profileDapAd&PG=MSPGEN&AP=1089300250Profile-Public-Combined-page1|SCPProfilesocial.msn.comProfileen-usProfilesocial.msn.com/profile/default.aspxsocial.msn.com/profile/default.aspx?urlName=XR1pKX2oY84A3YO10RBPBGMV1W1BXlDN6&mkt=en-us0Public profileProfileProfileProfilePlease type a nickname.There was an error. Please try again later.71264c5b410d48baaa559f69be9f7318Falsemoreen-US
Don't know any union boss that made this kind of money. And one "master" is trying to provide you with as many benefits as possible while the other "master" will send your job to the Philippines as soon as possible.
The argument is don't support a company that is abusive to its workers. If the company is providing a needed service, it will be replaced, hopefully with a company that treats its workers fairly.
That's one of my favorite arguments. If a company goes out of business, that service will disappear, never to be see...more
Your view may work at a smaller company, but goes nowhere with larger companies. The only reason they ever gave benefits was because a union demanded it. A CEO's responsibility is to the shareholders.
Seems you missed the point of the article. CEO's today doing the exact same job CEO's did years ago are collecting much higher salaries. And by the percentages it is obvious the money has been taken from employee compensation.
Boards of directors consist of CEO's and CEO's in waiting who's best self-interest is to see CEO compensation go as high as possible. Stockholders can vote on compensation packages, but I believe it is non-binding. When a CEO needs to be fired, boards do not like to do it for cause, because that could affect stock pr...more
5/1/2013
To report abusive content:
Select the post to go to the related message board page.