No.. HP.
Employees of a division of HP are being forced to forfeit 10% of their pay for the month of April. This is on top of the permanent reduction of 5% that happened last month.
Mark Hurd is the CEO of HP. He made $48 million dollars last year.
Americans are just beginning to discover what has been going on for a while. Very wealthy people control even publicly traded companies, and their mission is to siphon off as much money as possible for themselves.
This is what is known as "winning" in the United States. The natural consequence of that winning is everyone else having less money to cloth, shelter, feed, and educate their families.
I had a conversation with my boss. She was remarkably frank, because she's not a "winner" and is also getting screwed. I asked her to notify upper management that I would be willing to be CEO of HP for only $1 million dollars, giving the company substantial savings.
She agreed that I could run the company into the ground just as well as anybody else, and cost a lot less.
...
Some politician today said that he wanted AIG executives to emulate their Japanese counter-parts and publicly apologize, and then resign or commit hari kari.
This is not Japan. This is not Japanese economics. This is the AMERICAN DREAM.. of ripping off as many people as possible while enriching one's self.
Of course.. it's not going to change. Politicians will make a public display of shaming rich AIG staff.. and they'll laugh and hit a beach in Maui. The public might be somewhat satisfied, and things will go back to normal. This will be cyclical, and there is nothing that we can do about it because we're given just enough to prevent us from a real class war.
And if there is a class war.. remember whose side I'm on. I'll grab my pitchfork and help out.
...
And yes.. I know that every single employee of every single corporation is free to find a better job. The problem is that the next job you find will likely be the same as the last one.
10 comments:
I'll be CEO of HP for $990k. Let the bidding war commence!
Our CEO at IBM made 28 million last year. In the meantime all permanent employee bonus' have been canceled and all Contractors are forced to take a mandatory 10% pay cut if they re-sign.
Additionally a large number of jobs were cut and outsourced to places like india brazil. The company then said that the people could instantly retain their jobs if they were willing to move to these countries and work for the set wages there.
Which is why I'm glad that Obama proposes to punish companies financially when they send jobs over seas.
The management of these companies miss the obvious. When they ship jobs over seas, and force pay cuts and such, their own customers have less money to buy the company's goods.. meaning, they'll perform poorly.
Every company should ship their jobs over seas and then try and figure out how they're going to sell a product.
The moral of the story is, the people leading these companies are only interested in short term gains in order to reap very high compensation. They don't give a fuck about the wellfare of their fellow citizens. They don't care about what happens to the company 5 or 10 years down the road.. and the result is what we're seeing today.
This will ultimately be the undoing of our hegemony in the world... and the Loon Brigade will be cheering it on.. at least until the realize they have no money, and no prospects for making any.
You do realize that in a publicly traded company, the CEO salary is set by stockholders right?
LOL.. no it's not.
seriously.. LOL
You're bad.
http://www.marvquin.com/blog/ceo-salaries-and-executive-compensation-defined
[i]Generally speaking, the compensation and salaries of every executive employee are decided by the company owners through the board of directors and the management team.[/i]
Right.. and you said "stock holders", did you not? It's the board of directors.. And while technically true that most board members also own stock in the company, your meaning was clear. You actually thought that ALL the stockholders set the salary, when in fact, it's simply the board of directors.. making your original point completely false.
You really don't know the difference, do you? I'm asking that honestly.
There's actually a very small number of companies that allow stock holders any input in executive pay. In 2007, the very first majoy company in the US gave share holders a vote.. There were none prior to that.
Some companies have a share holder "advisory", but are not bound to it in the least. Apple Inc. is like that.
Also in 2007, a bill was introduced in Congress that would require stock holders be given smiliar "advisory" rights in all companies, but I'm not sure if that ever passed Congress and was signed by Chimpy. I don't think it was.
So, my point still stands.. it's a closed buddy system that determines executive pay. They are simply interested in awarding each other large compensation, because they can COMPLETELY IGNORE the stock holders.
Is that clear enough for you now?
I'll put my bid in at $800k.
Just sayin.
795K!
Oh additionally IBM's profits were up 18% last year (dont have the article handy).
It's not a surprise that a company whose profits are up cut employee salary. They use the economic downturn as an excuse to stick it to the employees, even if they've actually made more money.
Post a Comment