VIEWPOINT: Why Good Bunker Traders Sometimes Leave to Join a Competitor

Vernon Jayanathan is director of Maritime Recruitment Company Ltd. Image Credit: Vernon Jayanathan

There are many factors that can compel a good trader to jump ship.

After all, it is not a decision one makes on a whim, as there is always risk involved. Often it takes several months of irritation - and even despair - with a current place of work before a decision to move is made.

The most basic reason is money.

When staff feel they have to almost beg for a raise, knowing that staff who are no more capable than them at other firms are getting more, it can feel like a punch in the gut. This can test the loyalty of the most loyal.

If a raise is only presented after someone resigns, it can be too late.

Traders know that counter-offers are under duress. If accepted, the relationship is often never the same.

As well as basic pay, there is the issue of what commission and bonus structures are in place. These are two different things. Commissions are a percentage of the money a trader brings in. Bonuses are extra for hitting certain targets.

I do understand that in this industry, both these elements are called 'bonuses' and this can be confusing. But I am sure everyone reading this knows what I mean.

The main questions is whether the structure in place is transparent, and in writing, or just discretionary?

And is it all based on individual performance or is there a group element too? I am not saying one is better than the other. People like different models.

If you are not sure what your team prefers, why not ask?

The chance to develop is another main reason. If a trader feels there is no opportunity to progress in any way, they will move.

And 'progression' does not always mean a move into 'management'.

In fact, I know many traders who do not want that. It could just be being provided with the opportunity to look after different clients, or open a new market.

Just the chance to learn something new.

In some firms, opportunities are provided not on merit but on other factors such as personal/familial ties to the principals, alumni from certain colleges, memberships of sports clubs or other societies, and, yes, even heritage.

If they are not an 'insider' in whatever criteria are deemed important, staff look for the door. Meritocracy is important.

This leads to the issue of corporate culture, and this is just as, or for some, even more important than pay.

There is no right or wrong here. It is personal preference.

For example, some thrive in a competitive internal environment where colleagues have a more individualist orientation. Others prefer a collaborative one.

It is important to point out here that in some firms where the former orientation is the norm, I have heard stories of peer-to-peer bullying on more than one occasion.

Sometimes this bullying even crosses the hierarchical divide.

Culture is not always about internal behaviours. How staff conduct themselves at outside functions has been mentioned to me as a concern of late by some candidates wanting to move.

I have spoken to traders who have been embarrassed to be associated with the firm they work for because of the behaviour of some of their colleagues at various corporate events/parties.

They have said this affects not only their firm's reputation and 'brand', but also theirs by association.
This did surprise me, but makes sense.

I am forever telling my sons to be careful of who they hang out with, as they will be tarred with the same brush.

I wish someone had told me that way back when!

When going about my role, I have a spoken to a few candidates recently who despite having hit targets and performed well, have never been praised and told that they were doing a good job.
Not ever. To me that is unbelievable.

People need to feel valued, especially when putting their hearts and souls into their work. Many spend more time focusing on work than with their own families.

Bunkering can be 24/7, and this means that even when with families, a lot of traders' attention is diverted by their work phones. People need to know that this is appreciated on a human as well as a
monetary level.

The final reason I will touch upon is 'management'.

Is the management style 'soft touch' or more 'hands on'. In some firms staff are given a target and left to get on with it.

Others firms like to micro manage.

What about flexible working? Some firms prefer staff in the office every day. Others are more flexible. It is all horses for courses.

With respect to management, it is not just style and processes.

There is also the issue of how very senior colleagues work together. Is there a shared vision that is adopted and shared?

I have worked in firms where some senior directors could not stand each other, and this made the office 'interesting'.

Nothing is ever shared in such situations, let alone a common goal. I have seen where this can lead.

In a different industry many years ago there was one afternoon, a big commotion in the office I was working in.

Two of the heads who had one just got back from a long 'liquid lunch' had a 'fight' in the office.

When I say' fight' I am not talking Uysk vs Dubois. It was closer to and, at the time, almost as funny
as the altercation in Bridget Jones's Diary.

It was easily stopped, and there were red faces all around, but the person I had just walked into a meeting room to interview at the time decided it was not the place for her and walked out.

Furthermore two people - two good sales staff - resigned the following morning! In that respect it was not so funny after all.

Is your management team a team?

All these factors and more can influence why someone many want to seek opportunities elsewhere.

Very often recruiters/head hunters get a bad rap for disrupting teams by enticing happy people away when actually, many candidates come to us to get them out of their current environments after thoughtful consideration.

Either way we are mere facilitators of their free will. If we don't help them, they will often go direct.

If firms do all the above right - pay staff well, have transparent commission/ bonus systems, operate
a meritocracy, foster an inclusive culture where people feel recognised, valued, safe, and allowed to
grow -  they are less likely to depart.

They also need to feel proud to be associated with their firm whilst working for bosses who they
perceive as open, united, and caring.

If all firms took note, life for people in my profession would be very difficult indeed, as not even the
most silver-tongued headhunter can persuade a happy member of staff to jump. It makes me wonder why I am writing this…