I think this is one area where Monzo needs to do some work - at the moment everybody in COps is on the same pay scale. So even though I work in FinCrime, my salary is essentially the same as somebody in retail.
It’s very complicated though - the vast majority of people at Monzo start on frontline and then pick up a badge or two which allows them to specialise.
If you work in Financial Crime then you’re only allowed to work in Fincrime, whereas if you work on the vulnerable customer team (for example) then you might also hold a badge on the social team.
There is a lot of work going on behind the scenes (to which I’m not privy!) around this though, and I think it’s only natural that as get bigger (& the numbers of staff across COps has increased massively over the last 12 months) that structures, incentives, pay etc changes to reflect that.
You don’t need a degree for most jobs that are perceived as “high skill” though, and the arbitrary delineation of roles based on “skill” is not an accurate reflection of these roles in the real world. I am a software engineer without a degree and in my most recent job, I literally did less than one hour of low-effort low-skill work per day that I could have trained anyone capable of using a computer to do (and I was paid 5x what Monzo pays a customer support agent).
If you spend much time in the world of “high skill” work you will discover that from the top to the bottom there are people doing work that anybody could do. There’s a mythology around “high skill” work that misunderstands the relationship between jobs and skill. A company will spend more money to hire someone with a vast wealth of experience in relevant roles because the company wants confidence in the prospects ability to meet their needs, however, the actual needs are typically a very small subset of the skills that the prospect possesses.
Returning to the example of my most recent role: I was hired to do such a small amount of low-skill work at high pay because it was more economical for the company to spend a bunch of money for absolute confidence in me than it was for the company to spend 1/5th of the money and only have 80% confidence… but that’s not a reflection on the skill required to do the role, it’s simply a reflection on the economics of that specific company.
The reason customer support typically pays so little is not that it’s low skill, it pays so little because companies just don’t care, Monzo is making an active choice to treat customer support in this manner. There are companies that pay their customer support agents many multiples of what Monzo pays because they treat it as a skilled role, because they value it.
I don’t have a Monzo shaped axe to grind, although I do have an axe to grind about how permissive we (people, society) are of the mistreatment of employees. For the avoidance of doubt, I like Monzo and I think the decision they’ve made with customer support is the one that most of the industry makes, in fact, I think Monzo is above average in what they provide to their employees and from the comments by Monzo employees in this thread, it’s clear that Monzo is making efforts to improve, which is a positive. I am happy with the progress Monzo is making.
That doesn’t change Monzo’s responsibility for the unhappiness, though. My point is very simple: there are no get out of jail free cards for companies when it comes to how they treat their employees. People in this thread, prior to my comment, talked about how it’s just the nature of the job and how unhappy reviews can be ignored, and I am challenging that.
If Monzo employees are unhappy because of their environment or pay then it’s up to Monzo to own that, Monzo must take ownership of its decision. If Monzo has chosen to run their business in such a way that they cannot afford to pay customer support agents more, then so be it: I am not suggesting Monzo must pay customer support agents more or that Monzo must give them a better shift pattern, I am saying that Monzo must own the fact that it chooses to give customer support agents painful shift patterns.
A company exists to serve its shareholders interests. Monzo’s shareholders could decide that their interest is in providing the best experience for customer support employees, but they haven’t decided that, they’ve decided their interests are best served at the expense of the happiness of customer support agents. You might be fine with that (lots of people are, capitalism is popular!) but I am not, and my goal with these comments is to hopefully encourage at least one person to internalise that Monzo is making a choice to treat customer support staff this way rather than Monzo is just a victim of the way the world works.
Monzo doesn’t pay too bad, £21,320 is the lowest starting salary that I can see.
Benefits package is average.
@Dan5 with the badge system I believe comes pay rises, is it notable or? I recall one of my interviewers saying it’s a percentage per badge - is it like 5% or less?
I do agree the shifts make no sense to me when phone lines are closed at 8pm a fixed rotational would be better opposed to their open availability example, they’ve been running long enough to learn customer trends and can surely slim this down a bit and incorporate fixed early mid late shifts, on off weekends, 4 on 4 off maybe? The latter would be a perfect choice for me given they’re 7 days a week.
All I can say is that tight scheduling is an absolute nightmare.
So I used to do the schedules for a rotational thing, it involved an absolute minimum number of people present to hit a compliance ratio. But things would overrun, people would be late, or sick, people want to swap shifts or don’t like the shifts they are put on. Many have absolutes like, must be home every other week to pick up the nephew, once monthly therapy appointments etc. Then there’s training to schedule round, meetings for each sub team, company things and after you’ve just perfected your now extremely complicated colour coded spreadsheet for the next week a senior manager comes and says they want to take employee x,y and z out for lunch.
Finally you release it and the 30 people you sent it to all go ‘oh I don’t like this shift, this pattern, that day can I switch…’.
It’s a nightmare basically. From the perspective of one employee it looks very simple, from the perspective of the people scheduling for everyone it’s an utter pain in the backside.
Bear in mind whatever you produce managers actually then need to use to know who is one when which is vital for them to do their jobs, so it’s not like you can make it rough or make a hash of it.