Sample HR Management Paper on Base pay

Base pay

If I were mulling over a job offer, base pay is the component of total compensation that I would find more significant. In nearly all instances, base salary supersedes all other forms of compensation with respect to lasting value and implication. Enjoying a high base pay goes a long way also to boost the bonus earned. However, this is not applicable in the reverse as negotiations of higher benefits do not have any effect on the employee’s base salary (O’Meara, 2015). Moreover, it has been established that the computation of yearly increments on the total compensation is done as a proportion of the base pay. There is, therefore, no doubt that having a high base pay translates greatly to the increment of total compensation. If employees bargain for base pay, they have good opportunity to keep building on it in all other job offers by making it continue increasing.

If an employee has a high base pay, he can negotiate for its increment in the next job offer, and this will play a key role in raising the bonus indirectly. Nevertheless, an employee does not have the chance to negotiate for the increment of the incentive offered thus cannot build on it (O’Meara, 2015). For instance, a worker cannot tell the employee that since the bonus given in the previous company was 15% of the salary, he hopes to obtain not less than 25% in the new job. Unlike for the base pay, if all the workers in the new company are given a bonus of 12%, there will be no possibility of getting anything more. Negotiating and getting a high base pay motivates workers to perform excellently. I remember how in a company that I previously worked I was overjoyed when the employer granted the base pay that I had proposed. I did not just take the pay as mere money but as the value that my employer placed on me as an employee. The degree of appreciation that I felt had a direct influence on my overall performance.



The matter of base pay being the most significant element of total compensation signifies that employers seeking to attract workers like me must ensure that the basic salary they offer is not only competitive but aggressive. Since the objective of every employer is to draw, motivate, and ensure retention of workers, a company will offer a high base pay if it is convinced that that is what will satisfy the employees, especially the excellently performing ones (Cheng, 2014). To realize their objectives, employers have to endeavor to employ a blend of the major elements of total compensation. In particular, some of the employers’ approach is to provide a base pay that is competitive with the aim of attracting and retaining workers.

Since most employers cannot afford to offer a very high base pay for many employees as a means of drawing and motivating them, companies are faced with the challenge of creating a pay process that upholds the value of workers while ensuring their retention (Noe, Hollenbeck, Gerhart, & Wright, 2015). For instance, for a small organization that has moderate resources to establish an affordable pay program, it has to provide a competitive base pay rather than an aggressive one by offering payment akin to what a worker can get at some other company within the market.

In case I was thinking of a job offer, base pay is the constituent of total compensation that I would find the most noteworthy. Base pay surpasses all other elements of compensation with respect to enduring worth and insinuation. Unlike incentives or benefits, base pay offers an employee the chance to keep building on it in other job offers through ensuring its increment.



Cheng, S. (2014). Executive compensation in public higher education: Does performance matter? Research in Higher Education, 55(6), 581-600. Retrieved from

Noe, R., Hollenbeck, J., Gerhart, B., & Wright, P. (2015). Human resource management: Gaining a competitive advantage. New York City, NY: McGraw-Hill Education.

O’Meara, K. (2015). Half-way out: How requiring outside offers to raise salaries influences faculty retention and organizational commitment. Research in Higher Education, 56(3), 279-298. Retrieved from