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.
I believe this is the first time we've agreed on something. I believe that they should have done sometype of analysis last year before shelling out money to the Banks and Auto Industry. Maybe if they did, the voters would have a clear understanding of whats going on. Right now everyone is speculating and in an uproar, who's right? We won't know, because they did not do the math before hand.
Hmmmm. I agree with both of you too. Starting last fall, it seems like panic took over and no one took the time to ask questions and put the pros and cons of different solutions on the table. I understand that the fear was that if the really big companies failed it would take the entire economy down with it, and maybe we'll still avoid that. But the cost is certainly very, very high.
So why didn't they do some kind of analysis before shelling out hundreds of billions of our dollars to them?
The problem is that root causes were not and are not addressed. Why are Americans falling behind so fast? Globalism and the export of jobs but that has not been addressed. Unions are far behind the times because they should have seen where all this globalist export of jobs and import of cheap labor would lead, but they didn't and now they have to face the music.
CEO's raiding corporations, running their companies into the ground and meanwhile raking millions of dollars but the billions in bailouts certainly didn't address mismanagement and greed.
No one wants to address the root causes, I suppose because that would be politically uncomfortable.
Greed, greed and more greed. Even Waggoner, the guy who supposedly got canned, will receive a $23 million package to go away. Who negotiates a deal like that? There's no incentive for a CEO with that kind of a back up to do anything right. Whether he runs the company well, or runs it into the ground, he comes out doing great. There's something fundamentally wrong with that.
Greed, greed and more greed. Even Waggoner, the guy who supposedly got canned, will receive a $23 million package to go away. Who negotiates a deal like that? There's no incentive for a CEO with that kind of a back up to do anything right. Whether he runs the company well, or runs it into the ground, he comes out doing great. There's something fundamentally wrong with that.
Odd, Waggoners' compensation package is the very same compensation package that the unions have negotiated... While obviously those on the line do not leave with a $23M package, they do leave with package offering the same % of their income.
So where is the criticizm of the union contracts in your posting? Ooh, its much better to have a villian in GM to blame for economic problems we all are facing.
Odd, Waggoners' compensation package is the very same compensation package that the unions have negotiated... While obviously those on the line do not leave with a $23M package, they do leave with package offering the same % of their income.
So where is the criticizm of the union contracts in your posting? Ooh, its much better to have a villian in GM to blame for economic problems we all are facing.
Do they get a percentage of their pay if they're terminated for doing a bad job? If so, that's ridiculous. I'm not familiar with the terms of the union contracts, but to the extent they're contributing to the failure of the car companies, they should be re-examined and re-negotiated.
In general, I'm a union supporter. I've seen in my own family of boilermakers and telephone operators where modest union-secured pensions and health care have made all the difference in the lives of elderly retirees who otherwise would been entirely dependent on Social Security and Medicare. But that does not mean that every union concession is justified.
And, no matter how you look at it, a $23 million termination package from a company receiving government money is unconscionable.
Do they get a percentage of their pay if they're terminated for doing a bad job? If so, that's ridiculous. I'm not familiar with the terms of the union contracts, but to the extent they're contributing to the failure of the car companies, they should be re-examined and re-negotiated.
In general, I'm a union supporter. I've seen in my own family of boilermakers and telephone operators where modest union-secured pensions and health care have made all the difference in the lives of elderly retirees who otherwise would been entirely dependent on Social Security and Medicare. But that does not mean that every union concession is justified.
And, no matter how you look at it, a $23 million termination package from a company receiving government money is unconscionable.
Do they get a percentage of their pay if they are fired? Yes, yes they do. Thats what a pension is.
Do you even have a clue about why the motor companies are having financial hardship? If you think he did such a terrible job, then explain to me why every single car company in the world is facing similar problems.. Its an industry problem, not tied to just GM
Do they get a percentage of their pay if they are fired? Yes, yes they do. Thats what a pension is.
Do you even have a clue about why the motor companies are having financial hardship? If you think he did such a terrible job, then explain to me why every single car company in the world is facing similar problems.. Its an industry problem, not tied to just GM
When I hear the word "pension," I think of a retirement benefit, not severance package.
AFAIK, every single car company in the world is not facing the choice of bankruptcy or a huge government bailout. I think all of your head smacking and banging is causing you to speak in sweeping generalities.
When I hear the word "pension," I think of a retirement benefit, not severance package.
AFAIK, every single car company in the world is not facing the choice of bankruptcy or a huge government bailout. I think all of your head smacking and banging is causing you to speak in sweeping generalities.
You must have missed the $100,000 buyout packages for new employees of the car companies that were laid off. That was $75K cash and $25K towards a car. SEVERANCE PACKAGE for employees who have worked at the company for a very short period of time. I didnt hear anyone complaining about the fact that this money came from taxpayers...
I challenge you to list ONE car company of a decent size not facing economic issues at the moment....
You must have missed the $100,000 buyout packages for new employees of the car companies that were laid off. That was $75K cash and $25K towards a car. SEVERANCE PACKAGE for employees who have worked at the company for a very short period of time. I didnt hear anyone complaining about the fact that this money came from taxpayers...
I may be wrong but I don't think those amounts were offered to "employees who have worked at the company for a very short period of time" as you mention. I beleive the amounts were prorated based on length of service and that the amounts mentioned were the TOP amounts - those offered to long-term employees. Short term employees got much smaller amounts.
There were a number of different offers from the various companies at different times over the last couple of years - some were much better than others. The $100,000 one you mention was by far the most generous (and again, those top dollars only applied to the longer term employees - at least that's the way I understand it).
Also, many of these were not packages for employees that were forceably laid off - only those who took a voluntary lay off. This was an attempt to avoid forced layoffs (hence the sweetened deal) those folks actually laid off will likely get a whole lot less.
Ken
Last edited by LordBalfor; 03-31-2009 at 04:37 PM..
I may be wrong but I don't think those amounts were offered to "employees who have worked at the company for a very short period of time" as you mention. I beleive the amounts were prorated based on length of service and that the amounts mentioned were the TOP amounts - those offered to long-term employees. Short term employees got much smaller amounts.
There were a number of different offers from the various companies at different times over the last couple of years - some were much better than others. The $100,000 one you mention was by far the most generous (and again, those top dollars only applied to the longer term employees - at least that's the way I understand it).
Also, many of these were not packages for employees that were forceably laid off - only those who took a voluntary lay off. This was an attempt to avoid forced layoffs (hence the sweetened deal) those folks actually laid off will likely get a whole lot less.
Ken
I noticed no outrage over large amounts of taxpayers money going to buying out the union contracts.. I wonder why..
Per your link So Vega, a production worker whose base pay is about $60,000 per year, is considering the $75,000 buyout and trying to get another job
So essentially they were offered one year of their pay as compensation, lets see what a CEO makes shall we..
Salary of $2.2M, Incentive pay of $3.5M, 165,563 shares of stok at that time selling for about $20 each, 500,000 stock options, + 75,000 shares of preferred stock. anotherwords, about $20M.. His $23M layoff package is slighly more than his yearly salary, ironic, so is the union wages and their layoff package.
Regardless, where was the outrage over using taxpayers money to buy out thousands of employees to leave?
Everyone needs their villian, CEO's make great targets
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.
