Page 25 of 29 FirstFirst ... 152324252627 ... LastLast
Results 241 to 250 of 284

Thread: CEOs lay off thousands, rake in millions

  1. #241
    warrior of the wetlands
    TurtleDude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Ohio
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:11 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    180,769

    Re: CEOs lay off thousands, rake in millions

    Quote Originally Posted by EnigmaO01 View Post
    Then spare me the opinons with nothing to back them up.
    Yawn-you ignore the fact that dozens of links have been put on this board-as well as people who think like you constantly claiming that the death tax only hits 1% of the estates.

    the tax figures have been posted so many times that only one who is being dishonest would deny it



  2. #242
    warrior of the wetlands
    TurtleDude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Ohio
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:11 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    180,769

    Re: CEOs lay off thousands, rake in millions

    This information has been posted all over DP for months. In court stuff like this would be subject to "Judicial Notice"

    the dishonest pretend we should have to post the same facts over and over to support our positions

    I want the parasite side of the tax argument to prove that it is FAIR for the rich to pay far more taxes than they use in government services



  3. #243
    Sage

    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Huntsville, AL (USA)
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 10:48 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    9,772

    Re: CEOs lay off thousands, rake in millions

    Since folks are arguing that business exist to make money, I went back and looked at the primary entity mentioned in the OP, Hewlett Packard (HPQ), and reviewed their stock over the last year. The company's stock has a 1-year change of -9.25% since Aug 2008. They reached a high in late-March of nearly 55 points (54.75) for the 52-week period, but since then have dropped to just over 40 points (40.34) when the markets closed on Friday (9/03/10).

    A quote from the article in the OP reads:

    The report, from the Institute of Policy Studies, found that the 50 layoff leaders received $12 million on average in 2009, compared with an average compensation of $8.5 million for chief executives of companies in Standard & Poor's 500. Each of the 50 companies examined in the report laid off at least 3,000 workers between November 2008 and April 2010.

    “Our findings illustrate the great unfairness of the Great Recession,” said Sarah Anderson, lead author of the study, “CEO Pay and the Great Recession,” the latest in a series of annual “Executive Excess” reports published by the institute, a progressive think tank. “CEOs are squeezing workers to boost short-term profits and fatten their own paychecks.”

    Those CEOs include HP’s Hurd, who slashed 6,400 jobs in 2009 — a year when his compensation amounted to $24.2 million.
    Atleast where HP is concerned, the arguments for their CEO walking away with millions for underperforming does not hold water. He didn't make money for his company's shareholders. He lost them money, yet still managed to walk away with $24.2 million dollars!

    Another company, Johnson & Johnson (JNJ):

    William Weldon, who took home $25.6 million — more than three times the average CEO compensation for big U.S. companies — even as the health care giant was slashing 9,000 jobs and facing a massive drug recall scandal.
    Their 52-week high was 66.20 points; 1-year ago their stock was at 61 points. They closed 9/03/10 at 58.93. One-year change, -1.27. Not nearly as bad as HP, but still they company lost money for their shareholders.

    How does underperforming and mismanaging their companies justify their multi-million dollar payouts?

    And the argument someone made that the employees don't matter...!?! Of course they matter! These are the exact same people who Republicans are claiming the Bush tax-cuts will benefit the most because they will create jobs. So, I'll come right back to my same question:

    "If tax cuts were so beneficial to job growth, why the hell are these companies losing jobs?"

    Why is it that between these two well known American companies, they've posted a combined loss of
    -10.52 points on the NASDAQ, cut 9,400 jobs yet their CEOs walked away with just under $50M in severage pay?
    Last edited by Objective Voice; 09-05-10 at 11:51 AM.

  4. #244
    Sage
    Renae's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    San Antonio Texas
    Last Seen
    10-23-17 @ 10:14 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    38,972
    Blog Entries
    15

    Re: CEOs lay off thousands, rake in millions

    Quote Originally Posted by Objective Voice View Post
    Since folks are arguing that business exist to make money, I went back and looked at the primary entity mentioned in the OP, Hewlett Packard (HPQ), and reviewed their stock over the last year. The company's stock has a 1-year change of -9.25% since Aug 2008. They reached a high in late-March of nearly 55 points (54.75) for the 52-week period, but since then have dropped to just over 40 points (40.34) when the markets closed on Friday (9/03/10).

