PDA

View Full Version : if the unionistas have their way...



Uncle Bill
08-16-2013, 03:43 PM
...how soon before we are looking at a $10 Big Mac? Whenever the unions take a company over, not only do the ignorant employees that helped vote it in get their just rewards, but the consumer takes it in the shorts as well. Corporations aren't in the business to pay employees more than their value withour passing those costs on to the consumer.

As long as this regime of socialistic believers is in power, unions will be emboldened to think they can cow any operation they please. If this happens to the fast food industry you can kiss ALL entry-level jobs goodby, and rather than 25% UNemployment among the teens, there will be an impossible chance FOR employment in that age group. Even the constant push by the socialistic democrats for increases in the minimum wage, at what everyone with even an entry-level bit of intelligence knows, is making it harder for the teens to find a job now. Unionization will make that impossible. Couple that with Obamacare, and many of the local fast food outlets that are already marginal will be out of business.

UB

Fast Food No More: How The SEIU & Union Front Groups Want To Occupy Your Big Mac

By: LaborUnionReport (http://www.retrievertraining.net/users/laborunionreport/) (Diary (http://www.retrievertraining.net/laborunionreport/)) |


With union bosses once again clamoring (http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2013/08/07/richard-trumka-labor-movement/2629155/) that they are ‘in crisis,’ union bosses are looking to expand their membership into areas that have been traditionally immune to unions.
For the last several months, union-supported fast food workers have been staging “impromptu” strikes (http://www.policymic.com/articles/57139/fast-food-strike-won-t-get-15-an-hour-wages/763939) throughout the country.

http://www.redstate.com/files/2013/08/Occupy-Big-Mac2-620x465.png

Like the union-supported Occupy movement before it, the fast-food workers’ efforts are being coordinated by media-savvy professional organizers (http://www.csmonitor.com/Business/2013/0730/Schooled-by-Occupy-movement-fast-food-workers-put-demands-on-the-table-video) employed by the Service Employees International Union, a union front group called ROC (Restaurant Opportunities Center (http://www.rocexposed.com/what-is-roc/about-the-restaurant-opportunities-center/)), as well as an assorted array of pro-union politicians and “community activist” groups.


More about ROC and its agenda here (http://www.rocexposed.com/hidden-agenda/).



In actuality, however, the entire fast-food effort is part of a four-year old plan (http://www.redstate.com/laborunionreport/2010/05/14/seius-new-burger-queen-internal-documents-expose-plan-to-unionize-fast-food-industry/) cooked up by the Service Employees International Union (SEIU).


So far, the union-funded protesters are demanding raises to $15–more than twice the minimum wage–under the slick campaign slogan “Fight for $15 (http://www.fastfoodforward.org/en/).” However, the true aim of the SEIU and its allies is to unionize the industry and it appears the SEIU is about to launch a full-out blitzkrieg fast food joints across the country.


Based on an interview with Salon.com (http://www.salon.com/2013/08/14/fast_food_strikes_massively_expanding_theyre_think ing_much_bigger/), it seems that SEIU boss Mary Kay Henry, using typical Marxist logic, is trying to alter the world of the french-frying proletariat and bourgeoisie.


“It’s more about, ‘How do we shift things in the entire low-wage economy?’” she claims.
Henry was joined by SEIU assistant to the president for organizing Scott Courtney, who said to expect “a big escalation” from fast food workers in “the next week or 10 days.”
[snip]

…“The story is leverage in and of itself.” And “the fact that workers are taking these risks I think is our leverage.”
Where does that leverage lead? Could the endgame be a deal where corporations agree to pave the way for union negotiations and the union agrees before formal bargaining to carve out some parts of the country or cap the potential increase in labor costs? “It could be something like that,” said Courtney. “I think anything you know about traditional collective bargaining is possible,” said Henry, “and then things we haven’t imagined.” She added that innovations may be necessary to address the franchisee structure of the industry, in which fast food corporations set the business model – and reap substantial portions of the revenue — but don’t directly employ many of the workers. Could that franchisee structure itself be vulnerable to political or legal challenge? “Yeah, I think there’s a lot of areas,” said Courtney. “But again, it’s brand-new” and “certainly not fleshed out.” [Emphasis added.]

