Occupy Australia - International Day of Protest - October 15th 2011 - Melb, Syd, Bris

[sir pacman]

And one more thing busty the average ceo of a company makes 60 times what the average worker makes. Often wondered how one person can be equivalent of 60. We all have the same amount of hours in a week. So unless making that sort of money gets you a time free device then to me thats wrong.

 

[Busty St Clare]

Well you obviously have never had to use the services of legal aid when in front of the judge.

21 yo man on minimum wage cant afford to hire a lawyer so is reliant on legal aid.

21 yo man with rich parents can afford to hire a decent lawyer.

The courts favour the rich because they can afford to use the legal system where as the average person in the street cannot.

But your average copper is paid close to minimum wage. What's your point? On one hand you are saying all workers should be paid the same hourly rate yet on the other you are complaining that you can't afford a better (more expensive) lawyer. People are paid what they are worth otherwise you would have to pay too much for a shit lawyer not the other way round.

Your average CEO isn't paid for the hours he works in a day but the hours he has worked his entire life. In other words you pay for his experience and expertise. Don't forget that the owner also carries the risk. Does the average worker pay the interest on the bank loans? Do they take on the risk of setting up the business. What is stopping Joe Average from starting up a competing business?

 

[sir pacman]

My basic argument is that they better the legal defense you can afford the more chance of a better outcome in our legal system. Therefore those that have more money have better outcomes in our legal system.

Don't get me started about police in the legal system. They are part of the system so why choose them as an example ?

I am not saying all workers should be paid the same amount. What I am saying is that what some people at he higher end of companies and organizations are paid way too much. I am not having a go at business owners but managers ceo's etc of public listed companies. I appreciate that people at the higher end of businesses and organizations should be paid more than those at the bottom so to speak because they have much more responsibility and experience. However I still cant believe that somebody should be paid 60 times more than someone else. That figure to me is just way to high.

How can managers of companies accept bonuses for performance when the company loses money?

 

[Busty St Clare]

Most listed companies are smart enough to include bonuses that are actually shares in the company. If the share price raises so does their salary. CEO don't generally set their own salary, shareholders vote to increase their pay. Do you think shareholders accept losses easily? Alot of these salaries are simply paper money, they don't exist until they sell their shares, if the company goes bust their salary disappears. How would you like to work for 5 years and have nothing to show? That is part of the high risk high reward gamble that workers do not have to face.

A good CEO's salary is set by the market not some ceo monopoly. Shareholders will pay top dollar for one who will increase their companies value. If you are responsible for generating an extra $100 million then surely you should be paid a proportion of this.

 

[L2R]

IF a ceo increases the value of a company without compromising its goods or services, then by all means bonus them up. there have been far too many recent examples of bonuses being paid out after significant losses and/or mass layoffs.

That's not even considering the hell one needs to go through to get a (pittance of a) bonus at lower levels. Nor does it consider the impact on the economy when major financial incentives are focused on the minority who do not need it, and therefore delays that money continuing in circulation. Economic stimulation comes from the bottom, where anything given is immediately recirculated.

Busty, i think you have a naive understanding on how much an executive is actually worth, and what their positions in society actually means. The individualism which the current system runs on is to the detriment to the whole system. That is capitalism.

 

[Busty St Clare]

I own enough shares to know exactly how capitalism works. It is a fine line balancing profits vs costs vs ensuring your product is desirable but it will always come back to the price of the company's shares. If shaving a $4million CEO was going to be in the best interest of the owners (shareholders), believe me they would. The fact is CEO's are paid to make difficult decisions not friends and at the end of the day they live and die by their worth. Plenty of highly paid CEO's fail and leave with nothing. The difference is they don't have a union rep whinging for them and decide to sleep in a tent out the front of small businesses in the CBD.

Bonuses at the lower level are only a reflection of their worth. It is easier to replace a cog than a driver of a machine. If being a company CEO was an easy job why don't you offer to do the same for $1million? I'm sure shareholders would jump at the chance of a bargain basement solution to cut dead wood.

