"Larry Kraus" wrote:
> http://fw.to/yFOyBTc
------------------------------------------------
Brings to mind Lincoln Electric.
Check out a book by James Lincoln, "Incentive Management".
It's thin.<G>
Lincoln's Christmas bonuses were famous.
Actual amounts were never made public; however, a bonus equal to
your straight time annual earnings have often been reported.
Lew
"Lew Hodgett" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> "Larry Kraus" wrote:
>
>> http://fw.to/yFOyBTc
> ------------------------------------------------
> Brings to mind Lincoln Electric.
>
> Check out a book by James Lincoln, "Incentive Management".
>
> It's thin.<G>
>
> Lincoln's Christmas bonuses were famous.
>
> Actual amounts were never made public; however, a bonus equal to
> your straight time annual earnings have often been reported.
How many times have overpaid executives been paid huge bonuses for watching
the company they were supposed to be responsible for, fall into or come
close to bankruptcy. If they are really making the company grow and
providing jobs then they may be worth what they earn, but if they are just
bleeding ideas and concepts from underlings they they should be booted out
with no golden parachute and let knowledgeable people take over.
On 11/24/2013 05:23 PM, Larry Blanchard wrote:
> On Sun, 24 Nov 2013 17:25:52 -0500, Keith Nuttle wrote:
>
>> The janitor with the financial responsibility for the $50 of materials
>> he uses is paid one thing and the person who is responsible for the
>> company with 10 billion in sales is paid something else
>
> In your world, is compensation based on performance? Sure doesn't seem
> to be at most corporations.
>
Certainly doesn't seem so in DC - lots of overpaid people, especially
the CIC.
--
"Socialism is a philosophy of failure,the creed of ignorance, and the
gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery"
-Winston Churchill
On 11/24/2013 06:18 PM, Keith Nuttle wrote:
> On 11/24/2013 7:29 PM, Doug Winterburn wrote:
>> On 11/24/2013 05:23 PM, Larry Blanchard wrote:
>>> On Sun, 24 Nov 2013 17:25:52 -0500, Keith Nuttle wrote:
>>>
>>>> The janitor with the financial responsibility for the $50 of materials
>>>> he uses is paid one thing and the person who is responsible for the
>>>> company with 10 billion in sales is paid something else
>>>
>>> In your world, is compensation based on performance? Sure doesn't seem
>>> to be at most corporations.
>>>
>> Certainly doesn't seem so in DC - lots of overpaid people, especially
>> the CIC.
>>
>>
> What I said about compensation and job classification does not seem to
> apply to Washington DC, where there some of the highest paid failures
> around. On the other hand may be the classification is based on if they
> are sitting at their desk.
Especially when asked about anything in their sphere of responsibility,
they claim they didn't know anything!
--
"Socialism is a philosophy of failure,the creed of ignorance, and the
gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery"
-Winston Churchill
On Mon, 25 Nov 2013 00:23:52 +0000 (UTC), Larry Blanchard
<[email protected]> wrote:
>On Sun, 24 Nov 2013 17:25:52 -0500, Keith Nuttle wrote:
>
>> The janitor with the financial responsibility for the $50 of materials
>> he uses is paid one thing and the person who is responsible for the
>> company with 10 billion in sales is paid something else
>
>In your world, is compensation based on performance? Sure doesn't seem
>to be at most corporations.
It does in every corporation I've worked for. Perhaps you don't agree
with their measurements but that isn't their problem.
Ed Pawlowski wrote:
> On 11/24/2013 10:26 AM, Larry Kraus wrote:
>> http://fw.to/yFOyBTc
>>
>
> Good for them! Makes me proud to be a customer. The ratio has gotten
> out of hand in large corporations.
>
> OTOH, we despise high paid executives and worship overpaid movie stars
> and athletes.
Nah, I also despise overpaid athletes and movie stars. Well except athletes
who earn their money, like golfers, if they don't perform they starve.
--
PV
"And the Doctor piglet went squealing all the way home"
On 11/24/2013 7:23 PM, Larry Blanchard wrote:
> On Sun, 24 Nov 2013 17:25:52 -0500, Keith Nuttle wrote:
>
>> The janitor with the financial responsibility for the $50 of materials
>> he uses is paid one thing and the person who is responsible for the
>> company with 10 billion in sales is paid something else
>
> In your world, is compensation based on performance? Sure doesn't seem
> to be at most corporations.