    A quote from the article in the OP reads:

    The report, from the Institute of Policy Studies, found that the 50 layoff leaders received $12 million on average in 2009, compared with an average compensation of $8.5 million for chief executives of companies in Standard & Poor's 500. Each of the 50 companies examined in the report laid off at least 3,000 workers between November 2008 and April 2010.

    “Our findings illustrate the great unfairness of the Great Recession,” said Sarah Anderson, lead author of the study, “CEO Pay and the Great Recession,” the latest in a series of annual “Executive Excess” reports published by the institute, a progressive think tank. “CEOs are squeezing workers to boost short-term profits and fatten their own paychecks.”

    Those CEOs include HP’s Hurd, who slashed 6,400 jobs in 2009 — a year when his compensation amounted to $24.2 million.

    Atleast where HP is concerned, the arguments for their CEO walking away with millions for underperforming does not hold water. He didn't make money for his company's shareholders. He lost them money, yet still managed to walk away with $24.2 million dollars!

    Another company, Johnson & Johnson (JNJ):

    William Weldon, who took home $25.6 million — more than three times the average CEO compensation for big U.S. companies — even as the health care giant was slashing 9,000 jobs and facing a massive drug recall scandal.

    Their 52-week high was 66.20 points; 1-year ago their stock was at 61 points. They closed 9/03/10 at 58.93. One-year change, -1.27. Not nearly as bad as HP, but still they company lost money for their shareholders.

    How does underperforming and mismanaging their companies justify their multi-million dollar payouts?

    Because you lack wisdom and facts. There is more going on behind the scenes then the simple numbers you keep tossing out. The board could have stopped those payouts, however they did not. This means the job done by the CEO was worth the $$ paid. I don't see why people think it matters what a CEO get's paid or not paid, and what that matters to the people hired or fired.

    BUSINESSES DO NOT EXIST FOR THE WORKERS.
    Last edited by Renae; 09-05-10 at 11:47 AM.
    Climate, changes. It takes a particularly uneducated population to buy into the idea that it's their fault climate is changing and further political solutions can fix it.



  5. #245
    Sage
    EnigmaO01's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Indiana
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:33 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    7,028

    Re: CEOs lay off thousands, rake in millions

    Quote Originally Posted by RightinNYC View Post
    First, many (most?) CEOs are not selected from the board.


    Second, even when new CEO's are selected from the board...


    .
    Other than you apparent contradiction, the fact that you're telling me the board has little if any bearing on the selection of CEO's is, shall I say -- in your own words -- ridiculous?
    Last edited by EnigmaO01; 09-05-10 at 12:36 PM.

  6. #246
    Sage
    EnigmaO01's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Indiana
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:33 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    7,028

    Re: CEOs lay off thousands, rake in millions

    Quote Originally Posted by TurtleDude View Post
    Yawn-you ignore the fact that dozens of links have been put on this board-as well as people who think like you constantly claiming that the death tax only hits 1% of the estates.

    the tax figures have been posted so many times that only one who is being dishonest would deny it
    Like I said as far as I know you're just the local garbage man. Why should I take your word for everything?

  7. #247
    Sage

    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Huntsville, AL (USA)
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 10:48 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    9,772

    Re: CEOs lay off thousands, rake in millions

    Quote Originally Posted by MrVicchio View Post
    Because you lack wisdom and facts.
    No. What I lack are the details - the what, when, why, how and where these company decision-makers wanted to take their company. You don't know this information either. All we see are the end results of what has been laid before us. Towit: Company A lost money, laid off X number of employees, and their CEOs walked away with millions.

    There is more going on behind the scenes then the simple numbers you keep tossing out.
    Granted, hence my statement above concerning not knowing the details. But not knowing still DOES NOT justify the end results - laying off thousands of employees as a result of company CEO's mismanagement but being rewarded for same. You cannot argue that is exactly what has happened here.

