Executive Pay rises 41%, worker pay 1%
Discussion
johnfm said:
I think you need to figure out why you think it is being a t
t if you have to assess a group of workers and choose a % of them who aren't as useful to the company as the others.
It is called management.
How do you make decisions at you current job? I assume you don't order any products from suppliers or anything that involves decision making.
I do actually, but if that puts someone I don't know out of a job somewhere else I'm not bothered because I don't know them and they don't know me. I used to work for a charity which wasted so much money on rubbish because it was taken advantage of by greedy suppliers. The very nature of the place meant those employed were not business people with mathematical brains but they were fantastic at what they did do. I only joined to do data entry but ended up controlling their spending and reduced it by over 40% without having to lay anybody off - I didn't have the authority to lay anybody off anyway even if I wanted to.t if you have to assess a group of workers and choose a % of them who aren't as useful to the company as the others.It is called management.
How do you make decisions at you current job? I assume you don't order any products from suppliers or anything that involves decision making.
That may sound fantastic but this is a place which was paying £9 for a pack of pens when I turned up, suppliers were laughing to the bank. The first thing I did was switch suppliers obviously. Most people who worked there were very pro-union and completely anti business and it took some work to convince them - particularly with most of them being at least 10 years older than me - that you can save money and raise money without being a b
d. It seems this is a common problem throughout the public sector/charity sector etc, a £100 job turns into a £300 job the moment suppliers catch on to the fact theres a gravy train to jump on.martin84 said:
johnfm said:
I think you need to figure out why you think it is being a tt if you have to assess a group of workers and choose a % of them who aren't as useful to the company as the others.
It is called management.
How do you make decisions at you current job? I assume you don't order any products from suppliers or anything that involves decision making.
I do actually, but if that puts someone I don't know out of a job somewhere else I'm not bothered because I don't know them and they don't know me. I used to work for a charity which wasted so much money on rubbish because it was taken advantage of by greedy suppliers. The very nature of the place meant those employed were not business people with mathematical brains but they were fantastic at what they did do. I only joined to do data entry but ended up controlling their spending and reduced it by over 40% without having to lay anybody off - I didn't have the authority to lay anybody off anyway even if I wanted to.t if you have to assess a group of workers and choose a % of them who aren't as useful to the company as the others.It is called management.
How do you make decisions at you current job? I assume you don't order any products from suppliers or anything that involves decision making.
That may sound fantastic but this is a place which was paying £9 for a pack of pens when I turned up, suppliers were laughing to the bank. The first thing I did was switch suppliers obviously. Most people who worked there were very pro-union and completely anti business and it took some work to convince them - particularly with most of them being at least 10 years older than me - that you can save money and raise money without being a b
d. It seems this is a common problem throughout the public sector/charity sector etc, a £100 job turns into a £300 job the moment suppliers catch on to the fact theres a gravy train to jump on.Not sure why you think selecting people for dismissal is t
ttish though. If they are no good, they deserve to go. If they are any good, they will find another job.Where is the dilemma?
Another shareholder rejection of executive pay today. 59.5% of WPP shareholders have rejected Martin Sorrell's pay deal. 59.5% of the shareholders can't all be jealous or communists.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-18414152
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-18414152
rohrl said:
Another shareholder rejection of executive pay today. 59.5% of WPP shareholders have rejected Martin Sorrell's pay deal. 59.5% of the shareholders can't all be jealous or communists.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-18414152
That vote is based so far just on the large institutional shareholders; individual shareholders' votes are yet to be added.http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-18414152
rohrl said:
Wow. The large institutions usually just nod through exec pay deals, hoping no-one notices how overpaid a lot of retail fund managers are.
Did I read that right that he was up for a 60% pay rise over the previous year? I'm note quite sure what planet you have to live on to think that's "right". Did the company perform 60% better? 60% boost in profits? Just seems a bit too greedy IMO. I bet if they proposed 20% increase they wouldn't have met such opposition an that's still a nice bump by anyone standards.
Unless of course they've been paying him peanuts all this time and now wants what he deserves. Doubt that though.
Edited by Otispunkmeyer on Wednesday 13th June 18:20
In that particular case, the people whose business it is are complaining about executive pay. That's absolutely fine, it's their interests which are at stake, exactly as it would be if they were complaining about people on the shop floor being paid too much (though I suspect that idea would be greeted differently by some).
Randy Winkman said:
That's the sort of thing I don't understand. How does that kind of contract get dreamed up, let alone approved?At what point does someone actually think "I've just had an idea..."?
heppers75 said:
Well we are here again....
This debate has really got to the point that we are simply at that impasse on here which can best be summarised as..... For those that understand no explanation is necessary for those that do not none is possible...
So you're dividing posters into "those that understand" and "those that don't understand"? Don't you mean "those that have one opinion" and "those that have a different opinion"?This debate has really got to the point that we are simply at that impasse on here which can best be summarised as..... For those that understand no explanation is necessary for those that do not none is possible...
Fittster said:
And you'll in all likelyhood fail. The UK has the some of the worst social mobility in the world. You'll finish just where you started.
Sssh, you'll wake them up. 
Randy Winkman said:
So you're dividing posters into "those that understand" and "those that don't understand"? Don't you mean "those that have one opinion" and "those that have a different opinion"?
And what about those that listen and cogitate and then maybe change their minds or at least understand some points differently or more thoroughly?Randy Winkman said:
heppers75 said:
Well we are here again....
This debate has really got to the point that we are simply at that impasse on here which can best be summarised as..... For those that understand no explanation is necessary for those that do not none is possible...
So you're dividing posters into "those that understand" and "those that don't understand"? Don't you mean "those that have one opinion" and "those that have a different opinion"?This debate has really got to the point that we are simply at that impasse on here which can best be summarised as..... For those that understand no explanation is necessary for those that do not none is possible...
Halb said:
Fittster said:
And you'll in all likelyhood fail. The UK has the some of the worst social mobility in the world. You'll finish just where you started.
Sssh, you'll wake them up. Randy Winkman said:
So you're dividing posters into "those that understand" and "those that don't understand"? Don't you mean "those that have one opinion" and "those that have a different opinion"?
And what about those that listen and cogitate and then maybe change their minds or at least understand some points differently or more thoroughly?
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff