Tag: Business

By on


Tom Knighton explained why the above CEO Salaries are in line even though they are disproportionately higher than the average employee. It has, you guessed it, something to do with capitalism.

First, Knighton rightly points out that the excess money that these CEOs makes, if confiscated from the CEO’s and divided among the average employee, wouldn’t make a difference in a lower paid employees paycheck. Well, yeah, one executive’s salary wouldn’t make much of a difference but what about the other executives’ compensation. Most companies have VP and executive VPs coming out the ying yang who are also grossly overpaid. Throw those salaries in and I imagine you would have a much bigger kitty to distribute.

Then CEO’s have a responsible position. If they make mistakes, they could endanger other people’s jobs. Spare me. If CEOs are doing their job right, they could be eliminating jobs, so it doesn’t much matter much to the average employee. Let’s face it the average employee’s job is always under threat whether it be automation, elimination or outsourcing. The idea that the CEO is protecting his employees jobs is laughable, at best. If the shareholders and top executives are making money, there is little concern about the lower paid employees. Indeed, the average employee might be in more danger from a good CEO than a bad CEO. Besides the CEO has a team of executives working with him. If he makes a decision, it is being vetted by Board of Directors and other Executives, he rarely, if ever, makes an important decision alone. The risk is low of something disastrous.

Finally, and most importantly for Capitalism, Knighton believes you can find lower paid employees anywhere, it is difficult to find someone who can be a CEO. Knighton might look into the meat packing industry who are trying to find workers to operate dangerous machinery. Slaughter houses are having such a difficult time hiring people for these positions that they are breaking the law and hiring minors. They are also lobbying state legislatures to lower the age to work in these slaughter houses. As opposed to say, raising wages significantly in order to attract adults willing to risk life and limb to operate these machines. Why doesn’t the same philosophy of higher wages attracting the best people used to attract the best machine operators? If it works for CEO’s, it just might work for average employees as well.

As far as CEO pay is concerned it would be interesting to see if a lower pay was offered to smart ambitious young people who have yet to prove themselves what the results would be. What’s the worse that could happen? It’s not like the CEO would lose his life if he made a mistake, not like the teenagers working in a slaughter house. And, if they succeed, a lower wage for CEO would then bring more revenue into the business. Which is a win win right. I mean isn’t keep wages low one of the primary goals of a CEO? Why shouldn’t the CEO’s salary be included in this consideration. I am pretty sure you could find someone willing to do the job for less and I am betting that a good number of them could do a job. On the other hand, I know for a fact that slaughter houses can’t attract the right people to work in their establishments. Who, then, is more important and deserving of higher salaries?

Sorry, I still ca

By on

In a disturbing trend, businesses, particularly in the slaughtering animals industry, are continually being caught using underage workers. This has happened before (see here and here) and it seems to be gaining ground. Some Republican controlled states are trying to make it easier for businesses to hire underage labor. These aren’t jobs working at movie theaters or restaurants, these are jobs using dangerous machinery and the Florida law wants to allow up to eight hours of work. Sixteen year olds working full time and going to high school. This could be about 2/3 of their day. Tired workers using lethal machines, sounds like a good idea to me. I don’t think that most adults would perform well under these circumstances much less a 16 year old. But never mind, protecting children isn’t the concern here, cheap labor is.

The fact that these businesses continue to get caught is enlightening about their motives. These businesses are making a clear business decision. It is cheaper to break the law and pay the fines than it is to pay higher salaries. Since these are conscious decisions, it undermines the notion that these are God-fearing people making innocent mistakes. These are, in fact, criminal enterprises – knowingly breaking the law to their advantage.

If you needed any more proof regarding the criminality of these businesses, Exclusive Poultry, one of the businesses fined for hiring the underaged, also broke other labor laws. They underpaid their worker’s wages. This can’t be shrugged off as some error in HR. This is a conscious decision made by the managers in the firm to rip off their employees and, more telling, is it would have to involve people up and down the food chain. I believe this is called a criminal conspiracy.

