And the sheep keep voting YES to givebacks ????? WHY WHY WHY ??? YRC has money !!!!
Although these bonus paid to executives of a company losing money, which I despise, this is a old article from TDU from March. Are there any new recently paid bonuses?
Just to put things in a little bit of perspective, if $1 million of bonus money was instead divided up and given to all 30,000 employees equally it would amount to $33.33 each. Really something to get all worked up about isn't it.
Kinda reminds me of Forrest Gump.
They're scum? Why is that, because they're working for the compensation that was offered to them? As if you wouldn't accept a big pay check if it were offered to you (as would any one of us).
CEO compensation level increases at most all corporations in the US have outpaced the average worker pay level increases and grown to obscene levels in recent decades. That's a fact and none of us at the worker levels like it. But please don't tell me that you or me or anyone else would turn down the chance to make that kind of big money if we were in a position to do so. Let's not be hypocritical at least.
How many people you think would have voted differently
Had they been told if the MOU is voted in these guys would take bonuses ?
They did say the situation was dire and the company could go out of business.
I would turn it down, you don't know me. Success would outweigh compensation on my list of priorities, a motivated work force is the most crucial element for success, this type of compensation in the face of concessions is a motivation killer. Iacocca turned down money, you are wrong to assume everyone is unethical.
And you are wrong in assuming that I think everyone is unethical. That is not at all what I said or implied in my post. Accepting a large compensation package is in itself not unethical by any stretch. It may be resented by certain people (as it seems to be in our situation) and it may certainly be a motivation killer as you say, but it's certainly not unethical. If the executives in some way gave themselves extra compensation by doctoring the financials in some way, that would be unethical. But accepting the compensation that was offered, no way.
Well then we see things differently. Accepting a large compensation package while asking others to accept cuts, to me, is unethical. There are no specific rules to ethics. Ethics have been described as 'WHAT PEOPLE OUGHT TO DO'. If you think asking people to give so you can take is what someone ought to do, then that's fine, we each have our own moral compass.
Well then we see things differently. Accepting a large compensation package while asking others to accept cuts, to me, is unethical. There are no specific rules to ethics. Ethics have been described as 'WHAT PEOPLE OUGHT TO DO'. If you think asking people to give so you can take is what someone ought to do, then that's fine, we each have our own moral compass.
Doing what one ought to do can have rewards that far exceed monitary rewards.
Workers cheer restored Market Basket CEO | Daily Mail Online
I totally and completely agree with you. It's just that folks can have honestly differing opinions of "what one ought to do" in any particular situation.
I believe in karma, in the case of the Market Basket CEO I believe he reaped the reward of a huge stash of good karma. Can you think of one thing that Welch has done that would bring good karma?
You can always pick out and point to a "saint" and there's nothing wrong with doing that. However that doesn't mean that all who don't attain "sainthood" are necessarily "sinners". The great majority fall somewhere in between, neither "saints" nor "sinners". I'm guessing you're astute enough to realize that.