check stubs

[Winning DUH]

Here is my question;
How much information do you include on employees check stubs? Specifically do you show the amount of money paid towards insurance and benefits by the employer?

I had dinner not too long ago with two restaurant owners. Both of the restaurant owners provided their employees with insurance and 401K in addition to the hourly wage.

Owner #1 said he put YTD gross, YTD net, weekly hours, and weekly net. Also showing deductions for taxes, and employee?s contribution to the benefits. The employers cost of insurance was not shown and the employer matching of the 401K was not shown on the check stub.

Owner #2 did show all the costs of matching 401K funds and the cost of insurance. So the top line on owner #2?s check stubs would show the cost in hard dollars what the employee really cost for a week?s work.

Owner #2 was of the opinion that if he showed the employees the total amount of compensation that they were receiving that the employees would be less likely to change jobs because the employee ?could see? the amount of money they were making. That way if the worker was presented with new work opportunity the worker could ?do the math him self?.

I also worked for an electrical contractor that four times a year would send out a letter stating that ?ACME Electric has paid x amount of dollars into your social security and x amount in matching funds by the employer into various tax accounts.?
Is it a good idea to constantly show employees how much they are making or should all of the fringes, taxes, and additional benefits just be paid and not brought to the employees attention?

How do you handle it?

 

[ceb58]

Here is my question;
How much information do you include on employees check stubs? Specifically do you show the amount of money paid towards insurance and benefits by the employer?

I had dinner not too long ago with two restaurant owners. Both of the restaurant owners provided their employees with insurance and 401K in addition to the hourly wage.

Owner #1 said he put YTD gross, YTD net, weekly hours, and weekly net. Also showing deductions for taxes, and employee?s contribution to the benefits. The employers cost of insurance was not shown and the employer matching of the 401K was not shown on the check stub.

Owner #2 did show all the costs of matching 401K funds and the cost of insurance. So the top line on owner #2?s check stubs would show the cost in hard dollars what the employee really cost for a week?s work.

Owner #2 was of the opinion that if he showed the employees the total amount of compensation that they were receiving that the employees would be less likely to change jobs because the employee ?could see? the amount of money they were making. That way if the worker was presented with new work opportunity the worker could ?do the math him self?.

I also worked for an electrical contractor that four times a year would send out a letter stating that ?ACME Electric has paid x amount of dollars into your social security and x amount in matching funds by the employer into various tax accounts.?
Is it a good idea to constantly show employees how much they are making or should all of the fringes, taxes, and additional benefits just be paid and not brought to the employees attention?

How do you handle it?

What owner #1 is doing is like the NEC. He is doing the minimum of what is required. Owner#2 is going above and beyond. This can be a good thing. Too many times employees look at the owner and say how he is making all of the money and why cant I get a raise. Very few understand that it cost the employer money to give them a job.
This was the case with one of my son-in-laws. He works for a contractor doing custom homes. He was complaining about how much the contractor charged per hr. for him and how much he got paid. Not until I showed him how much of that rate went just to keep him working did he understand why the contractor had to charge what he dose. After the taxes and SS he pays,the insurance, the trucks and their expense, tools and every thing else he is just barely making a profit on there labor.

 

[renosteinke]

First, a poll of those reading this who REALLY operate a business: if you were simply stunned to learn all the 'hidden' expenses of having an employee or running a business, say "aye!"

OK ... now that my ears have recovered from the roar .....

There is a general attitude that all financial and business informations is "confidential,' not to be shared with anyone, ever. Lying is advised. I disagree with this advice.

As I touched upon in my 'lead certification' thread, there are all manner of 'hidden' expenses that we must meet. Some businesses cut corners to reduce these expenses. For example, how often have you heard an employer say 'I'm not training someone so he can go work somewhere else?' Well, SOMEONE has to provide the training, or the next statement will be 'I just can't find qualified help.' But I wander ....

IMO, we NEED to share this expense information with EVERYONE. If a new rule costs you $100/mo, you need to be sure that everyone (especially the rule advocates) understand that this means you'll have to charge more, and some firms will fold. If sending an employee to a training class costs you $800, he needs to understand this. We all need to see these expenses, if for no other reason than to identify who among us less conscientious than we might like.

Does the information need to be on the check stub? Maybe not - but I believe that there is value in keeping these matters 'up front,' with regular updates. IMO, a lot of the emotion fueling the 'health care debate' is founded on ignorance - ignorance fostered by years of companies concealing the costs of 'benefits' from their employees.

Ditto for workmans' comp, unemployment insurance, social security taxes, employee taxes, etc. While you're at it, be sure to share information as to the costs of work clothes, PPE, consumables (gloves, soap, etc.), holidays / vacation, and the Christmas party.

Look at it this way: If you're paying a man $21, and another offers him $25 ... that offer looks pretty good- unless your guy is also aware that your benefit package is worth (costing you) $7.85/ hr., and the new offer does not include any benefits.