From this I can surmise the following:

  1. Fines for labor violations are too small to have any detrimental effect on business. That so many businesses, particularly in the meat packing industry, continue to do business despite seemingly large fines suggests that they weighted their options and paying the fines was the cheaper one. In order to discourage people from breaking the laws, like with any law, the punishment has to be a high price to pay. Right now, these fines are just a more economical choice for these law breaking businesses which only encourages them to break the law.
  2. Wages need to be higher to attract qualified adults. These are dangerous jobs. People are risking life and limb to perform them. What adult labor is saying is that businesses are not paying enough for them to take this risk. In a functioning capitalist society, this is when higher pay works. Businesses clearly have the money to pay higher wages but paying government fines is a better deal.
  3. This brings me to the Republican Party. The party of family values and protecting children from books and transexuals. They are also the party, at least in Florida, willing to let 16 years work a full eight hour shift and then go to school. How can an adult be doing both well much less a 16 year old. So when you hear Republicans babbling on about protecting children — just remember no child has been killed by a transvestite reading them a story but several have been killed in workplace accidents. Which means that an awful lot of energy that the Republican party is expending on transvestites is wasted while a very real danger to children is being ignored.
  4. None of this distinguishes modern business enterprises. They are either evil or incompetent. This isn’t a few errors. There are multiple infractions involving multiple laws. Given their incredibly weak defense, these businesses are criminal and thus evil.  But, to be fair, let’s consider incompetence. They are unable to vet potential employees to see if they meet the minimum age requirement for a dangerous job. This happens a lot so they aren’t just bad at it, they are so bad that they are unable to follow the law. If this is the case, and this is what these businesses would have the public believe, then why should the public believe they are capable of following the health standard requirements for slaughtering animals or employee safety laws.  So while incompetent may absolve them of criminality, it isn’t particularly reassuring about their business practices. It would certainly make me a little suspicious. It also opens us up to a third option that they could be both evil and incompetent. The most frightening and dangerous combination of all.

By on

When hearing stories about swindlers and marks, Americans have a peculiar tendency to be angry at the mark instead of the swindler. The mark is almost as guilty as the swindler for being so gullible. If there weren’t so many dumb marks, swindlers would all be out of business.

This odd belief has created a rather interesting way of looking at business transactions. The basic assumption in business is that the other guy is somehow trying to screw you and you need to be extremely vigilant in order to avoid being taken. People expect salesman to overpromise, overcharge, and avoid talking about problems with the product. Since swindling is a part of the salesperson job description, people aren’t much bothered when they learn that the salesperson they are dealing with is a swindler.

Swindling is part of the American DNA. Swindlers began arriving on these shores pretty much the start. I remember Sister Mira telling the story of the Dutch buying Manhattan from the Indians. It amused her to no end how stupid the Indians were when they sold the island for $24. How could they sell such prime real estate for such a low price? Couldn’t they see that New York would soon become one of the most important cities in the world? The Dutch, on the other hand, were smart businesspeople. Doing what businesspeople do screwing over people to get a better price. The Dutch were smart, the Indians weren’t. There was no shame in underpaying the Indians.

Of course, Manhattan was not the great city it became when the Dutch settled, so the $24 might have been a fair price at the time. That, however, isn’t the story the Sister Mira was telling. She was telling a story about how the Dutch outsmarted the Indians and it was perfectly acceptable business practices to do so. Yes, children, at a Catholic school no less, learning that it is perfectly all right to screw people over in a business transaction. Being fair is not a part of capitalism. If the Indians wanted a fair price it was their responsibility to bone up on Manhattan land values and not for the Dutch to offer a fair price. Deception is just a part of business.

When I moved to California, I learned that my car would not meet California pollution standards. It was an older car. I decided it would be easier to buy a new one in California and sell my old car in Kansas rather than driving an old car half way across the country and upgrading. Since I never sold a car before, I asked for advice from a guy who I knew had experience in buying and selling car. He immediately offered to buy my car, giving me the impression, that, oh shucks, I know you are in hurry to leave, I don’t need the damn thing but let me just take this off your hands so you can leave without worrying about selling your car. I took him up on the deal. Once the title and the check changed hands, he couldn’t wait to tell me how he just screwed me over. The car was worth at least a thousand dollars more than he paid.

I should have known, right? Absolutely I should have known that was why I asked him in the first place. I wasn’t trying to sell him the car, I was trying to learn how. Instead of telling me how, he, knowing I didn’t know what I was doing, offered to buy the car. Then, after the sale, he gives me the lesson that I wanted in the first place. He took advantage of me and felt absolutely no guilt about it. To add salt to the wound, nobody felt the least bit sorry for me. I should have known better.

These stories litter the American Business history. Antique dealers going to garage sales and finding a treasure. They buy the treasure for a song and then earn a fortune on the resell. The antique dealer is admired for his business savvy while the seller is a chump. If the seller doesn’t know what he has that is his own damn fault. The seller got the price he was asking for. There are no moral qualms about it that is just the way Capitalism operates.