    The board could have stopped those payouts, however they did not.
    This could be part of the details we don't know. Were large severage packages part of these CEO's contracts? I'd imagine there were but therein lay the problem. Would you reward an average worker-bee if he screwed up on the assembly line? I would say not, but in a sense that's exactly what has happened with this CEOs, and their 1-year stock performances bore that out. Their "assembly line" IS the stock market. That is how their BoD and shareholders "evaluate" their CEOs overall performance - how good or bad their stock performed over a given period. Still, I would add that until we know how their contracts were structured, we'll never know the truth of the matter as to why these CEOs still made money even if the company their managed did not.

    This means the job done by the CEO was worth the $$ paid.
    Really? So, you're 100% okay with a CEO mismanaging their company and still walking away with that kind of money? Money that could have gone back into the company to possibly keep the people employeed? To help the very stagnent job market you're complaining about? Does that make any sense to you? CEO's making all that money, walking away from their company while also pushing employees out the door with nothing except their savings, if any, and the prospect of going to the very unemployment line you're arguing they shouldn't be in in the first place? Again, does that make sense to you?

    I don't see why people think it matters what a CEO get's paid or not paid, and what that matters to the people hired or fired.
    Thank you! You've tapped into the very reason for my argument. It should matter, not what CEOs make, but whether or not they should be paid anything for mismanaging their company while also forcing employing onto unemployment...atleast not along the amounts they are being paid under such circumstances.

    BUSINESSES DO NOT EXIST FOR THE WORKERS.
    No, but without the workers, the business would not exist!

    WE make the products.

    WE promote the product.

    WE provide the service.

    WE ensure the service is viable.

    WE get the product to the market-place.

    WE execute the business model.

    That isn't to say that where 1,000 employees walk off the job or are laid off for one reason or another that another 1,000 employees won't eventually take their place. For this same argument can be made concerning CEOs. However, after that CEO walks away with his multi-million dollar severage package, many of those same employees who were fortunate enough not to be laid off will still be there doing the same jobs as they did before...

    Making the products.

    Promoting the product.

    Providing the service.

    Ensuring the service is viable.

    Getting the product to the market-place.

    And executing the business model.

    Your argument concerning the value of the employee is greatly INVALID!
    Last edited by Objective Voice; 09-05-10 at 12:44 PM.

  8. #248
    Sage
    EnigmaO01's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Indiana
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:33 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    7,028

    Re: CEOs lay off thousands, rake in millions

    Quote Originally Posted by TurtleDude View Post
    if that makes the shareholders money what's the problem?
    The problem is you're not listening. If the company's not making money due to the CEO's incompetence, how can that be making the shareholders money?

  9. #249
    Sage
    Renae's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    San Antonio Texas
    Last Seen
    10-23-17 @ 10:14 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    38,972
    Blog Entries
    15

    Re: CEOs lay off thousands, rake in millions

    Quote Originally Posted by Objective Voice View Post
    Your argument concerning the value of the employee is greatly INVALID!
    No, the Employees, in the end, don't matter. They are a means to and end. They are the means by which the people whom invested THEIR MONEY into the company, create wealth for themselves. That's the point of business. To enrich those whom have risked personal monies.

    My argument about employees value isn't invalid, your emotionalism about their value is meaningless.
    Climate, changes. It takes a particularly uneducated population to buy into the idea that it's their fault climate is changing and further political solutions can fix it.



  10. #250
    Sage
    Renae's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    San Antonio Texas
    Last Seen
    10-23-17 @ 10:14 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    38,972
    Blog Entries
    15

    Re: CEOs lay off thousands, rake in millions

    Quote Originally Posted by EnigmaO01 View Post
    The problem is you're not listening. If the company's not making money due to the CEO's incompetence, how can that be making the shareholders money?
    What if the CEO hired turned a 60 billion dollar loss into a 20 billion dollar loss. That's 40 billion in savings. I'd say that's an achievement for which compensation is due.
    Climate, changes. It takes a particularly uneducated population to buy into the idea that it's their fault climate is changing and further political solutions can fix it.



Page 25 of 29 FirstFirst ... 152324252627 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •