Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Work and Employment
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 06-10-2018, 06:27 PM
 
5,317 posts, read 3,206,206 times
Reputation: 8240

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by BobNJ1960 View Post
I disagree with your points.

I would wish to segregate $16 mill Toys R Us by tenure. Turnaround execs, brought in after corp already in dire straits, deserve the bonuses no matter what, as w/o them, no exec would run a corp in dire straits.
How do you know these were "turnaround execs"?

In addition "no matter what" means that they don't have to have results. They get the big bucks no matter what. Positive results are optional.

Why are they entitled to big salaries while the rank and file are not?

No exec would run a company in dire straits because that's a setup for failure.

Quote:
What % of the $16 mill went to turnaround guys who came in long after trouble begin, and thus bore zero responsibility for the underlying issues at Toys R Us?
They bore full responsibility for not turning around the company. In other words, they failed.

Quote:
PS: Rank and file are paid for time worked. No risk of not getting paid.
Rank and file got laid off. That's 100% risk of not getting paid. Executives got $16 million golden parachute while rank and file got nothing.

So explain why the execs are not responsible for anything but get rewarded for everything?

If you don't like Toy's R Us situation as a good example of top brass not bringing in value, what about

Yahoo! - Marissa Meyer ran the company into the ground. Spent $2 billion of company funds buying companies owned by her ex-Google cronies, which promptly failed and six tons of layoffs resulted. At least her cronies got 2 billion dollars richer! She got rewarded for reducing the value of the company 80%, a bonus check of many millions of dollars. What value did she and her executives bring?


Pay close attention: If executives take a long term view, take a company and make it very wealthy, they deserve bonuses (and so do the rank and file who helped them make the company rich. I've seen many companies go private and take this long term view. Those tend to be run very well by very competent management who deserve their big checks.

On the other hand, someone who spends their days watching ticker symbols and doing ridiculous short term gambles to juice the stock price - at the expense of long term profitability - i.e. killing the golden goose - these don't deserve any bonuses.


Perhaps you should read about the Gervais Principle to see where I'm coming from?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 06-10-2018, 06:34 PM
 
5,317 posts, read 3,206,206 times
Reputation: 8240
Quote:
Originally Posted by BobNJ1960 View Post
Competition issue is huge. Casual dining when I grew up was 3x plus McD's cost.
Casual dining and fast food are in different markets and different niches.

Quote:
Now it is 1.5 or so. I can get a double quarter pounder combo $10 at Mcd's; half pound and fries, drink, tip at say Chilis or like $15 ish. Latter made as I like it, to order.
Precisely - stagnating wages for the middle class force them to make cuts in their budget. It makes it necessary for more expensive food establishments to cut their costs to get the middle class dollar since fewer are available.

Tell me, when people can't get raises, how do you expect them to keep paying a higher cost of living?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-10-2018, 06:54 PM
 
33,862 posts, read 16,906,563 times
Reputation: 17135
Quote:
Originally Posted by bobsell View Post
How do you know these were "turnaround execs"?

In addition "no matter what" means that they don't have to have results. They get the big bucks no matter what. Positive results are optional.

Why are they entitled to big salaries while the rank and file are not?

No exec would run a company in dire straits because that's a setup for failure.



They bore full responsibility for not turning around the company. In other words, they failed.
Wrong on all counts.

Turnaround experts are tossing Hail Mary passes. Want one? Must pay the bonus. Why would any exec leave a solid corp for a sinking ship otherwise? No turnaround exec-might as well liquidate 2 years ago when crisis first became dire. 2 fewer years employment for all, including rank and file. Feel better now?

PS: I asked the split on $16 mill b/w turnaround and legacy execs. Since you know the $16 mill, surely you know the split, right?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-10-2018, 06:56 PM
 
33,862 posts, read 16,906,563 times
Reputation: 17135
Quote:
Originally Posted by bobsell View Post
Casual dining and fast food are in different markets and different niches.
Casual dining is doing fine. Economy is very good. People eating out in big numbers. Just not at fast food.

Which renders the Fight for 15 a faster path to the unemployment line for the Mcd's burger maker.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-10-2018, 08:39 PM
 
Location: Buckeye, AZ
38,936 posts, read 23,819,762 times
Reputation: 14125
Quote:
Originally Posted by BusinessManIT View Post
The problem with McDonald's is their food, not their employees. The sandwiches and other food portions are too small. When you order a meal at McDonald's you get a message by the size of the portion that says "I don't care about my reputation, I just want to save money by giving you the smallest amount of food that I can get away with."

For a long time this has been the case. I avoid going to this "restaurant" because of these small food portions that seem to be meant for little children rather than adults.

McDonald's can restructure all it wants, but if it doesn't improve the size of their food portions then they will continue to be buffeted around by their competitors
I happen to like some offerings namely the barbeque bacon burger/chicken that is expensive compared to their normal offerings or the chicken McNuggets. The rest of McDonald's is meh. The price of labor isn't a problem if sales are great which they aren't despite the negative push for higher McWages.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-10-2018, 11:16 PM
 
2,924 posts, read 1,582,270 times
Reputation: 2498
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brian_M View Post
Part of the restructuring is doing away from the front-end staff... 1000 stores a year will be getting kiosks.


My local McD's has a double drive-through, and if both lanes aren't backed up into the street from 6am~whenever they close (2am?), there's something wrong. You know not to drive down the main roads next to that store unless you want to wait on traffic.
Kiosks aren't all they are cracked up to be. While it may offer more choices, I was at Wendy's today and their fancy drink kiosk thing was harder to mess around with with the touch pad than the traditional dispensers for soda. Not all new stuff is easier to use.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-10-2018, 11:18 PM
 
2,924 posts, read 1,582,270 times
Reputation: 2498
Quote:
Originally Posted by bobsell View Post
How typical.

The executives make mistakes and then punish the rank and file with layoffs.

Upper management is not responsible for anything.
Knowing that McDonalds doesn't pay well (I actually saw one paying here the minimum wage of $8.25 (in contrast, the Taco Bell nearby was paying about $9.50 to $10.), they wrote Congress asking for Amnesty for illegals (why would one do that unless one was employing them?), and they also replaced their American tech workers with H1Bs, I agree with your assessment.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-10-2018, 11:26 PM
 
2,924 posts, read 1,582,270 times
Reputation: 2498
Quote:
Originally Posted by bobsell View Post
Nope.

A continuum is based on the same set of values.

The values are changing from "make people more valuable" to "make people worthless and dehumanize them" - those are not on the same planet and mutually exclusive.
I agree. It was a giveaway when they changed it from personnel to "human resources" and started using the phrase "human capital" of what their intentions and views of us were.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-11-2018, 06:51 AM
 
3,462 posts, read 4,812,978 times
Reputation: 7015
Quote:
Originally Posted by BusinessManIT View Post
The problem with McDonald's is their food, not their employees. The sandwiches and other food portions are too small. When you order a meal at McDonald's you get a message by the size of the portion that says "I don't care about my reputation, I just want to save money by giving you the smallest amount of food that I can get away with."

For a long time this has been the case. I avoid going to this "restaurant" because of these small food portions that seem to be meant for little children rather than adults.

McDonald's can restructure all it wants, but if it doesn't improve the size of their food portions then they will continue to be buffeted around by their competitors
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr_Geek View Post
Here are your steps to success McDonald's. I'll be waiting for my check:

1. Improve the quality of the food. They have been increasingly taking shortcuts and using fillers or whatnot and the food just sucks now.

2. Cut back on your menu. Go back to what made you; burgers, fries, soft drinks, shakes.

Yep, their problem is the food. They have allowed the nut and berry eating vegetarians that don't even eat at their restaurants, pressure them into trying to make their food more healthy. In the process they ruined the food. The fries used to be awesome but now they aren't so good. If you don't eat them immediately while they are still warm, they suck.

So the moral of the story is that if you change your food to satisfy the few, the many quit coming. McDonald's has lost sight of who is their customer base. Their customers want good tasting, burgers and fries quickly with no regard to the healthiness. This is why smaller restaurant chains and local burger joints are so busy at lunch these days. Their customers also do not care about fancy coffee drinks or a dining area that looks like something a snowflake on hgtv designed. I despise the new look and the terrible seating arrangements.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-11-2018, 07:30 AM
 
Location: Denver CO
24,204 posts, read 19,122,698 times
Reputation: 38266
Quote:
Originally Posted by Serious Conversation View Post
A lot of these layoffs are coming from the kiosks.

I've always thought McDonald's sucked. They're my last fast food option. For burgers, we have a local fast food chain called Pal's. Cook Out is also good. If I can't go to these, Burger King and Wendy's are better for the bigger national chains.

I don't know that this means a lot.
Zero of these layoffs are coming from kiosks. They are corporate jobs, not retail jobs.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Work and Employment

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 03:24 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top