Average Employee Satisfaction Rating Results for Work Environment Factors

The hotel has a separate salary scale for employees by department and level, as well as salary increase policies based on working time, results and quality of work of employees, thereby ensuring fairness among employees. In addition, the company's welfare policies are also quite clear and fully implemented for employees.

2.2.2.7. Average assessment results of employee satisfaction with working environment factors

Table 2.21: Average rating of employee satisfaction with working environment factors

One-sample T-test

Frequency statistics
Working environment	Average value	Check value determine	Significance level (Sig)	Level 1-2 (%)	Level 3 (%)	Level 4-5 (%)
Salary commensurate with work results	3.96	4	0.09	0	6.2	93.8
Superiors care about superiors below	3.86	4	0.00	0	13.8	86.2
Safe working environment	3.94	4	0.03	0	8.2	91.8
You don't worry about job loss	3.12	3	0.00	5.6	76.4	18

Maybe you are interested!

(Source: Data analysis results, 2014)

Through the table above, we can see that there are 3 statements about employee satisfaction with the working environment factor, all of which have a significance level of less than 0.05. In addition, with a t value greater than 0 (appendix), we reject the Ho hypothesis and accept the H1 alternative with a confidence level of 95%. Thus, with a test value of 3, it can be concluded that the statement " You are not worried about losing your job " is above normal and tends to move towards the level of agreement. With a test value of 4 and t less than 0 (appendix), the assessments of the statements " Superiors care about subordinates " and " Safe working environment " of employees at Green Hue Hotel have not reached the level of agreement. In addition, with a test value of 4 and a sig greater than

more than 0.05, we accept the hypothesis Ho with 95% confidence or employee assessment

The statement "Salary is commensurate with performance" is on par with the

agree. With this result, it can be seen that in general, all employees working directly at the Green Hue Hotel are quite satisfied with the working environment at the company. This can be easily understood because the working environment at the Green Hue Hotel is a dynamic and professional environment, always ensuring the safety of employees. In addition, the management board regularly cares, supports and answers questions to subordinates. The hotel is ready to provide relevant information, creating favorable conditions for employees to maximize their abilities and complete their work well. In addition, the hotel always has clear recruitment and staff reduction regulations based on the work process, making employees quite secure about employment issues. However, in the current market economy, employment and labor issues are relatively difficult, so many employees are still worried about losing their jobs, as shown by the average value of the observed variable "You are not worried about losing your job" being much lower than the remaining variables in the working environment group.

2.2.2.8. Average assessment results of employee satisfaction with training and work opportunities

Table 2.22: Average rating of employee satisfaction with training and work opportunities

One-sample T-test

Frequency statistics
Training and employment opportunities	Value	Price	level of intention	Level	Level 3	Level

job

medium	control determine	meaning (Sig)	1-2 (%)	(%)	4-5 (%)
You are trained and career development	4.68	4	0.00	0	0.5	99.5
Reasonable division	4.37	4	0.00	0	2.6	97.4
Have enough means and equipment necessary to do the job	4.47	4	0.00	0	2.6	97.4

(Source: Data analysis results, 2014)

Through the table above, we can see that all 3 statements about employee satisfaction with the training and working opportunity factor have a significance level of less than 0.05. In addition, the t value is greater than 0 (appendix), so we reject the Ho hypothesis and accept the H1 alternative with a confidence level of 95%. Thus, with a test value of 4, the evaluation of the statements " You are trained and developed professionally ", " The division is reasonable " and " There are enough necessary means and equipment to do the job " by employees at Hue Green Hotel is above the level of agreement. With this result, it can be seen that in general, all direct employees at Hue Green Hotel are satisfied with the Training and working opportunity factor at the company. The high satisfaction in this group is explained by the fact that Green Hotel always focuses on training and career development for employees, organizes necessary job skills training to improve skills, helps employees confidently perform their jobs while improving the quality of hotel services. In addition, during the working process, the work is divided reasonably, clearly and appropriately according to the ability of each employee as well as fully equipped to perform the work.

