ohiomike Posted October 19, 2011 Report Share Posted October 19, 2011 All that would do is weaken US companies by moving the talent pool of top execs and CEOs to companies based outside the US.Like the rest of the world is in tip top shape financially. NOT. I keep hearing this weak reason to continue paying these top level people too much money.Iirc in Japan their exec's cannot make anymore than 10% more than their highest paid hourly worker. A pretty good rule if you ask me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uncle Punk Posted October 19, 2011 Report Share Posted October 19, 2011 How about we say no to issue 2 and instead make our own issue that forces the heads of every large company to step down and make what its employees make. Then re-evaluate their budgets at that point? oh wait cant do that. Then the assholes would not be able to afford their million dollar homes and 3 million yachts.Fucking rediculous! Yeah cut the workers and pay, but its OK for the high ups to get raises and bonuses for doing so. Fucking stupid! Issue 2 is just plainly fucking stupid. (I have seen the cuts from this shit already, we lost 13,000 employees over 6 states)(in return forced our workload to triple if not quad).I am not saying nothing needs to happen but it needs to happen across the board. Issue 2 is trash and does nothing for the chain of command but line their fucking pockets! The Asshole that created it, bonuses for him, every manager for every company that has union employees. Bonus, for as many as it affects.I hate reading about it, I hate hearing about it. If these states were run correctly and everything was on the up and up it would never have been thought of.Hell at my company alone. We the engineers do the work that make the money. However, we have a manager watching us (6 engineering offices across Ohio). Then there is another manager that watches those managers. Then yet another that watches that manager and then another (head of state) watching that manager. I can see 4 too many managers that we dont need. WOW! there is a $2.8 million savings.Sounds like someone has his issues all mixed up together. What does private businesses CEOs pay have to do with issue 2? Absolutely fucking nothing. Issue two is a tool that is to be given to the public sector so that they might have a better chance at balancing their budgets. Why would anyone be opposed to that? Oh, I know, because it lines their pockets with money stolen from the rest of us to pay benefits to others that exceed most peoples who work and earn a living. I understand how hard it would be for a public employee to support the issue because it will take money away from them just as I would expect those on welfare to not vote for a law to take money away from them. I am for the issue because it will take money away from me. All a matter of self interest for all concerned. My hope is that the majority of those who get money taken from them to give to others will prevail over the minority who benefit from the scam. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tpoppa Posted October 19, 2011 Report Share Posted October 19, 2011 Iirc in Japan their exec's cannot make anymore than 10% more than their highest paid hourly worker. A pretty good rule if you ask me.That is absolutely incorrect. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uncle Punk Posted October 19, 2011 Report Share Posted October 19, 2011 Like the rest of the world is in tip top shape financially. NOT. I keep hearing this weak reason to continue paying these top level people too much money.Iirc in Japan their exec's cannot make anymore than 10% more than their highest paid hourly worker. A pretty good rule if you ask me.Oh my fucking God this has to be the single most stupid post I have ever read on this forum. You obviously have no clue what made this country great or how to create wealth. I would suggest you take your ignorant ass over to Japan and partake in their superior system to ours. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buildit Posted October 19, 2011 Author Report Share Posted October 19, 2011 The bill we ought to pass.State workers no longer have tenure. Workers are dismissed when they are found to be preforming below standards for the position. Failure to identify these people will result in fines equal to 10% the pay of the managers and politicians in charge of those positions. Pay increases are tied directly to the increases of the superiors in charge of them. So if the governor gets a 10% pay increase, everyone below him should expect a 10% increase. If the governor takes a 5% decrease in benefits everyone else gets the same cut. This way the politicians can't duck the responsibility for the huge budget issues and unions can't bitch if people aren't getting increases in pay. It also makes managers responsible for the quality of workers they employ.Companies should work the same way. If the bosses at the top do well, the workers under them should do well. If a manager keeps a screw up around then he can afford a 10% decrease in pay to help compensate for the added cost to the company. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tpoppa Posted October 19, 2011 Report Share Posted October 19, 2011 Companies should work the same way. If the bosses at the top do well, the workers under them should do well. If a manager keeps a screw up around then he can afford a 10% decrease in pay to help compensate for the added cost to the company.Profit sharing was never very sucessful.Compensation is typically based on how replaceable you are. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uncle Punk Posted October 19, 2011 Report Share Posted October 19, 2011 The bill we ought to pass.State workers no longer have tenure. Workers are dismissed when they are found to be preforming below standards for the position. Failure to identify these people will result in fines equal to 10% the pay of the managers and politicians in charge of those positions. Pay increases are tied directly to the increases of the superiors in charge of them. So if the governor gets a 10% pay increase, everyone below him should expect a 10% increase. If the governor takes a 5% decrease in benefits everyone else gets the same cut. This way the politicians can't duck the responsibility for the huge budget issues and unions can't bitch if people aren't getting increases in pay. It also makes managers responsible for the quality of workers they employ.Companies should work the same way. If the bosses at the top do well, the workers under them should do well. If a manager keeps a screw up around then he can afford a 10% decrease in pay to help compensate for the added cost to the company.So a manager or owner finds a way to increase their market or a way to increase profit and the company is able to employ more people. This person is supposed to be compensated at the same rate as those who are benefiting from those decisions? A company decides to develop a product using their profits from an existing product. The product fails and isn't received by their customers so all the money risked by the company is lost. Do the employees need to give money back to help make up for the risk the company took? After all they are benefiting from the good outcome of a prior risk. Rewarding everyone equally in a business environment is not good for business if everyone isn't going to accept the risks equally. If sales drop 50% and you still have a job should you take 50% less pay? Don't most small business owners take a pay cut when their sales drop? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ohiomike Posted October 19, 2011 Report Share Posted October 19, 2011 (edited) That is absolutely incorrect.No Outcry About CEO Pay in Japan"That's because most Japanese chief executives don't earn anywhere near the big paychecks of their Western counterparts. CEOs at Japan's top 100 companies by market capitalization earned an average of around $1.5 million, compared with $13.3 million for American CEOs and $6.6 million for European chief execs at companies with revenues of higher than $10 billion, according to an analysis of 2004-06 data by Towers Perrin, a Stamford (Conn.) human resources firm."http://www.pbs.org/now/politics/politics_pop/index.htmlhttp://www.businessweek.com/globalbiz/content/feb2009/gb20090210_949408.htmI did some digging back when and this article is somewhere near the date I was doing the digging concerning this issue back during the Bush days. It says '11 times' instead of '10%' so I suppose my memory fails me a bit, but the point is still the same."Turns out that American executives compensation rates are quite different from those of the rest of the developed world. In Japan a typical executive makes eleven times what a typical worker brings home; in Britain, 22 times. In America...."http://www.pbs.org/now/politics/executivepay06.html Edited October 19, 2011 by ohiomike Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tpoppa Posted October 19, 2011 Report Share Posted October 19, 2011 Iirc in Japan their exec's cannot make anymore than 10% more than their highest paid hourly worker. A pretty good rule if you ask me.No Outcry About CEO Pay in Japan"That's because most Japanese chief executives don't earn anywhere near the big paychecks of their Western counterparts. CEOs at Japan's top 100 companies by market capitalization earned an average of around $1.5 million, compared with $13.3 million for American CEOs and $6.6 million for European chief execs at companies with revenues of higher than $10 billion, according to an analysis of 2004-06 data by Towers Perrin, a Stamford (Conn.) human resources firm."http://www.businessweek.com/globalbiz/content/feb2009/gb20090210_949408.htmI did some digging and this article is somewhere near the date I was doing some digging concerning this issue back during the Bush days. It says '11 times' instead of '10%' so I suppose my memory fails me a bit, but the point is the same."Turns out that American executives compensation rates are quite different from those of the rest of the developed world. In Japan a typical executive makes eleven times what a typical worker brings home; in Britain, 22 times. In America...."http://www.pbs.org/now/politics/executivepay06.htmlThanks for proving my point.If Japanese CEOs average 1.5 million are you saying hourly workers make 10% less than that? