We actually have a system like this, except it involves someone creating a company and bringing in some H1-B's for 5 years while they work for a Green Card, then skim 50-70% off their rate. I guess one of the differences between our arrangement and the article is the quality isn't as high.
This could spiral out of control in both good and bad ways. The good ways are mentioned in the article, everyone wants to keep everyone else happy so they all continue earning their bonuses. But what happens when someone does leave? The person who referred them will suddenly have their compensation drop. That could destroy morale and send that person looking for other employment. The problem could then possibly ripple throughout the entire organization.
Ten years at the same company sounds like a nightmare to many of us. I don't ever want to do that again (I hit nine years once), and I don't ever want to inflict that on people I like.<p>I'll happily take that $12k over the usual $1k, however.
In other words a system for non-ambitious dinosaurs to get in their cronies and milk the system while almost being assured of a job for the next decade
I actually kind of like the system, but doesn't this involve publicizing other employees' salaries? A possible workaround is to just have classes of bonuses, like 5k a year for entry-level, 15k for senior-level, etc.
This is a great idea (assuming that the budget exist), because it takes care of retention, not just recruiting.<p>I'd split the bonus between the two employees, and have it stop if either leave the company. This way both employees (who might have some influence on one another) have an incentive to keep each other happy at that company. This can boost the retention effect of this strategy.
I'd like to see a per-year (or even per-month) compensation scheme for recruiters, because it would give them an incentive toward more successful placement. The current system seems to encourage churn.<p>That said, the "both must stay" provision here will cause people to stay longer than they should. Paying people to stick around when there really isn't anywhere for them to go doesn't make a lot of sense. Perhaps that recruiting bonus should be independent of the salaried role (and therefore continue to recur) since it is a separate job.