2.2.2.9. Average assessment results of overall employee satisfaction

Table 2.23: Average rating of overall employee satisfaction

One-sample T-test

Frequency statistics

Overall satisfaction

Value

central

Price

treat

level of intention

meaning

Level

1-2

Level 3

(%)

Level

4-5 (%)

jar	check determine	(Sig)	(%)
Satisfied working at company	4.118	4	0.001	0	6.7	93.3
Tell everyone this is the best place to work job	3,723	4	0.000	0	32.3	67.7
Very proud to work at company	4.123	4	0.003	0	10.8	89.2

(Source: Data analysis results, 2014)

Through the table above, we can see that all 3 statements about the general satisfaction with the work of employees have a significance level of less than 0.05. In addition, with the t value greater than 0 (appendix), we reject the Ho hypothesis and accept the H1 alternative with a confidence level of 95%. Thus, with the test value of 4, the " Satisfaction when working at the company" and "Very proud to work at the company " of employees at the Green Hue Hotel are above the level of agreement . Similarly, with the test value of 4 and t less than 0, we can conclude that the statement " I recommend to everyone that this is the best place to work " has not reached the level of agreement . With this result, it can be seen that in general, all direct employees at Hue Green Hotel are satisfied with their jobs.

2.2.2.10. Testing the difference in mean value of satisfaction according to employee age

Table 2.24: Test for homogeneity of variance of employee groups by age

Observation variable

Levene Statistics	df1	df2	Sig
HL34	3,091	3	191	.028
HL35	3,705	3	191	.013
HL36	1,678	3	191	.173

(Source : Data analysis results , 2014 ) Based on the results of the variance homogeneity test, we see that the observed variables HL34 and HL35 have sig = 0.013 < 0.05, meaning that the variance of the factor groups is similar.

pills by degree

age is not the same as maturity

95% confidence. For observed variables

HL36 has a sig value = 0.173 >0.05, so with a 5% error, the variance of the age groups is identical. Continuing to conduct Anova testing with the variable HL36, the following results were obtained:

Table 2.25: Anova test of satisfaction by age

Observation variable

Age	Medium	F	Sig
Very proud to work at the company (HL36)	< 25	3,982	5,579	.001
	25 – 40	4.116
	41 – 54	4,588
	>54	4,500

(Source: Data analysis results, 2014)

From the table above, we get the sig value of the observed variable HL36 is less than 0.05. Thus, there is a difference in the average value of the variable HL36, which means there is a difference in the assessment of this observed variable of the employee groups divided by age with 95% confidence.

Next, conduct in-depth analysis and obtain the following results:

Table 2.26: In-depth Anova analysis by age group

Very proud to work at the company (HL36)

	Comparison pair		Sig
Tukey	< 25	25 – 40	.434
	< 25	41 – 54	.001
	< 25	>54	.560
	25 – 40	41 – 54	.006
	25 – 40	>54	.763
	41 – 54	>54	.997

(Source: Data analysis results, 2014)

For the HL36 variable with homogeneous group variance, the Tukey test should be used. From the table above, we can see that there are two pairs of comparison groups: under 25 years old and 41 - 54 years old and 25 - 40 years old and 41 - 54 years old , the sig values obtained are 0.001 and 0.006, respectively, both less than 0.05. Thus, with a confidence level of 95%, it can be concluded that

There is a difference in the assessment of the observed variable “Very proud to work at the company” of employees between the two pairs of age groups above. The remaining four comparison pairs obtained sig>0.05, so there is no difference in the assessment of the variable HL36 at the 95% confidence level.

This can be explained by the fact that satisfaction will be different for different ages. Especially for groups with quite different ages such as under 25 and over 54 years old, the level of satisfaction with the workplace will not be the same. Young people today with a dynamic tendency, wanting to find a job that suits their abilities, they will have higher comparisons and conditions to evaluate between workplaces. On the contrary, for older employees, who have a long period of experience and work at the hotel, they will feel more attached, satisfied and proud of the hotel where they work.