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buildit Posted October 19, 2011 Author Report Share Posted October 19, 2011 Profit sharing was never very sucessful.Compensation is typically based on how replaceable you are.So a manager or owner finds a way to increase their market or a way to increase profit and the company is able to employ more people. This person is supposed to be compensated at the same rate as those who are benefiting from those decisions? A company decides to develop a product using their profits from an existing product. The product fails and isn't received by their customers so all the money risked by the company is lost. Do the employees need to give money back to help make up for the risk the company took? After all they are benefiting from the good outcome of a prior risk. Rewarding everyone equally in a business environment is not good for business if everyone isn't going to accept the risks equally. If sales drop 50% and you still have a job should you take 50% less pay? Don't most small business owners take a pay cut when their sales drop?I see your point. There's a devil in the details but I think if government employees are going to bite a bullet the politicians who control their pay need to be sharing in the pain. After all the issue 2 advertisement compared government employees to public employees. If we want it fair, then we need to make it fair.After all, despite the appearance, I'm not hateing on hard working government employees, I just think the current system protecting their benefit programs and tenure is unsustainable. The same can be said for our elected officials. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ohiomike Posted October 19, 2011 Report Share Posted October 19, 2011 Thanks for proving my point.If Japanese CEOs average 1.5 million are you saying hourly workers make 10% less than that?Try reading my entire post. I admitted my error...here let me help you..I did some digging and this article is somewhere near the date I was doing some digging concerning this issue back during the Bush days. It says '11 times' instead of '10%' so I suppose my memory fails me a bit, but the point is the same.So yes my 10% looks to actually be 11 times. My bad. The point is still the same.And Punk, up yours bro. Bet you voted for ol Barry too..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tpoppa Posted October 19, 2011 Report Share Posted October 19, 2011 I see your comment.From the link you posted:Is it time for Americans, then, to imitate the Japanese? Executive compensation experts wouldn't advise it. Japan's system is hardly ideal, they say. In fact, many Western investors argue that Japanese executives get paid too little and that performance should be a bigger factor in determining compensation packages. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uncle Punk Posted October 19, 2011 Report Share Posted October 19, 2011 So yes my 10% looks to actually be 11 times. My bad. The point is still the same.I am failing to get a legitimate point. We should emulate the Japanese in our business practices? I don't see where they are regulated to uphold that ratio it's just a small sampling to make a point that misses a mark. Conducting ourselves as they do in business won't lead to a recession or depression? Oh wait......... I will take my chances with our system that allows us to have the freedom to succeed or fail without a formula that regulates my success or compensates me for my failures. I value our freedoms and if you want a government to take care of you like a child you should probably go and take advantage of the opportunity since you don't seem to be able to fend for yourself and want the government to protect you from the bad business men. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fireman_343 Posted October 19, 2011 Report Share Posted October 19, 2011 I can't believe anyone is FOR Issue 2! It's bullshit, and I hope everyone VOTES NO!! Vote early! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kawi kid Posted October 19, 2011 Report Share Posted October 19, 2011 I can't believe anyone is FOR Issue 2! It's bullshit, and I hope everyone VOTES NO!! Vote early!Why do you feel this way? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fireman_343 Posted October 19, 2011 Report Share Posted October 19, 2011 I don't think I really need to explain.. I'm a firefighter that works for the State of Ohio... I'm getting hit hard Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buildit Posted October 19, 2011 Author Report Share Posted October 19, 2011 Why do you feel this way?The union told him to. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ohiomike Posted October 19, 2011 Report Share Posted October 19, 2011 What 'business practice' does SB5 concern itself with in terms of comparing it to what Japanese execs make?You want to look at this SB in the black and white which is not all bad. The fact that American execs take home much more of the pie that their Japanese counterparts represents a lot of money these corps. would have otherwise-Amer vs Japanese. That is where my point is. Am I saying we should conduct business the same? Not what I was addressing. You want black and white, well a comparison like that also has to be in black and white. No business practice but rather pay structure. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tpoppa Posted October 19, 2011 Report Share Posted October 19, 2011 I can't believe anyone is FOR Issue 2! It's bullshit, and I hope everyone VOTES NO!! Vote early!For you personally it may be bad. Big picture it's a step in the right direction. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fireman_343 Posted October 19, 2011 Report Share Posted October 19, 2011 For you personally it may be bad. Big picture it's a step in the right direction.I just don't see how it can be a step in the "right direction"? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buildit Posted October 19, 2011 Author Report Share Posted October 19, 2011 What 'business practice' does SB5 concern itself with in terms of comparing it to what Japanese execs make?You want to look at this SB in the black and white which is not all bad. The fact that American execs take home much more of the pie that their Japanese counterparts represents a lot of money these corps. would have otherwise-Amer vs Japanese. That is where my point is. Am I saying we should conduct business the same? Not what I was addressing. You want black and white, well a comparison like that also has to be in black and white. No business practice but rather pay structure.It's hard to keep the issue 2 debate clear because of the noise from pro and con groups. They are both trying to make opinion into fact. However, when those opposed to issue 2 put a school teacher on tv saying how their bargaining ability for better education will be removed? I ask, "How has that bargaining ability worked so far in schools?" The desired effect vs effect that has happened seems very different. How are public services improving under the current system? I see no benefit to the status quote. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kawi kid Posted October 19, 2011 Report Share Posted October 19, 2011 I don't think I really need to explain.. I'm a firefighter that works for the State of Ohio... I'm getting hit hardHave there been cuts in pay or benefits made already? Or are they just telling you that if it passes there will be? I'm asking out of seriousness and not being s dick, I really want to know. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buildit Posted October 19, 2011 Author Report Share Posted October 19, 2011 Have there been cuts in pay or benefits made already? Or are they just telling you that if it passes there will be? I'm asking out of seriousness and not being s dick, I really want to know.+1 What benefit reductions have been made? How many fire fighters have lost jobs vs those taking less pay. Are the big chiefs suffering equal cuts the those with boots on the ground? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uncle Punk Posted October 19, 2011 Report Share Posted October 19, 2011 I can't believe anyone is FOR Issue 2! It's bullshit, and I hope everyone VOTES NO!! Vote early!The only people I know who are against it are those who will benefit from it. I have a few friends who an employed by government means and they are all for it because it affects their bottom line. I know of no one who is against it that isn't employed by government means. I talk to a lot of business owners and successful people who have a good understanding of how things work and not one of them are against it. Admittedly they are looking at it as a bottom line issue as well. Both sides are viewing the issue in their best interests I hope the majority of people can understand what the issue is and how it affects them. People were elected to negotiate the contracts that put us in this mess and people were elected that were trying to fix this mess. I can’t believe the little whiny bitches that didn’t like the way our elected officials decided to fix this mess and wanted to second guess them. From now on we should put all of the contracts up for a vote when public employees are asking for more money from us. I expect that to go as well as most school levies turn out in this economy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fireman_343 Posted October 19, 2011 Report Share Posted October 19, 2011 How are public services improving under the current system? I see no benefit to the status quote. Because it is keeping more fire and police on the streets! Without my union, the state firefighters over in Springfield would of all lost their jobs when the base closed.., our union saved the state money by absorbing those firefighters into the other state Fire Depts and upping our manning to the numbers we should be at!! We were always undermanned before and were getting paid a lot of money in OT.. Now that we have the proper staffing at all state FD's, the OT has dropped almost to none now! Sucks for me because I liked to get OT, but it saves the State money and saves jobs! NO ON ISSUE 2!!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.