Corporatists BTFO
Corporatism is the biggest threat to humanity.
>>55251740
which company was that?
>fire blue colars to increase profit
WHAT A MONSTER!
>fire white colars to increase profit
Look at white this awesome 24y/o CEO just did, it's awesome!
>>55251962
look at what*
>>55251740
> Fired 2/3 of the leeches to whom the previous CEO owed a favor and surprisingly made profit.
>>55251740
>turnover
What's their gross revenue / net profit? Also a $9 million dollar company is tiny if we're talking market capitalization.
Seems like the kind of false shit uneducated liberals would eat up.
>>55251962
Yes?
It is not strange that most people have sympathy with the worker and labourer over the CEO.
Yes! OP has found what we must do. Trust a sourcelsss occupy wallstreet-esque meme image
>>55251740
This picture is fucking bullshit and the sad thing is most people would believe it if they saw it on facebook.
>a CEO
>a company
>>55251740
What does this have to do with corporatists?
>>55251740
He didn't do it out of the kindness of his heart. He did it because increasing the horizontal hierarchy in an organization is an effective means of cutting costs and saving money. In most cases, a manager can watch over a team of 20 just as well as he can a team of 10, so there's no reason to have so much middle management.
He didn't give the power to his employees. He let them think they had more power and profited off it.
>Facebook memepics are unequivocal truth.
These threads should result in an auto-ban.
>>55252419
Wait until all the grunts get pissed off due to the lack of advancement opportunities. "Hey, buddy, here's your annual 2% merit increase. You're going to spend 30 years with the company, right?"
>>55251740
>Turnover of $200 million
>Turnover
>Not "net income"
>Not even "profit"
>Turnover
>>55252487
>You're going to spend 30 years with the company, right?
He'll be outsourced, downsized and laid off long before 30 years in any company.
Now I see why people run off and get government jobs. The pay isn't as good but it has 100% job security.
>>55251740
Question
what is turnover?
I know profit and revanue n that shit but not turnover
is it profit+expenses+rev or something?
>>55252235
>firing the delivery room guy
>bad
>firing the clerk receiving the deliveries
>good
It still does not make sense.
>>55253180
I work in the government. I can confirm that this is definitely my main reason for going there (though I make about half of what I would in the private sector).
It's also something of a curse, though. About 90% of the people I work with are incompetent jackasses who wait for the management to do the work for them. I've been told by my director that competency isn't a legitimate grounds for firing people; only misanthropy to the public/other workers will do. It's kind of interesting, as the Directors have to engineer situations baiting employees they don't like into saying racist shit. Trolling is a skill in government.
>>55253479
>the Directors have to engineer situations baiting employees they don't like into saying racist shit
It almost sounds like mock trials and purges, tbqh family
>>55251740
How did he "give the power to the employees"? Didn't he just amalgamate managerial duties to a smaller group? Maybe the company is more profitable, there is such thing as too many managers, but surely the wider duties for less managers means a pay raise
>>55253479
How do i get gov job? that sounds liek so much fun
"a company"?
"a CEO"?
how about some real facts from the real wor- oh wait this was written by a leftist scumbag.
>>55253604
>but surely the wider duties for less managers means a pay raise
Costs less to pay a few more then a lot a salary.
>>55251784
even if they had it listed you still wouldnt see be able to prove anything
also deals and work take years to solidify, the white collars made all the connections and got this shit work in before they were fired, so when you fire all white collars, fire 2/3rds of anything and not release the financials its hard to take comments like this seriously
>>55253649
Yes, a company, Snake. Companies provide either a service or a product, now get back to your mission.
And that young CEO's name? Albert Einstein.
>>55251784
http://edition.cnn.com/2004/BUSINESS/06/29/semler.profile/
Seems this guy.
>>55253299
In accounting, turnover is a time measure for how quickly inventory moves or Accounts Recieveable is collected.
I have no clue what they are referring to. My best guess would ve either Gross or Net Profit. They are plebs who can't into Investopedia regardless.
If you are going to debate something or prove a point show your sources. Which company for example.
I am sad to see how quickly people fall for bullshit.
>>5525385
If it's a measure of time then why is it measured in money?
does that mean it could cost them 40 dollars to deliver/ship product and they make 40.05 dollars, so even though the turnover is 40.05 they only got 5 cent in profit?
>>55253653
Exactly, which is why a good corporation puts as much duty as can be handled effectively by a manager.
>>55251740
Turnover? God I love accounting and being able to read through this bullshit.
Turnover is how long your inventory sits before getting sold. Its not measured in money. Wtf are they referring to?
>>55253642
It's actually quite irritating, but since you asked:
1. Be a minority
2. Be a veteran
3. Know somebody
4. If all else fails, be skilled way beyond what the position calls for and willing to take a massive pay cut.
>>55253940
Turnover should be unitless. Turnover= (Cost of Goods Sold)/(Average inventory level for the period), which is $/$ which results in no units. A high number suggests inventory sticks around a while, but is a poor measure when sales are infrequent.
Again, they measure it in dollars because they probably are thinking "turnover" means profit or sales.
>>55253805
Einstein was a democratic socialist.
>>55252419
This. They're all going to get antsy eventually when they realise they have more responsibility with less room for advancement in the company.
>>55253858
>I have no clue what they are referring to
Don't worry, they don't know either
>Fire 2/3 of managers
Honestly this reminds me of the chapter in Economic Facts and Fallacy's, where he goes over the failures of communism during the Lenin era and one of the things he talks about was like Ops pic. They fired most of the administration/managers after the government seized control over most large companies believing that anyone could do their job and they were overpaid compared to the average worker. After a few years of productivity plummeting, Lenin was forced to reconsider this policy. Turns out you need talented individuals at the top with skills and connections in order to help run a successful company, something that the average worker usually lacked. There was a reason why they were paid more for their job.
That's not to say that some companies are too administrative heavy with a bloated middle management, but the reality of Op's pic is probably far from the liberal utopia it was trying to paint. Management is a pretty vague term and can mean many different jobs depending on the company. Also the whole "put power back in hands of employees" just seems like a nice way of saying gave them more work to do for same pay.
>>55251740
I heard of a socialist guy in england on the XIX century who gave his factory to his employees and it failed deplorably.
