-
ReasonableDoubt said...
Workers took concessions just a few years ago and this year the company has stopped making its contractually obligated contributions to their pensions. Meanwhile, according to the union,the company's CEO got a 300 percent raise,from $750,000 to $2,250,000,while other top executives got raises of hundreds of thousands of dollars apiece.
The factory had already planned on closing a lot of their stores. This simply allowed them to do so and point the finger at someone else. But yes, the unions tried to protect employees from corrupt executives and right wingers jump them for it instead of actually looking at the full story.
Crimson_Ghost
- 5 stars Rating: 81
2148 votes total - Redshirt
- (3916)
- 27 months
- Send Message
- Follow User
- Ignore User
- 5 stars
-
Crimson_Ghost said...
just wondering...
if i own a company isnt it my right as the owner to pay whoever i want whatever i want ?keep in mind an "executive" given a monster pay raise by The Board (or ownership) doesnt equal
a "corrupt" exec that steals from the company.- juz sayn - because it sounds like another classic example of the tail wanting to wag the dog.

ReasonableDoubt
- 5 stars Rating: 84
1882 votes total - Letterman
- (2305)
- 27 months
- Send Message
- Follow User
- Ignore User
- 5 stars
-
ReasonableDoubt
- 5 stars Rating: 84
1882 votes total - Letterman
- (2305)
- 27 months
- Send Message
- Follow User
- Ignore User
- 5 stars
-
ReasonableDoubt said...
You have every right to run the company into the ground, but you should take ownership of your actions instead of blaming it on others.
Don't blame the unions when it was part of your bankruptcy plans to close mostly everything already. They were closing shop while draining the assets and the employees were making concessions and not getting all their benefits....
Take ownership of your greed n dont push it on someone else.
Crimson_Ghost
- 5 stars Rating: 81
2148 votes total - Redshirt
- (3916)
- 27 months
- Send Message
- Follow User
- Ignore User
- 5 stars
-
Crimson_Ghost said...
i realize that part of the equation is the "Wonder"(mgt/ownership) wanting to shut down parts of the company,
but do we know if those parts are profitable ?my point was simply the "Wonder" isnt in business to benifit the "twinkies".
its totally irrelvant how you or I would choose to operate the company because its not ours to run, its "Wonders"
and the bottom line here is they have the right to run it any way they want.
ReasonableDoubt
- 5 stars Rating: 84
1882 votes total - Letterman
- (2305)
- 27 months
- Send Message
- Follow User
- Ignore User
- 5 stars
-
Crimson_Ghost
- 5 stars Rating: 81
2148 votes total - Redshirt
- (3916)
- 27 months
- Send Message
- Follow User
- Ignore User
- 5 stars
-
ReasonableDoubt said...
Workers took concessions just a few years ago and this year the company has stopped making its contractually obligated contributions to their pensions. Meanwhile, according to the union,the company's CEO got a 300 percent raise,from $750,000 to $2,250,000,while other top executives got raises of hundreds of thousands of dollars apiece.
The factory had already planned on closing a lot of their stores. This simply allowed them to do so and point the finger at someone else. But yes, the unions tried to protect employees from corrupt executives and right wingers jump them for it instead of actually looking at the full story.
y2kMgrad
- 4 stars Rating: 72
13547 votes total - Res Ipsa
- Starter
- (8742)
- 29 months
- Send Message
- Follow User
- Ignore User
- 4 stars
- Post a New Topic
- Back to Topics
- « Previous Topic
- Next Topic »
- Boards ▾
- Pages: 1 | 2 | 3 | Refresh
So... No more Twinkies or Wonder Bread?