While Courtney claims “it’s brand new,” the reality is the SEIU’s strategy is only an altered version of its 2009 blueprint (http://www.redstate.com/laborunionreport/2010/05/14/seius-new-burger-queen-internal-documents-expose-plan-to-unionize-fast-food-industry/):


Initiate a focused experiment in one or two metro areas to test the organizing theory and bring resources to bear on a limited geographical target.
Choose metro areas with a favorable local political environment and workforce composition (Los Angeles and an east coast market) [The SEIU chose New York (http://www.redstate.com/2012/11/30/seiu-picks-nyc-to-launch-3-year-old-planned-attack-to-unionize-nations-fast-food-industry/) to launch its fast food union campaign]
Target 7-10 of the largest chains to keep bargaining manageable and map out geographic clusters where field work can be concentrated. [Though McDonalds was the first, other chains are now being targeted by the union.]
Build broad-based support for targeted workers via extensive community outreach and organizing and political work with prominent local elected officials
While staying focused on the 7-10 chains, bring workers together across companies within geographic clusters to build a sense of movement and solidarity. [Fast-food strikes, when they occur, are not at a single restaurant but several.]
Use a living wage as a vehicle to excite, build momentum, build worker lists/ID potential leaders and potentially support collective bargaining. We believe we will have enough traction with an ordinance to use as a legitimate tool for organizing and potentially as legislation to raise standards.
Move fast and furious with an army of 200-300 Staff/MOs/VOs/other volunteer organizers and the necessary number of leads to:

Petition for living wage
ID leaders
Bring workers together within geographies
Sign authorization cards
File on dozens of restaurants per week





Does this sound familiar?
Although the SEIU’s actions are a modified version of its 2009 blueprint, the actions are remarkably similar to what the SEIU laid out four years ago.
So, what is the end game?
Money. Money for the SEIU that is.

While fast-food workers won’t get the $15 (http://www.policymic.com/articles/57139/fast-food-strike-won-t-get-15-an-hour-wages) they are campaigning for, if unionized, the SEIU will get union dues. Moreover, with union dues standing averaging 1.3% (or more) of pay, if a fast-food worker earns $8 per hour, the SEIU gets at least $0.10 per hour for every hour the employee works.

That’s not, of course, counting the initiation fees the SEIU will collect for every new worker hired. With turnover in the fast-food industry, initiation fees alone will account for millions in the SEIU’s coffers–and the more turnover there is, the more money the SEIU makes.

Of course, along with unions come union rules–typically designed to make jobs less productive and require more workers. (More workers mean more union dues.)

No matter how you slice it, it appears the SEIU’s campaign to unionize fast food workers is escalating and, like it or not, someday, your Big Mac may come with a union label stamped on those two all-beef patties.
_________________________

GaryJ
08-16-2013, 03:54 PM
I believe in a fair wage for the job performed. I also do not purchase anything that I think has an unfair price. I suspect if the prices become unreasonable due to labor rates others will do the same as I do and that establishment will go out of business and as you said, unemployment will grow and entry level jobs will be a thing of the past.

Unions have one agenda which getting all they can and they don't care if it comes from a minimum wage worker as long as they get it.

huntinman
08-16-2013, 08:15 PM
I believe in a fair wage for the job performed. I also do not purchase anything that I think has an unfair price. I suspect if the prices become unreasonable due to labor rates others will do the same as I do and that establishment will go out of business and as you said, unemployment will grow and entry level jobs will be a thing of the past.

Unions have one agenda which getting all they can and they don't care if it comes from a minimum wage worker as long as they get it.

That's how they have practically killed the big three automakers.

swampcollielover
08-17-2013, 11:02 AM
Many of us lived through the 70's and early 80's when the American automobile industry owned the world as far as car production. But over that period they started producing poor quality. How many of you remember the term 'planned obsolescence'? American cars became very poor quality, with a few notable exceptions...but every manufacture produced a number of models every year, that would not last 100K. Enter Japan, within a few years, Japan was all over it, they saw the opportunity, had copied our manufacturing and quality control methods, and like most things Japanese back then, they copied it and then improved it! In response to this challenge, the American car industry raised the prices, to try and recover lost revenue, paid the union more (because they were charging more), and never focused on improving quality. 20-25 years later some of the automakers finally started improving quality, but it was too late as foreign automakers had taken over much of the market. Unionization was necessary back in the beginning of the industrial revolution, but in modern times, they limit the free market system and as such make it so their companies cannot compete on the global markets...that is how we stopped being a world market leader!

Henry V
08-19-2013, 10:28 PM
I believe in a fair wage for the job performed. I also do not purchase anything that I think has an unfair price. I suspect if the prices become unreasonable due to labor rates others will do the same as I do and that establishment will go out of business and as you said, unemployment will grow and entry level jobs will be a thing of the past.

Unions have one agenda which getting all they can and they don't care if it comes from a minimum wage worker as long as they get it.

I hate to break through the beautiful echo, but another point of view is that "Corporations (aka "people" right?) have one agenda which is getting all they can and they don't care if it comes from a minimum wage worker as long as they get it."
Case in point being McDonald's which employs 440,000 workers worldwide. The average full timer earns $18,200 per year. The company typically has an $8 billion profit, which works out to be about $18,200 per employee. Keep in mind that many employees are part time, so the profit per employee is greater than what the vast majority of workers makes each year. The company's own employee budget recommends a second job to make ends meet.