 

[L2R]

nice sell, but no i'm not buying it.

what the hell do stupid shareholders know of anything? how are their opinions worth a damn when it comes to the consequences of the decisions which led to that fraction of an increase they fantasise about while jerking off. Whoopty fricken do, you made some money you DIDN'T EARN. congratulations, i hope you feel that your contribution to society is enough with your existence alone.

there's more to life than money, busty. people's worth are measured by more than just the bottom line of one *scoff* company. oh they make tough decisions? cry me a fkn river, NO DECISION is worth a $5 mil pay. Especially when the actual people who toil as a result of that decision get fuck all.

Owning shares doesn't mean you know capitalism, Busty. To the contrary, if you had any idea about capitalism, you would STEER CLEAR of shares. That is also of course granting that you have any moral or ethical sense also, and i'm assuming you do.

bonuses at the bottom, just as at the top, are NOT a reflection of any worth. they reflect power and politics alone.

 

[L2R]

reposted from ce&p social and facebook

 

[Busty St Clare]

If your decision directly causes your company to earn an extra 300 million in one year, how much is it worth? $20.50/hr?

Of course there is more than money in life. Shareholders did nothing but take the risk to invest in the company. Without this investment the business will not exist and jobs are nil. If you don't agree with the model of private enterprise and the market forces that exist there is nothing stopping you getting a cushy job in the public sector. Oh that's right only lack of capital and the need for government subsides.

 

[L2R]

i work for the public sector union, bro. i'm doing my part.

If your decision directly causes your company to earn an extra 300 million in one year, how much is it worth? $20.50/hr?

somewhere between that and $5mil.

the lemmings upon whose backs that profit was actually made deserve more for their toil. do you think front line work is fun or easy, when they time your toilet breaks to the second? shit's hard, mang.

 

[L2R]

lol qantas drama today has been hilarious.

qantas made a half bil in profits this year, yet this fuckin sook of a ceo is willing to burn his customers, as well as his staff and the australian economy just to justify his $5mil pay.

 

[sir pacman]

Another example:

Today's revelations about million-dollar pay rises for chief executives show the Government's pathetic legislation is doing little to redress the imbalance between the big end of town and everyday Australians, Greens Leader Bob Brown said today.

"The Government should have heeded the suggestion from the Australian Greens that chief executives' salaries be limited to 30 times the average pay within their corporation," Senator Brown said in Hobart.

"Our amendment would have been a good incentive to the CEO to improve the salary conditions of the workers, and it might have helped to winnow out those whose modus operandi is self-interest and retain those who are fair-minded human beings," Senator Brown said.

"The CEOs of Australia's top 50 companies - only including those adhering to a level of transparency that requires disclosure of pay - will enjoy an average 11.8% increase in their take home pay, analysis in today's AFR shows."

"So while the bosses get another $1 million a year, not including long-term share bonuses, the worker on the minimum wage gets an extra $19.40 a week, or 3.4%."

Source:
http://bob-brown.greensmps.org.au/content/media-release/big-end-town-untrammelled-government

 

[malakaix]

lol qantas drama today has been hilarious.

qantas made a half bil in profits this year, yet this fuckin sook of a ceo is willing to burn his customers, as well as his staff and the australian economy just to justify his $5mil pay.

Yeah its pretty unbelievable.

 

[sir pacman]

and that qantas shit is not right

 

[Busty St Clare]

I haven't flown QANTAS for years partly because I don't have any emotional nationalistic attachment to them but mostly because they only employ old boilers for air hostesses. Sir Richard knows how to move on his staff once they cant squeeze into a size 10.

 

[L2R]

 

[L2R]

see yaz tomorrow

 

[L2R]

occupy sydney part 2 today

very heavy police presence. there'll be trouble tonight. people will be hurt

 

[NickyJ]

I'm a member of the NTEU. Pointless story.

 

[L2R]

sooooolidarity for leaaaaaaather