Absolutely correct! They did it for totally self reasons! If they did it for benevolent reasons then management should be fired. They did it because they felt they would benefit from either the publicity, good will with the workers, or with the President. Probably a combination of the three. They gave the money away purely out of greed and out of their being profit driven!That is why anyone who makes a statement like thisClearly has never owned or run a business. When I am most profit driven and greedy that is when I hire and make sure that my employees are well taken care of and happy.
That is why anyone who makes a statement like thisClearly has never owned or run a business. When I am most profit driven and greedy that is when I hire and make sure that my employees are well taken care of and happy.
You should have stopped after your first statement. You seem to be clueless about the history of business in this country with this statement.
I know very well about how businesses have sometimes abused their employees. That is why the unions were formed and have an important place in this country. There needs to be a balance between the management and the workers. It shows more so when dealing with unskilled, typically blue collar, workers who can be easily replaced. Jobs which require skills, whether white or blue collar, are much less susceptible to these abuses and they would be counterproductive. No system is perfect.
I know very well about how businesses have sometimes abused their employees. That is why the unions were formed and have an important place in this country. There needs to be a balance between the management and the workers. It shows more so when dealing with unskilled, typically blue collar, workers who can be easily replaced. Jobs which require skills, whether white or blue collar, are much less susceptible to these abuses and they would be counterproductive. No system is perfect. I can talk from my experience that when I keep my employees happy I benefit more than they do. There have been numerous times when employees have asked for a raise of a certain amount and I gave them more than they asked for. I got much more back in return. When an employee of mine was moving I gave him a bonus to help him with his move. It was a very worthwhile investment and I did it for totally selfish reasons.
Do you feel there's a place for public unions too? Or should we assume that government are likely to respect workers needs, and the only purpose that public unions serve is extracting extraordinary contracts and benefits that wouldn't be available in the private sector, and would bankrupt any private business.
Then you need to be on the Presidents business council because you have the right approach and I commend you. If all/most businesses took this approach I would be for this tax bill. The history of business in this country has not been what you do. You are unfortunately the exception to the rule. We have the necessary evils of the unions because businesses are the opposite of what you do. I now fully understand why you are for the tax bill. You base it on businesses will do as you do. History has shown us that is not going to happen.
I have never worked as an employee, but my wife has and now my daughter does too. My wife has had employers who were abusive, but she was looking for a new job almost as soon as she started. My daughter did her research on working conditions when she was choosing where to take her job. I can't imagine that others do not do the same.
Would your business be considered a family/small business? If so IMHO that is a place with the best chance of being treated fairly.
It would most definitely be considered a small business, but my wife has seen both ways from small businesses too. My daughter works for a larger business that is definitely a much more corporate structure. They are well known locally for treating their employees well.
There are good and bad in all businesses. With large corporations their #1 goal is profits. They have a long history that is undisputable of screwing their workers to achieve that goal. They have no history of paying their employees more than they ask for like you have done.
With large corporations their #1 goal is profits. They have a long history that is undisputable of screwing their workers to achieve that goal.
I work for a company that is well known for treating employees as pawns on a chess board. When times are tough there are raise freezes and cuts. When times get better the company sticks with the reduced rate schedule put into place during hard times. I stick with this job because the hours and location work well for me but my experience and that of many others that I know is that the corporate structure will pocket this tax break as a windfall and I will get nothing out of it
Most of the history you'e referring to is not modern but ancient history. People are more able to move away from a job that treats them badly. Unless the trade off is there in salary or perks.
https://att.jobshttps://jobs.boeing.comhttp://forums.dansdeals.com/index.php?topic=4623.0
I would love to have you on the other side of the table during contract negotiations. You are so naive.
Do you really think I am so stupid? You think I don't realize that they are doing this for selfish reasons (happy employees generate more profit)? But the point is that now they can remain with the same profit and the employees walk away with more money! Its a win/win.Why is the fact that they are doing it for selfish reasons relevant here at all? Can you please explain that to Mr. Naive?
No I don't think you are stupid. If I was sitting across the table that 1k bonus would be every year just like the tax cut is.