>
In most companies managers and execs make boneheaded maneuvers that in
many (not all) cases is just to boost their apparent rating of look what
I did. But in reality it usually the same old shit. many just reinvent
the wheel or change direction to a direction already tried b4.
Where I am working now, there is an idiot in charge of storage. We need
to get off our servers as they are no longer supported really old, have
many issues. The O/S is not supported, other items are not supported.
We are having issues. We can not get storage for our new servers because
the idiot in charge is trying to cut costs, so in order to get more
storage we must return 110% of our ask.. So for a server that is
suffering from lack of storage already we can not get less than we
currently have, we need more, we've been suffering, and we can not get
new storage on the existing servers because of the status of the
existing hardware. So this idiot looks good to his peers at his level,
but is killing everyone trying to deal with this below him. No one will
speak against him for fear of being let go before the bonuses are handed
out... or ever for the same reason. This same problem is repeating among
many different organization
The Dilbert principle at work.
I could tell you about our CEO, but I'll leave that for another time.
--
Jeff
On 11/24/2013 5:08 PM, Mike Marlow wrote:
> Ed Pawlowski wrote:
>> On 11/24/2013 10:26 AM, Larry Kraus wrote:
>>> http://fw.to/yFOyBTc
>>>
>>
>> Good for them! Makes me proud to be a customer. The ratio has gotten
>> out of hand in large corporations.
>>
>> OTOH, we despise high paid executives and worship overpaid movie stars
>> and athletes.
>
> No kidding! How many guys here sit and watch football on the weekends, or
> Monday night? How many of them (us), then participate in the thoughts about
> overpaid executives? But sports figures seems exempt from that complaining.
> Movie stars - if you're on the left, they are demi-gods. Guess that
> entitles them to priveledges...
>
Me, I watch on Sunday... and some Mon, Thurs... Kind of hurts getting
into the shop. Sometimes I watch in the shop.
--
Jeff
On Sun, 24 Nov 2013 17:25:52 -0500, Keith Nuttle
<[email protected]> wrote:
>On 11/24/2013 2:27 PM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
>>
>> OTOH, we despise high paid executives and worship overpaid movie stars
>> and athletes.
>+ fixed ratio between the highest pay grade and the lowest. In a
>small company that ratio may be right at 5:1, In a medium size company
>of 400 to a 1000 employees that ration may be 10:1. But should the
>president of a company of 10000 or more employees and a sales of 10 to
>100 times that the company with 400 to 1000 employees make the same money.
"But it's not "fair"!"
>It all comes down to financial responsibility the more money you are
>responsible for the more money you make.
Or the specialized skills you have (which amount to the same thing).
>The janitor with the financial responsibility for the $50 of materials
>he uses is paid one thing and the person who is responsible for the
>company with 10 billion in sales is paid something else
Unless you're a stockholder, what does it matter what the CEO of
MegaCorp makes? If you are, you get the same vote as the next share.
Unless you're a stockholder of &NFL_Team, what difference does the
contract price of the quarterback make? It's *not* coming out of your
hide.
Ed Pawlowski wrote:
> On 11/24/2013 10:26 AM, Larry Kraus wrote:
>> http://fw.to/yFOyBTc
>>
>
> Good for them! Makes me proud to be a customer. The ratio has gotten
> out of hand in large corporations.
>
> OTOH, we despise high paid executives and worship overpaid movie stars
> and athletes.
No kidding! How many guys here sit and watch football on the weekends, or
Monday night? How many of them (us), then participate in the thoughts about
overpaid executives? But sports figures seems exempt from that complaining.
Movie stars - if you're on the left, they are demi-gods. Guess that
entitles them to priveledges...
--
-Mike-
[email protected]
On 11/24/2013 2:27 PM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
>
> OTOH, we despise high paid executives and worship overpaid movie stars
> and athletes.
+ fixed ratio between the highest pay grade and the lowest. In a
small company that ratio may be right at 5:1, In a medium size company
of 400 to a 1000 employees that ration may be 10:1. But should the
president of a company of 10000 or more employees and a sales of 10 to
100 times that the company with 400 to 1000 employees make the same money.
It all comes down to financial responsibility the more money you are
responsible for the more money you make.