Getting a fair price is different from getting a good price. One is laying all your cards on the table and the other is just deceiving someone. Shamelessly deceiving at that. This is particularly annoying when many pro-Capitalist apologists try to argue that Capitalism is the only moral system. I am uncertain what lesson Sister Mira was trying to impart to her class. What I learned, though, was that you don’t have to be fair when working in business. Do whatever you need to do to get the deal done. Be the swindler and not the mark. How this jibes with making me a good Catholic, which I mistakenly believed was Sister Mira’s primary responsibility, is beyond me.

By on

I love this guy.

His boss hassled him whenever his company’s Instant Messaging software told the boss how long he has been gone. You know what I mean. Every employer uses some form of instant messaging software that always narcs you out — think Microsoft Lync that tells people how long you have been gone with the green light/yellow light red light gizmo. This tool fights the boss who needlessly monitors your work time when they are happy as a clam with you work otherwise. This guy’s device moves your cursor while you are away from your desk which tricks Microsoft Lync into thinking you are at your PC. Green light instead of yellow light or red light — if you know what I mean. And image what your boss will think with all of those nine and ten hour days. And, really, who gets harmed in the deal.

Here is the link. https://slate.com/technology/2021/12/mouse-movers-market-corporate-productivity-tracking.html

By on

The resignation of Jon Gruden has raised a lot of hackles with conservative columnists. It was a little shitty how his emails came to light, but when you make enemies, as Gruden has, you should expect these enemies to use any weapon they can find against you. The bottom line is that Gruden sent prejudice-laden emails. If he had paid any attention to the HR videos that every other employee in the civilized world is subjected to, he would have refrained from sending them in the first place. After years of incessant lectures regarding appropriate e-mail procedures, everyone should know that once you press send your email is both stored forever and can be sent absolutely anywhere. So, this incredibly responsible and privileged man ignored the rules of corporate e-mail etiquette and got caught. He now paid a high price for doing so.  

This is why HR departments worldwide conduct classes to instruct employees what is appropriate behavior to avoid such embarrassing situations.  HR, also, reminds us that if that e-mail is sent on a company server and/or with a company email address, your company has the right to read your emails.  If your emails are deemed inappropriate, you could be disciplined up to and including termination. I find it difficult to believe that someone at Gruden’s level didn’t know that words like “faggot” and “pussy” are offensive words. Everyone knows that e-mails are not private that is why HR instructs employees to be careful when sending them.

More importantly, Gruden is using blatantly homophobic, sexist and racist words while communicating with other top executives associated with football. He says he doesn’t have a racist bone in his body. Maybe Gruden reasons that he was only talking about the size of DeMaurice Smith’s lips. He could be talking about any person of any race who happened to have big lips. Right. Context is everything here. He was describing a black man using one of the most frequently used stereotypical descriptions of Black people.   

Even if we could give him some wiggle room for his big lips comment, what was his intention for “faggot.” Any person living in 21st century America knows that the word “faggot” is an offensive term. There is absolutely no debate about “faggot” which undermines his argument about not having a racist bone in his body. He seems pretty comfortable using homophobic language when describing gays, then it also seems likely that he is just as familiar with the racial epithets.

Some argue that OK he may have used colorful language but this was a private email. He never intended for anyone other than Bruce Allen to read it.  This is a troubling argument because Gruden manages blacks, women and gays.  How can a person be a private racist and a public non-racist? Is that even possible? It is not something you can turn on and turn off whenever you move from public to private. If, as a work colleague, you have Gruden’s homophobic statements, how confident could you be that Gruden treats his gay employees fairly. At the bare minimum, it should make you suspicious.

You would think that someone would have reminded Gruden about his phrasing. From what I can determine, absolutely nobody said a word to him about his choice of words. None of these men owed their jobs to Gruden, they could speak freely without fear of losing their jobs.  Yet, they said nothing. Indeed, they carried on with their conversation as if this is the way they talk every day.  Conversations filled with racist, sexist and homophobic innuendo.

And, to their argument that Gruden doesn’t have a racist bone in his body.  These men probably believe it. They don’t see any harm in talking like this with other white men. They have a very narrow definition of racist. To them, a person has to be a member of the KKK or the Nazi party before a person can be considered a racist.  Every other White is basically OK.  Their casual racists remarks are forgiven.  He was just being funny. He doesn’t really mean it. He would never do anything to physically harm someone. The KKK is a racist but a white man noticing that a black man has big lips – that isn’t racist, it is observation.

So much for all these HR trainings having any effect on the workforce. Clearly Gruden and Allen need to attend another course.