Onkel Buck: bdub77: And so the rounds of layoffs at big corporations begin again.Well someone should punish them! Didnt we vote for someone who said he would do just that?
misanthropologist: Hokey pokey, it's like Occupy Fark in here!
ikanreed: AngryDragon: Another corporation reporting record profit, revenue, and EPS laying off workers.All hail the job creators.Please retire that same old rhetoric. We all know the Job Creators don't perform layoffs, that's delegated to the evil middle classes, they only hire new employees. Esepcially when their profit post-tax is higher.
bdub77: And so the rounds of layoffs at big corporations begin again.
MeSoHomely: blatz514: I thought this was a best-looking reporter thread?[img.gawkerassets.com image 300x313]Thank you. I was afraid that, with all the financial debate, no one would take the time to post photos of aesthetically-pleasing on-air personalities that we should all then band together to support and stress that their jobs should be saved.Carry on, if you please...
FrancoFile: Nana's Vibrator: MyRandomName: Gonz: misanthropologist: Hokey pokey, it's like Occupy Fark in here!Let's see: The Dow's at 14,900. A company with over $42,000,000,000 in revenues last year and a current market cap of $114,936,085,637 is claiming it needs to quit employing as many people in order to stay competitive.Yeah, I think we're OK to call "bullshiat" when we see it.Companies hire based on their needs, not profit. Just because a third party has money doesn't mean he owes you employment.Kind of a broad statement. It's somewhat defendable if they lay off 175 people and don't ask the current employees to increase their own workload beyond their means. After that, what you say is the first step into a big pickle. If companies are at all time profit highs yet trim their rosters to the tune of 10%+ unemployment, what government wouldn't step in and address the needs of their citizens and tap the offending resource?/Don't answer that last questionWell that's the philosophical question. The preamble to the US Constitution says that is was enacted to secure the general welfare. To what extent is any one person's specific welfare part of the general welfare?/and you gave yourself away by saying "offending" resource. Why are you castigating someone for being competent and efficient?
Cubicle Jockey: DubtodaIll: 175 employees? That doesn't sound like a lot for a company like Disney. Trim the worst 10%, it's a good policy for a large company.And what would happen if every company did the same thing simultanteously? No company is an island.
jakomo002: js34603: Damn companies always firing people. Once you get hired you are entitled to stay forever because your company makes money. They should never be able to fire you.No but there's a lot between Right To Work and socialist-leaning economies like in Europe.It's hard to fire somebody in France and yet they have better employment numbers than the US and a strong middle class, comparatively. Better healthcare too.Not black and white
Gonz: misanthropologist: Hokey pokey, it's like Occupy Fark in here!Let's see: The Dow's at 14,900. A company with over $42,000,000,000 in revenues last year and a current market cap of $114,936,085,637 is claiming it needs to quit employing as many people in order to stay competitive.Yeah, I think we're OK to call "bullshiat" when we see it.
bdub77: But I'm sure it's good for the yacht industry. I'm sure whatever CEO has the foresight and money to start a yacht company will come out gangbusters.
jakomo002: Wangiss: They've sustained growth using this model for decades. Are you just dogmatically attached to this idea? How long does Disney have to continue growth doing exactly what you say is unsustainable for you to change your mind? 100 years? Or in year 101, if they finally stop growing, will that be the treasured proof of your philosophy?They've "restructured" countless times precisely to increase bottomline profit.We live in a actual world with natural laws. Unlimited growth is unsustainable. The economic models can disagree, but it'll be their downfall. I mean, MORE MORE MORE is hardly a realistic longterm model for survival of anything anywhere EVER.
Nana's Vibrator: jakomo002: It's about short-term growth and profit. Quarter over quarter results.Workers are the cogs but shareholders are the bosses. If the company doesn't hit their magic number for the quarter, then they just get rid of cogs to increase profit. Some accountant says, "We fell short on our predictions so we need to reduce costs. Fire people and we'll worry about it next quarter."The funny thing here is I used to work for a company that had a specifically written mission that essentially ranked their priorities: 1. Customers 2. Employees 3. ShareholdersThen they thought it was a good idea to audit themselves on this , then they were shocked when they were hammered by their emplyees. It's always the shareholders first. There's likely not a fortune 500 company in the world that wouldn't lay off employees or raise customer prices before going in front of shareholders to tell them their profits were compromised on behalf of customers or employees. I'd be interested in hearing abnout it if I were wrong, though.
blatz514: I thought this was a best-looking reporter thread?
Two16: [www.stencilrevolution.com image 560x373]
RockofAges: misanthropologist: Hokey pokey, it's like Occupy Fark in here!"Job creators" is a joke. Demand creates jobs. Not arbitrary or artificial supply.Please do tell us more about what is wrong about what the farkistanis are saying ITT.
Onkel Buck: AngryDragon: Onkel Buck: bdub77: And so the rounds of layoffs at big corporations begin again.Well someone should punish them! Didnt we vote for someone who said he would do just that?[cache.ohinternet.com image 562x437]C'mon now, the poor and the enabled believed it wholeheartedly.
AngryDragon: theMightyRegeya: bdub77: They don't have to listen to you, because they have f*ck you money and you don't.Yeah, I think I'll cancel those plans to go to Disney World now, then, and the plans to get Disney Halloween costumes, or to buy their movies. They don't need me.This really is the right answer. The only thing the masses have left to vote with is their wallets. Stop buying the crap and using the services of the companies screwing you over. It may not feel like much, but if enough of us do it, they WILL feel it.
skinink: Can't understand why I keep seeing reports that the economy is gradually improving, while at the same time I see so many stories about companies laying off. My company just laid off someone who had been with the company for over 17 years. Great person and an excellent worker. Just let him go to reduce headcount.
Brick-House: Obamacare strikes again.
bdub77: They don't have to listen to you, because they have f*ck you money and you don't.
Lost Thought 00: bdub77: And so the rounds of layoffs at big corporations begin again.The peasants were starting to get uppity. They had to be put in their place.
Mugato: it's incumbent upon us to stay ahead of the curve. To that end, we've undergone a review of our organizational structures and processes, and have re-imagined and realigned certain areas and functions to gain efficiencies and better position us for future growthHow about you increase your core competencies and make go farking yourself a primary action item with an eye toward productivity and connectivity. That would be great.
If you like these links, you'll love
More Farking, less working
Sign up for the Fark NotNewsletter!
Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.
When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.
Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.
You need to create an account to submit links or post comments.
Click here to submit a link.
Also on Fark
Submit a Link »
Copyright © 1999 - 2017 Fark, Inc | Last updated: Dec 16 2017 01:18:05
Runtime: 0.418 sec (418 ms)