Last time I checked, CEOs were still getting paid. So, yeah, the market is bearing it. Typically there bonuses are tied to company performance. You can't tie their entire compensation to company performance, nobody would take that job.The market is currently not "bearing" it. Hello?
When the company does well he should get it, when the company does poorly he should get a more realistic wage. (Not go crying to the Government for help instead).
No, it is not. They are operating in debt, and asking for handouts and threatening BK if they don't get it.Last time I checked, CEOs were still getting paid. So, yeah, the market is bearing it.
Good chance the CEO's exit will be part of any bailouts.but they can always get another CEO job if the MOCO fails.
There is another side to that coin. This is a whole other argument. Here is quick test: Ask a rich guy which he would rather invest in, an investment whose profits will be taxed at 28%, or an investment whose profits will be taxed at 15%. I think we all know the answer.....It seems to me that people would rather have the economy tank just to stand on an misconceived idea that the trickle down might work. I believed in it with Reagan. Did it work? It didn't.
Where I come from, we call it WELFARE....:spank:...Its not an entitalment it is a stimulas to the people instead of corrupt CEOs.
Hey Pikeslayer, you are like an open book and a very typical Republican Engineer !
Do you know what Engineer's use for birth control ?
Their personalities ! :spank:
You need to get a clue, there aren't any CEO's out there that give a Rat's A$$ about YOU !
Also George W. can't even speak in normal sentences..........some HERO. He don't give a Rat's A$$ about you either !
Yeah I'm one of those so called over paid union workers that get's Damn tired of field Engineering some Engineer's project that looks good on paper, but in no way can work in the REAL WORLD ! Now who's overpaid....Mr. Engineer ?
Now you may flame away..............:hystria:
Thank you. Actually I consider myself a conservative, it just happens that traditionally (maybe not lately) the Republican party has been the most conservative.Hey Pikeslayer, you are like an open book and a very typical Republican Engineer !
I see you'll have alot to offer to this thread.Do you know what Engineer's use for birth control ?
Their personalities !
You see this is the difference between you and I. I don't want or need my government to care about me or for me. All I ask them to do is protect the borders. Other than that, I wish they would get out of the way of my and others prosperity.You need to get a clue, there aren't any CEO's out there that give a Rat's A$$ about YOU !
Also George W. can't even speak in normal sentences..........some HERO. He don't give a Rat's A$$ about you either !
Is your intent to just insult those who disagree with you? I have met some of the engineers you describe, but most of us can get the job done. I find the easiest way to get to a solution is to work with the people who are having the issue, this is the assembly line where I work as I support production. I have never worked in a Union shop, but from what I hear it is difficult to get things accomplished due to stringent job descriptions. Where I work, when there is an issue, I go to the line and one of the guys usually says something like, "here, you try and install this". So I pick up the tools and parts and give it ashot. By trying it myself I see firsthand the trouble they are having. Then we work together to fix the problem. I'm guessing this doesn't happen much in a union shop. It is probably against the rules for an engineer to work on the assembly line. Maybe this why you're view of engineers is jaded.Yeah I'm one of those so called over paid union workers that get's Damn tired of field Engineering some Engineer's project that looks good on paper, but in no way can work in the REAL WORLD ! Now who's overpaid....Mr. Engineer ?
Nice job BlueGlide05:clapAs a 30 year Teamster and having worked at 4 union freight companies I can explain how work classification works in freight.
The company judges the work load at a local dock. The bids reflect jobs needed. If work runs out in a bid such as swithing the junior man is moved to a class that needs extra manpower. On the flip side if switching is heavy the senior dock man is offered the work down the line. If nobody takes it the junior man is forced to switch. The protection to the labor force is everyone is a 8 hour guarantee a day and 40 hour week. If work slows down a layoff happens with the senior layoff person called in to work as needed. If you work 1 day on layoff then you are commited to come to work when called. Layoff hours worked add people back to active status. Sounds flexable to me.
As far as management and labor working together to come up with better production several time we have formed commities of management and labor. The only ideas that come out of these commities are ones that management goes along with no matter how good the idea is labor puts forth. Oh there's a big psych on the companies part to make it look like its a joint idea but it not. I stopped being on these meetings years ago as most of the higher experianced people have. The only people who takes part now is the yes men of the labor force who wants to sit in a air conditioned room drinking coffee and eating doughnuts.
