Anti Union are usually wrong
I keep laughing at those that keep saying reason why this business fail is because of the Unions and i ask so did the Union got a pay cut like the ex's that fail the company? I mean in no other sector of America you see a CEO fail miserable and have a severance package of millions of dollars. Usually those against unions are the ones that support CEO making out like bandits yet blaming the workers for a company falling.
Actually you see this in most industries. It's due to the contracts they have in place. CEOs are far more valuable than an average employee and therefore get paid much better.
If someone doesn't like it, they are free to become a CEO. But it takes a lot of work to climb the ladder and usually endless amounts of education. Your average person isn't willing to do that work to become a CEO, hence is why CEOs are valuable.
|reply to Eddy120876 |
I'd say that forming a union sometimes either runs a company into the ground or causes the management to get mad enough to run it into the ground, and sometimes it's hard to tell which one happened. Neither is a terribly favorable result.
I admit I don't like unions much as they exist today. They should really be more like non-profit personnel companies that subcontract to companies within their industry. You know, train or attract people who are really good at their jobs, and if successful the companies will hire them because they're high-quality workers. If the worker is lazy they don't deserve a union!
|reply to silbaco |
Yeah they are so valuable yet they run the company to the ground. I say if you as a CEO took a company doing well and crash it you should get no bonus.