Since most benefits have a 'probation' or 'qualification' period, your guys need to see the benefits as if they were a 'raise' they received after they proved their worth.

Finally, the guys need to know how jobs turn out. They need to see how that extra day turned the job from a money maker to a money taker. Even the thickest of them should be able to figure out that your losing money eventually means they do poorly.

 

[ptonsparky]

First, a poll of those reading this who REALLY operate a business: if you were simply stunned to learn all the 'hidden' expenses of having an employee or running a business, say "aye!"

OK ... now that my ears have recovered from the roar .....

There is a general attitude that all financial and business informations is "confidential,' not to be shared with anyone, ever. Lying is advised. I disagree with this advice.

As I touched upon in my 'lead certification' thread, there are all manner of 'hidden' expenses that we must meet. Some businesses cut corners to reduce these expenses. For example, how often have you heard an employer say 'I'm not training someone so he can go work somewhere else?' Well, SOMEONE has to provide the training, or the next statement will be 'I just can't find qualified help.' But I wander ....

IMO, we NEED to share this expense information with EVERYONE. If a new rule costs you $100/mo, you need to be sure that everyone (especially the rule advocates) understand that this means you'll have to charge more, and some firms will fold. If sending an employee to a training class costs you $800, he needs to understand this. We all need to see these expenses, if for no other reason than to identify who among us less conscientious than we might like.

Does the information need to be on the check stub? Maybe not - but I believe that there is value in keeping these matters 'up front,' with regular updates. IMO, a lot of the emotion fueling the 'health care debate' is founded on ignorance - ignorance fostered by years of companies concealing the costs of 'benefits' from their employees.

Ditto for workmans' comp, unemployment insurance, social security taxes, employee taxes, etc. While you're at it, be sure to share information as to the costs of work clothes, PPE, consumables (gloves, soap, etc.), holidays / vacation, and the Christmas party.

Look at it this way: If you're paying a man $21, and another offers him $25 ... that offer looks pretty good- unless your guy is also aware that your benefit package is worth (costing you) $7.85/ hr., and the new offer does not include any benefits.

Since most benefits have a 'probation' or 'qualification' period, your guys need to see the benefits as if they were a 'raise' they received after they proved their worth.

Finally, the guys need to know how jobs turn out. They need to see how that extra day turned the job from a money maker to a money taker. Even the thickest of them should be able to figure out that your losing money eventually means they do poorly.

I asked a Safety Training instructor to design a truck for me to include all I need. "OK, I can to that." Now, call me to work under your house in that "confined space" of yours. "Uh, I don't think I like where this is going."

I provide the minimum amount on check stubs and probably should be more open with why a raise was skipped or just why/how they are still employed after the worst 1st quarter in 5 years. Definitely not because of their good looks.

Good info.

 

[Strife]

I'm definitely with #2.
I've been in this trade 25 years and most employees have no clue how much "burden" there is for every dollar they get paid. Most of them think companies make these outrageous profits. Most of them go: "company charges 50-60 an hr and they only pay me 20". If it was up to me I'd show the WC, liability, tools lost/damaged/worn out, van tear and wear, van gas.
On an unrelated note, it's similar with what I learned from my mentor. There's a lot of times when you don't charge good customers for the full amount. Or you don't charge certain calls where the guy goes in a does nothing. I learned to always send them a work order with "No Charge" on it.

Here is my question;
How much information do you include on employees check stubs? Specifically do you show the amount of money paid towards insurance and benefits by the employer?



Owner #2 did show all the costs of matching 401K funds and the cost of insurance. So the top line on owner #2?s check stubs would show the cost in hard dollars what the employee really cost for a week?s work.

Owner #2 was of the opinion that if he showed the employees the total amount of compensation that they were receiving that the employees would be less likely to change jobs because the employee ?could see? the amount of money they were making. That way if the worker was presented with new work opportunity the worker could ?do the math him self?.

I also worked for an electrical contractor that four times a year would send out a letter stating that ?ACME Electric has paid x amount of dollars into your social security and x amount in matching funds by the employer into various tax accounts.?
Is it a good idea to constantly show employees how much they are making or should all of the fringes, taxes, and additional benefits just be paid and not brought to the employees attention?

How do you handle it?

 

[jmellc]

Not much of an issue with me. I hire very little help right now. But I agree, tell as much info as possible about what you pay in various ways.

Many of us have a "Joe Six Pack" mentality when we're young & some always have it. The more the figures are listed, the better chance the guy will appreciate what he has and get on board with a better attitude. Or maybe when he complains at home, his more intelligent wife can add up his check stub & remind him of the $ he doesn't actually see that goes to his benefit.

The IRS discovered this principal, in reverse, many years ago. They realized they could get far more taxes out of someone by advance withholding than they ever could in arrears. The sucker doesn't miss what he doesn't see.