The janitor with the financial responsibility for the $50 of materials
he uses is paid one thing and the person who is responsible for the
company with 10 billion in sales is paid something else
On Sun, 24 Nov 2013 17:25:52 -0500, Keith Nuttle wrote:
> The janitor with the financial responsibility for the $50 of materials
> he uses is paid one thing and the person who is responsible for the
> company with 10 billion in sales is paid something else
In your world, is compensation based on performance? Sure doesn't seem
to be at most corporations.
--
This message was for rec.woodworking - if it appears in homeownershub
they ripped it off.
--
This message was for rec.woodworking - if it appears in homeownershub
they ripped it off.
On 11/24/2013 7:23 PM, Larry Blanchard wrote:
> On Sun, 24 Nov 2013 17:25:52 -0500, Keith Nuttle wrote:
>
>> The janitor with the financial responsibility for the $50 of materials
>> he uses is paid one thing and the person who is responsible for the
>> company with 10 billion in sales is paid something else
>
> In your world, is compensation based on performance? Sure doesn't seem
> to be at most corporations.
>
Performance and pay grade are not related. (Performance affects pay
within a grade or classification) You can be a poor performer in a
Janitor job, the same way you can be a poor performer in a 10million
dollar job. Regardless of what the company does, the question is did
you meet the goals of your job classification.
On 11/24/2013 7:29 PM, Doug Winterburn wrote:
> On 11/24/2013 05:23 PM, Larry Blanchard wrote:
>> On Sun, 24 Nov 2013 17:25:52 -0500, Keith Nuttle wrote:
>>
>>> The janitor with the financial responsibility for the $50 of materials
>>> he uses is paid one thing and the person who is responsible for the
>>> company with 10 billion in sales is paid something else
>>
>> In your world, is compensation based on performance? Sure doesn't seem
>> to be at most corporations.
>>
> Certainly doesn't seem so in DC - lots of overpaid people, especially
> the CIC.
>
>
What I said about compensation and job classification does not seem to
apply to Washington DC, where there some of the highest paid failures
around. On the other hand may be the classification is based on if they
are sitting at their desk.
On 11/24/2013 5:25 PM, Keith Nuttle wrote:
> On 11/24/2013 2:27 PM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
>>
>> OTOH, we despise high paid executives and worship overpaid movie stars
>> and athletes.
> + fixed ratio between the highest pay grade and the lowest. In
> a small company that ratio may be right at 5:1, In a medium size company
> of 400 to a 1000 employees that ration may be 10:1. But should the
> president of a company of 10000 or more employees and a sales of 10 to
> 100 times that the company with 400 to 1000 employees make the same money.
>
> It all comes down to financial responsibility the more money you are
> responsible for the more money you make.
>
> The janitor with the financial responsibility for the $50 of materials
> he uses is paid one thing and the person who is responsible for the
> company with 10 billion in sales is paid something else
For the most part, I agree. But even in the largest company, there is a
limit to the real value of the CEO as opposed to the value of the people
that make his company a success. Most important, are ALL employees
getting a wage that is fair with the job they are doing? Does the wage
match the skills?
Even the CEO needs his wastebasket emptied and bathroom cleaned and he
needs the guys running the machines in the factory. Before you take a
big bonus, be sure they are getting a fair wage. Federal minimum of
$7.50 is not a fair wage for anyone.
BTW, if you offer me $10 million a year to play right field, I'll accept
no matter how bad I'd play.
On Sun, 24 Nov 2013 14:27:22 -0500, Ed Pawlowski <[email protected]> wrote:
>On 11/24/2013 10:26 AM, Larry Kraus wrote:
>> http://fw.to/yFOyBTc
>>
>
>Good for them! Makes me proud to be a customer. The ratio has gotten
>out of hand in large corporations.
What the executives, or employees, of a company I have no financial
stake in make, is none of my concern. I don't care what my neighbor
makes or how many toys he has, either.
>OTOH, we despise high paid executives and worship overpaid movie stars
>and athletes.
Maybe you do. I think it's rather funny how much energy people put
into worrying about what others make, or have. If they put half that
much energy into bettering themselves and worrying about their
families, they would be far better off. I can't control their lives,
so just giggle at them.
When I see someone with a beautiful house on a lake, I think "go for
it!", not "why don't I have that?". I *know* why I don't have that.