[Public_Domain]

[DerbyX]

Mr_Canada Mr_Canada:

DerbyX DerbyX:

Hey. You're back. Hell we both are! Good to see ya!

I'm not sticking around (good to see you though)

It's just hard to resist conversing when there's all this 'election buzz' crap

Plus, this thread specifically, I could moan around here for hours

That's what she said.

[Public_Domain]

[dino_bobba_renno]

Well I just did a quick glance over the companies listed. The exec. compensation increases weren't really out of line with the company’s performance. In fact they were pretty closely matched. What upsets me is when these corporations perform poorly and the exec. compensation packages continue to grow.

[PimpBrewski123]

Oh c'mon man, DX.

To be honest, I did not read the article but already know what it is about.

So let's say this, the ''unions'' have become the very thing from what they set out to protect. They are powerful and dictate what should be done. They are not in the best interest of the workers but instead themselves.

[Public_Domain]

[DerbyX]

PimpBrewski123 PimpBrewski123:

Oh c'mon man, DX.

To be honest, I did not read the article but already know what it is about.

So let's say this, the ''unions'' have become the very thing from what they set out to protect. They are powerful and dictate what should be done. They are not in the best interest of the workers but instead themselves.

So you didn't read the article yet will dismiss it? Very fair of you.

CEOs Vs Workers. CEOs manage to stick it to the workers every time. Obscene pay, obscene benefits and never ever being held accountable for bad decisions which bankrupt pension plans.

Even in my own company. A bunch of asshats corporate execs made the decision to switch over to new analyzers that would replace many others OVER the objections of even the managers who said this new machine would not be able to do what the seller said it could do. It was a costly move and we have been struggling with it for over a year. Just last week the decision was made to not add certain patient tests to the analyzer because it was simply not able to handle the volume. This is to say nothing of the maintenance issues we are having that they swore we would not.

Its been a dismal failure but the people who made this decision are the CEOs and have nobody to blame. The most "damning" thing that happened was the department exec got "reassigned" to a new position. Her new position is now an office in the new wing with free coffee & doughnuts (for people who make 5 times the salary of people who have to pay for it).

Us MLTs who sign our names to reports and who's license allows the company to operate get stuck with machines that function inadequately all because the company wanted to save a few buck.

Did I mention they cut loads of workers too? Exec raises & bonuses won't be affected.

Vive le revolution.

[Public_Domain]

[Zipperfish]

I don't think it's as marked in Canada as it is in the US, and we should ensure that it doesn't get that bad. To me it speaks to the need for unions. It's a good check on the system.

It's true business is business, but the fact is that corporations have gotten so large that they effectively game the system to work for them--as evidenced in the recent "too big to fail" bailouts. Since when is a company "too big to fail"?

[DerbyX]

Zipperfish Zipperfish:

I don't think it's as marked in Canada as it is in the US, and we should ensure that it doesn't get that bad. To me it speaks to the need for unions. It's a good check on the system.

It's true business is business, but the fact is that corporations have gotten so large that they effectively game the system to work for them--as evidenced in the recent "too big to fail" bailouts. Since when is a company "too big to fail"?

Do you want to be one of the people toiling in the sugar mines or the guys managing the operation?

[mikewood86]

If you haven't seen it, I highly suggest watching it. It's mind boggling. It's funny because they all look like scum bags too.

[andyt]

PimpBrewski123 PimpBrewski123:

Oh c'mon man, DX.

To be honest, I did not read the article but already know what it is about.

So let's say this, the ''unions'' have become the very thing from what they set out to protect. They are powerful and dictate what should be done. They are not in the best interest of the workers but instead themselves.

WTF does this have to do with the topic? And exactly who are they unions that they are in it for themselves? And the unions made the CEO's pay rise so much compared to the average worker? From 20x in the 1960's to 400++ times today. Union power has been declining all that time, yet you want to keep repeating the lie that they dictate industrial policy. Have another sip of Kool Aid.

[andyt]

OnTheIce OnTheIce:

Businesses are in business to make money. Period.

They owe nothing, zero, except a paycheck to employees willing to do the work at the wage set.

CEO's are not regular workers for a company nor should their wages be compared at all. We spend so much time worrying about what other people make.

Great. So let's quit bailing out and subsidize those companies. And let's enact labor legislation that creates a level playing field between worker and company. And let's tax companies and their rich owners sufficiently on their profits.

[Yogi]

Such situations have already started to change. As noted in the article, shareholders (who are actually the owners of these publicly traded companies) have already begun voicing their disapproval of such pay packages.

'Socialists are socialists, until they run out of other peoples money'!

[andyt]

Well those companies that got bailed out while execs took bonuses are the ultimate socialists - but losses only please. Let's keep profits private and all. It seems capitalists also have a strong interest in other people's money.