Employers are always seeking ways to enhance their
employees’productivity
, and subsidising healthy pursuits may be one way of achieving Correct your spelling
productivity
this
. There are arguments on both sides, Linking Words
however
, which we will discuss here. On the one hand, it might be said that if workers are fitter and less stressed, their working time will be more efficient, leading to higher levels of output and service. Linking Words
Furthermore
, the work/life balance of the staff will hopefully be improved, because their leisure time will be more fulfilling. Linking Words
This
may even be more motivating than pay increments, perks, or financial rewards Linking Words
such
as bonuses or incentives which may be hard to attain. Linking Words
Finally
, feeling healthier may lead to better jobLinking Words
the
satisfaction which is in itself a motivating factor. Correct article usage
apply
Conversely
, the problem with Linking Words
such
leisure-based subsidies is that their efficacy is Linking Words
virtuallyimpossible
to quantify. Correct your spelling
virtually impossible
For example
, with target-related payments, employers can at least see whether the objectives are reached or not. It might Linking Words
also
be said that, if Linking Words
this
budget was spent on (for instance) Linking Words
on the job
training or day release programmes, the employees would achieve better career progression and have better job prospects. These matters are all easier to measure, especially in performance reviews and appraisals, and may even help to reduce the risk of redundancy if the company restructures, downsizes or outsources its workforce. Add a hyphen
on-the-job
Overall
, it seems that, Linking Words
while
health-related subsidies are superficially attractive, the lack of measurability is a substantial drawback. Spending funds on ongoing training would appear to be a better use of company or Human Resources budgets.Linking Words
khushnudrustamovich