2.2.2.11. Testing the difference in mean value of satisfaction according to employee working time

Table 2.27: Test for homogeneity of variance of employee groups according to working time

Observation variable

Levene Statistics	df1	df2	Sig.
HL34	3.164	3	191	.026
HL35	6,940	3	191	.000
HL36	1,812	3	191	.146

(Source: Data analysis results, 2014)

Based on the results of the variance homogeneity test, we see that the two observed variables HL34 and HL35 have sig values of 0.026 and 0.00, respectively, both less than 0.05, meaning that the variance of the employee groups according to working time is not homogeneous with a confidence level of 95%. For the observed variable HL36, the sig value = 0.146 >0.05, so with a 5% error, the variance of the working time groups is homogeneous.

Continue to conduct Anova test with variable HL36 to obtain the following results:

after:

Table 2.28: Anova test of satisfaction by working time

Observation variable

Working time

Medium

Sig

job
Very proud to work at the company (HL36)	< 1 year	4,000	6,954	.000
	1 - 3 years	4,000
	3 - 5 years	4,094
	> 5 years	4,500

(Source: Data analysis results, 2014)

From the table above, we get the sig value of the observed variable HL36 on employee satisfaction all have sig values < 0.05. Thus, there is a difference in the average value of this observed variable between groups of employees divided by working time with 95% confidence.

Next, conduct in-depth analysis and obtain the following results:

Table 2.29: In-depth Anova analysis by working time group

Very proud to work at the company (HL36)

	Comparison pair		Sig
Tukey	< 1 year	1 - 3 years	1,000
	< 1 year	3 - 5 years	.928
	< 1 year	> 5 years	.018
	1 - 3 years	3 - 5 years	.722
	1 - 3 years	> 5 years	.000
	3 - 5 years	> 5 years	.002

(Source: Data analysis results, 2014)

For the HL36 variable with homogeneous group variance, the Tukey test should be used. From the table above, we can see that there are three pairs of comparison groups: less than 1 year and greater than 5 years, 1-3 years and greater than 5 years , 3-5 years and greater than 5 years , with sig values of 0.018, 0.00 and 0.002, respectively, all less than 0.05. Thus, with a 95% confidence level, it can be concluded that there is a difference in the assessment of the observed variable "Very proud to work at the company" by employees between the three pairs of working time groups above. The remaining three comparison pairs have sig>0.05, so there is no difference in the assessment of employees for the HL36 variable at a 95% confidence level.

Thus, employee satisfaction also varies based on the length of time working at the hotel. This result can be explained as follows. For employees who

Employees who have worked for a long time (more than 5 years), have a strong attachment and loyalty to the hotel, so they will easily be satisfied, adapt to the company's human resource policies as well as feel proud of the hotel where they work. Meanwhile, young employees who have just entered the hotel, with a short working time, do not understand and have not adapted to the company, their satisfaction and pride will be lower.

2.2.2.12. Testing the difference in mean value of satisfaction according to current income of employees

Table 2.30: Test for homogeneity of variance of employee groups by income

Observation variable

Levene Statistics	df1	df2	Sig.
HL34	2,949	3	191	.034
HL35	20,172	3	191	.000
HL36	.677	3	191	.567

(Source: Data analysis results, 2014)

Based on the results of the variance homogeneity test, we see that the two observed variables HL34 and HL35 have sig values of 0.034 and 0.00, respectively, both less than 0.05, meaning that the variance of employee groups according to current income is not homogeneous with a confidence level of 95%. For the observed variable HL36, the sig value = 0.567 >0.05, so with a 5% error, the variance of income groups is homogeneous.

Continue to conduct Anova test with variable HL36 to obtain the following results:

after:

Table 2.31: Anova test of satisfaction by income

Observation variable

Income	Medium	F	Sig
Very proud to work at the company (HL36)	< 2 million	3,864	9,459	.000
	2 - 3 million	4,081
	3-4 million	4.303
	> 4 million	4.666

(Source: Data analysis results, 2014)

From the table above, we get the sig value of the observed variable HL36 on employee satisfaction with sig value < 0.05. Thus, there is a difference in the average value.

Comment