Because the CEOs make the decisions about who to fire.
2007-04-03 15:57:48
·
answer #1
·
answered by Bella Bruda 1
·
1⤊
0⤋
There's always dead weight in a company. Ever heard of the 20/80 rule? 20% of the workers do 80% of the work and vice versa. Odds are, if someone can't see it, they ARE the dead weight. Why pay 4 people for a job 3 can do? Why pay one person the same wage that can be split between two? These are sound business decisions I look for as an investor in the management of a company.
2007-04-03 16:01:22
·
answer #2
·
answered by Michael E 5
·
1⤊
0⤋
Martin Gecko said in Wall Street: "Greed is good." That sentiment has permeated our society to the point that voters, stockholders and the rest of us have given in to the lottery mentality, not realizing we are mortgaging our future into permanent low wage slavery. Then Big Boys believe that "If God did not want them sheared, He would not have made them sheep," and as long as we cooperate by baaing all the time, this kind of thing will go on forever. I remember a bank president who lost billions loaning money to I think Brazil was let go with a $25 million severance!
2007-04-03 16:03:04
·
answer #3
·
answered by michaelsan 6
·
1⤊
2⤋
Those thousands are the muscle, and you can lose some muscle, but those CEOs are the heart. They are the central nervous system. They give the company direction.
2007-04-03 17:42:35
·
answer #4
·
answered by The Angry Elephant 4
·
1⤊
0⤋
Because they can. Employers always have the upper hand. The same goes for local & state govenments too. One person to do the actual work and 3 supervisors to handle the paperwork. I believe upper management people develop a belief system among themselves that they are invaluable to the company, and add to that a "good ole' boy" mentality, and you have mass lay-offs of the people that actually do the work. Someday this house of cards will all fall down!
2007-04-03 16:04:53
·
answer #5
·
answered by Petrushka's Ghost 6
·
1⤊
2⤋
Name one corporation which has done this, please. But for the sake of argument, let's say they all do it.
Because they own the companies, they answer to the stock-holders (who have legal remedies, in publically held companies) and they do not answer to anyone else. This is America.
And anyone who can handle the risk can start a company. They let anyone do it. (Smile, even you).
Non-contractual employees do not have an ownership interest in their jobs. And we also don't tell people who they are allowed to support politically.
And uh, guys, anything else is communism.
2007-04-03 16:01:35
·
answer #6
·
answered by Shrink 5
·
2⤊
1⤋
maximum of their earnings come from distant places. Oil is priced interior the greenback and the Fed keeps slicing expenditures of interest which in turn devalues the greenback inflicting bigger expenses for each thing no longer basically oil. the US has been affected extra because of the fact our greenback is well worth much less and in Europe mutually as the barrel fee is in money their euro has held secure so they do no longer look to be paying such an advance for oil (gasoline). DEFINITION OF INFLATION: Inflation is the lack of ability of a relentless finding out to purchase fee of the greenback, brought about through an advance out of 'skinny air' of the provision of money and debt introduction through the economic equipment. OPEC keeps elevating the greenback fee because of the fact because of the fact the greenback is going down in fee it takes extra of them to have the comparable finding out to purchase skill. it incredibly is noted as inflation. the government claims CPI is in simple terms approximately 2% while truthfully it incredibly is working at approximately eleven.8%. Their earnings are additionally maintained because of the fact different international places provide them incentives to drill and locate new oil fields. they do no longer do lots kinfolk drilling right here anymore it incredibly is the place expenses have long previous up. additionally international call for is up even although call for right here has long previous down. we tend to basically think of of u . s . as quickly as we communicate approximately economics.
2016-12-08 17:43:21
·
answer #7
·
answered by cosner 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
I think it is safe to assume that when a CEO is let go, it probably is a reflection on his lack of achievement.
With this being said - why the hell do they give them millions of dollars in a severance package?
Insanity, I say, pure insanity.
In answer to your question, when cost cutting, it seems the labor costs are the quickest and easiest to implement - and, yes, it's usually the blue collar production worker that gets the ax. Makes no sense to me when they continue to keep the same overhead in the upper echelon.
2007-04-03 16:05:47
·
answer #8
·
answered by LeAnne 7
·
2⤊
3⤋
Why do the stockholders - the American people - put a stop to it? That would certainly be *much* more appropriate than the government getting involved.
And hi, Chi!
2007-04-03 15:58:35
·
answer #9
·
answered by Jadis 6
·
1⤊
0⤋
It's the Golden Rule. The CEO's have the gold so they make the rules.
2007-04-03 15:58:51
·
answer #10
·
answered by yupchagee 7
·
0⤊
1⤋