Our CEO who was hired some years ago took over form people who lead a successful company. There was no commities then management did their job and labor did theirs we were the most successful frieght company out there. If we lost money in a quarter they sit down and corrected the problem. This guy has ran the company to the ground. He took a 3.5 million bonus when the company was loseing money and the next month he stopped matching funds into the managements 401k. His contract says if the company wants to get rid of him he has to paid 100 million to leave. Now they are meeting with the union and they want us to take a $1 on the hour cut in pay to keep the company afloat. And this is suppose to be the unions fault?
gree:Hey Pike hate to tell you this but Wikipedia is a very interesting but very unreliable source of information. Not that what you read is false but I wouldn't take it to the bank. I've never tried it but people can edit content. So I've heard but never had time to try it. Check it out.There is another side to that coin. This is a whole other argument. Here is quick test: Ask a rich guy which he would rather invest in, an investment whose profits will be taxed at 28%, or an investment whose profits will be taxed at 15%. I think we all know the answer.
Found this on Wikipedia:
Empirical support
According to a 1996 study[26] from the libertarian think tank Cato Institute:
* On 8 of the 10 key economic variables examined, the American economy performed better during the Reagan years than during the pre- and post-Reagan years.
* Real median family income grew by $4,000 during the Reagan period after experiencing no growth in the pre-Reagan years; it experienced a loss of almost $1,500 in the post-Reagan years.
* Interest rates, inflation, and unemployment fell faster under Reagan than they did immediately before or after his presidency.
* The only economic variable that was worse in the Reagan period than in both the pre- and post-Reagan years was the savings rate, which fell rapidly in the 1980s.
* The productivity rate was higher in the pre-Reagan years but much lower in the post-Reagan years.
I certainly agree with you on Wikipedia. It can be very good and it can also be totally wrong. Also unless you have a perfect comment with citations to support literally every word, when you edit it or add to it, the suits that run the place will try to shoot you down.Hey Pike hate to tell you this but Wikipedia is a very interesting but very unreliable source of information. Not that what you read is false but I wouldn't take it to the bank. I've never tried it but people can edit content. So I've heard but never had time to try it. Check it out.
Yeah, I know, that's why I quoted my source. What I read doesn't sound too far off base. If you find a better source, let me know.Hey Pike hate to tell you this but Wikipedia is a very interesting but very unreliable source of information. Not that what you read is false but I wouldn't take it to the bank. I've never tried it but people can edit content. So I've heard but never had time to try it. Check it out.
BlueGlide, I have worked in assembly running machines, and moved up to several different mgmt positions. It's not a union shop, but the co. has some union plants, some not. Fortune 500 bearings maker.As a 30 year Teamster and having worked at 4 union freight companies I can explain how work classification works in freight.
The company judges the work load at a local dock. The bids reflect jobs needed. If work runs out in a bid such as swithing the junior man is moved to a class that needs extra manpower. On the flip side if switching is heavy the senior dock man is offered the work down the line. If nobody takes it the junior man is forced to switch. The protection to the labor force is everyone is a 8 hour guarantee a day and 40 hour week. If work slows down a layoff happens with the senior layoff person called in to work as needed. If you work 1 day on layoff then you are commited to come to work when called. Layoff hours worked add people back to active status. Sounds flexable to me.
As far as management and labor working together to come up with better production several time we have formed commities of management and labor. The only ideas that come out of these commities are ones that management goes along with no matter how good the idea is labor puts forth. Oh there's a big psych on the companies part to make it look like its a joint idea but it not. I stopped being on these meetings years ago as most of the higher experianced people have. The only people who takes part now is the yes men of the labor force who wants to sit in a air conditioned room drinking coffee and eating doughnuts.
Our CEO who was hired some years ago took over form people who lead a successful company. There was no commities then management did their job and labor did theirs we were the most successful frieght company out there. If we lost money in a quarter they sit down and corrected the problem. This guy has ran the company to the ground. He took a 3.5 million bonus when the company was loseing money and the next month he stopped matching funds into the managements 401k. His contract says if the company wants to get rid of him he has to paid 100 million to leave. Now they are meeting with the union and they want us to take a $1 on the hour cut in pay to keep the company afloat. And this is suppose to be the unions fault?
You are entitled to believe whatever you want...obviously. Your 30 years...blah, blah, blah...only trumps the education if the job you do doesn't require one (a formal education). One's education only trumps your experience if the position requires it...(an education)....
As for those of you who have attended college, what gives you the right to think that you are "worth" more than me ? Is it the student loan that you got yourself into? Maybe you should have had to work your way through college, like we did. Is it your overwhelming knowlege or vast experience ?
....
I'm sorry but I believe that my 30 years with the same employer and 20 years at my present position(on the job experience) trumps your 4 to 8 years of school ! When you add this experience to your schooling then you DESERVE a higher wage indeed.
I respectfully disagree...an education can add $10k or more to one's annual salary...if that's not valuable, I'm not sure what is...Scott, take a chill pill ! I in no way am knocking an education ! I am also not knocking anyone willing to pursue one. For what it's worth, I started college during my senior year in high school.
My only point was that education DOES NOT mean value !
Just keep living and continue the education
