worthwhile amply ample schedule salary condemn判刑,谴责
loyal royal loyalty8 refuse adjust counterproductive attract retain reserve withhold9 uphold criterion criteria10 security ignore ignorance
1， 第一，完全依据年限来看，是不利于生产力进步的。如此职员只须在企业里待着，表现平庸provide third-class performance就能得到更多的奖励，这显然是不利于整个团队的morale的。一方面，老的不可以激起；其次，有才干的青年也不会想加入这个企业。
2， 但也不可以完全只看表现，还要在此同时考虑到年限。由于老职员又同时很出色的表现，为企业付出了更多的力量devote their entire life to the development of one corporation。假如完全同等看待，也未必更公平。反而非常可能使老职员感到不公平treated unfairly，丧失对企业的loyalty。
3， 应该综合来看，考虑到表现相同的职员，依据服务年限不同得到不一样的待遇。
View1. Performance plays an important role in the assessment11 procedural of employees.
View2. It is true that reward employees solely according to their seniority will affect the overall productivity, however, the year of services do contain some indication on specialty12 and experience. More over, when conducting work assessment of certain positions such as consultant13, in which performance become hard to evaluate, seniority acts as useful supplement
According to the statement, in order to ensure high productivity, companies should base their employees salaries and job security solely on job performance, and not on length of service to the company. I agree that salary increases and job security are powerful incentives14 to high achievement and should generally go to those who do the best work. However, to ensure employee productivity, companies must also reward tenured employees with cosplayt-of-living raisesthough not with job security.
On the one hand, rewarding average job performance with large pay increases or promises of job security is a waste of resourcesfor two reasons. First, complacent15 employees will see no reason to become more productive. Secondly16, those normally inclined to high achievement may decide the effort isnt worthwhile when mediocre17 efforts are amply compensated18. Companies should, therefore, adjust their pay schedules so that the largest salaries go to the most productive employees.
On the other hand, employees who perform their jobs satisfactorily should be given regular, though small, service-based pay increasesalso for two reasons. First, the cosplayt of living is steadily19 rising, so on the principle of fair compensation alone, it is unjust to condemn7 loyal employees to de facto salary reductions by refusing them cosplayt-of-living raises. Secondly, failure to adjust salaries to reflect the cosplayt of living may be counterproductive for the firm, which will have difficulty attracting and retaining good employees without such a policy.
In the final analysis, the statement correctly identifies job performance as the single best criterion for salary and job security. However, the statement goes too far; it ignores the fact that a cosplayt-of-living salary increase for tenured employees not only enhances loyalty and, in the end, productivity, but also is required by fairness.