Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Let me tell ya -- it really concerns me that people feel they can malign their employers. We are gonna end up with our over-reaching Federal guv't stepping in, and the Pres is gonna nationalize corporations. Then let me hear folks squeal about their rights.
Ani. Your Victorian ideas about labor relations would be quaint if they weren't so vicious.
Do you really believe our moderate-right President and far-right Congress would dream of nationalizing corporations? This ain't Latin America, no matter how much the corporations wish it were.
Ani. Your Victorian ideas about labor relations would be quaint if they weren't so vicious.
Do you really believe our moderate-right President and far-right Congress would dream of nationalizing corporations? This ain't Latin America, no matter how much the corporations wish it were.
What is it about our President that makes him moderate-right?
He advanced and passed the Republican health plan from 1994 rather than even considering single-payer as just one example. He has lowered taxes. He has governed consistently from the center.
Quote:
Originally Posted by NDL
Doesn't GE CEO Jeff Immelt, also have significant influence in our President's Jobs and Competitiveness Council?
This makes my point. Obama is seeking corporate influence in his jobs program, not planning on nationalizing anything.
Your link is almost three years old. GM was a unique situation. If GM had failed, the entire Midwest would have looked like Detroit. I'm talking 30% unemployment everywhere considering all those parts manufacturers, sellers, dealers. It would have been really ugly.
I think for folks who didn't read this thread immediately after it started, there may be confusion about some of the replies many of us gave on the first page.
The original statement from the OP was very much different than it now appears. It has been completely changed from rather a "rant" to a rational statement about lay-offs.
If you read the first page as it stands now, you will find folks referring to things that no longer appear in the first post. Without that first post, the first 15 or so responses don't really make much sense as it appears people are making some off the wall comments (wh/ were actually in direct response to the OP's dramatic opening volley that included vituperative statements about Lowes execs as well as the company overall).
The bottom line on this thread is: Lowes is laying off employees. This is sad news for the employees, their families and the community. According to the OP, they are not just handing out pink slips; rather, they are offering a buy out to a group of employees. Comments were made in that initial post about how this was more or less a heinous tactic.
It seems to me it is the best way to handle layoffs. I also asked if anyone had access to Lowes profitability and earnings over the last year. I never got an answer to that. Companies don't lay off employees on a whim.
I don't understand why people are trying to turn this into some nefarious act. It is a sad chapter in tough economic times. Layoffs happen but corporations are not "evil" for doing whatever they have to do to remain in operation.
He advanced and passed the Republican health plan from 1994 rather than even considering single-payer as just one example. He has lowered taxes. He has governed consistently from the center.
This makes my point. Obama is seeking corporate influence in his jobs program, not planning on nationalizing anything.
Your link is almost three years old. GM was a unique situation. If GM had failed, the entire Midwest would have looked like Detroit. I'm talking 30% unemployment everywhere considering all those parts manufacturers, sellers, dealers. It would have been really ugly.
Great post. Half the Obama bashers are repeating tired lines that don't add up when you look at his first 4 years.
The bottom line on this thread is: Lowes is laying off employees. This is sad news for the employees, their families and the community. According to the OP, they are not just handing out pink slips; rather, they are offering a buy out to a group of employees. Comments were made in that initial post about how this was more or less a heinous tactic.
It seems to me it is the best way to handle layoffs. I also asked if anyone had access to Lowes profitability and earnings over the last year. I never got an answer to that. Companies don't lay off employees on a whim.
I don't understand why people are trying to turn this into some nefarious act. It is a sad chapter in tough economic times. Layoffs happen but corporations are not "evil" for doing whatever they have to do to remain in operation.
Here is an article from November, which seems to be the last time Lowe's issued an earnings report:
Lowe’s posted net earnings for the quarter of $225 million, or 18 cents per diluted share, down 44 percent from the $404 million, or 29 cents per diluted share, it earned during the same period a year ago.
You had mentioned before that the layoffs were so they could "keep the doors open," but I'm not sure that is the case. They're making money (lots of it), just not as much as they had hoped.
Would love to see mfg get a resurgence in the US. Some valid points in the article. When you see a Chinese wage creep up a bit you'll really see companies rethink their strategy.
The logistics piece is huge, along with the wages. If you consider we can order a faucet from China but there is a 90 day lead time because of shipping across the water, if you cut that down to 30 days and had it on the shelf and got an extra 60 days of sales, how much does that eat into what you saved by having it made in China today? Obviously not enough to have that faucet made back in the US yet, but I'd bet the gap is closing.
In terms of Lowe's and what's happening there, I do personally know people taking this voluntary separation offer. Some have been there 20+ years and others have been there less than 5 years. Big corporate environments aren't for everyone so I'm glad they get the "chance" to get out but saving someone else that really wants to be there at the same time potentially.
I hate the layoffs, restructuring and all the stress associated with it and am currently directly effected by it, but I know it's for the best of the company and the 3-5 year goals they are working to meet. Don't meet those and this will probably seem like a drop in the bucket to what could happen.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