I am curious, what is a fair profit margin per employee for job performed? At what profit margin do you think McDonalds would have any reason to increase wages? When their net profits are 2, or 2.5, or 3 times the typical employee salary? In this economy where corporate profits are at record highs and wages are stagnant or regressing in real world dollars, exactly when is the trickle down supply side economic boost going to kick in? Perhaps increasing wages would increase consumer demand and spur this economy. The other approach clearly has not worker for 10+ years.

JDogger
08-19-2013, 11:30 PM
Careful Henry. You might make some heads explode...:p JD

mngundog
08-19-2013, 11:38 PM
If the employees were to be payed a fair wage then the CEOs wouldn't be able to be paid 354 times higher than average worker. That would make no sense, especially when they are so busy managing them into the ground.

Backwater
08-20-2013, 12:33 AM
I hate to break through the beautiful echo, but another point of view is that "Corporations (aka "people" right?) have one agenda which is getting all they can and they don't care if it comes from a minimum wage worker as long as they get it."
Case in point being McDonald's which employs 440,000 workers worldwide. The average full timer earns $18,200 per year. The company typically has an $8 billion profit, which works out to be about $18,200 per employee. Keep in mind that many employees are part time, so the profit per employee is greater than what the vast majority of workers makes each year. The company's own employee budget recommends a second job to make ends meet.

I am curious, what is a fair profit margin per employee for job performed? At what profit margin do you think McDonalds would have any reason to increase wages? When their net profits are 2, or 2.5, or 3 times the typical employee salary? In this economy where corporate profits are at record highs and wages are stagnant or regressing in real world dollars, exactly when is the trickle down supply side economic boost going to kick in? Perhaps increasing wages would increase consumer demand and spur this economy. The other approach clearly has not worker for 10+ years.

Henry your not even close here. I have a MBA and I will tell you the profits aren't what you think they are. Your liberal President and union backed Democrats have seen to it that taxes and regulations are such that United states is on the loosing end in the global market. The big companies are doing just what many very rich Americans are doing, taking their toys and leaving the country. You really think someone who has no education, no student loans, should be paid what??/ 100k a year? If you think this is bad take your own money and risk it with the hard work, then just to have someone like you bash them for their profits. Nothing is stopping you from opening your own business and then paying your employees as much as you want. it's called capitalism, I know dirty word for Obama supporters.

huntinman
08-20-2013, 12:40 AM
Wonder what percentage of McDonalds employees are full time? And how many will be this time next year because of Obamacare??

Seems to me the Obama administration likes the McDonalds model. Must be why 90%+ of all jobs created during the Obama years have been part time jobs.

caryalsobrook
08-20-2013, 02:42 AM
I hate to break through the beautiful echo, but another point of view is that "Corporations (aka "people" right?) have one agenda which is getting all they can and they don't care if it comes from a minimum wage worker as long as they get it."
Case in point being McDonald's which employs 440,000 workers worldwide. The average full timer earns $18,200 per year. The company typically has an $8 billion profit, which works out to be about $18,200 per employee. Keep in mind that many employees are part time, so the profit per employee is greater than what the vast majority of workers makes each year. The company's own employee budget recommends a second job to make ends meet.

I am curious, what is a fair profit margin per employee for job performed? At what profit margin do you think McDonalds would have any reason to increase wages? When their net profits are 2, or 2.5, or 3 times the typical employee salary? In this economy where corporate profits are at record highs and wages are stagnant or regressing in real world dollars, exactly when is the trickle down supply side economic boost going to kick in? Perhaps increasing wages would increase consumer demand and spur this economy. The other approach clearly has not worker for 10+ years.

Sounds to me the 440,000 should take those more lucrative and fulfilling jobs that are clamering to hire them AND BUY McDonalds Stock!!!!!:rolleyes:

GaryJ
08-20-2013, 07:52 AM
Henry your not even close here. I have a MBA and I will tell you the profits aren't what you think they are. Your liberal President and union backed Democrats have seen to it that taxes and regulations are such that United states is on the loosing end in the global market. The big companies are doing just what many very rich Americans are doing, taking their toys and leaving the country. You really think someone who has no education, no student loans, should be paid what??/ 100k a year? If you think this is bad take your own money and risk it with the hard work, then just to have someone like you bash them for their profits. Nothing is stopping you from opening your own business and then paying your employees as much as you want. it's called capitalism, I know dirty word for Obama supporters.

Spot on Backwater. Manufacturing used to be the economic foundation of this country. But the fed gov't has chased most of that elsewhere. So what is left but a service industry. Lets be real here. For the most part the margin is higher in manufacturing companies and so are the wages compared to service companies. This administration is destroying capitalism.

zeus3925
08-20-2013, 07:58 AM
Spot on Backwater. Manufacturing used to be the economic foundation of this country. But the fed gov't has chased most of that elsewhere. So what is left but a service industry. Lets be real here. For the most part the margin is higher in manufacturing companies and so are the wages compared to service companies. This administration is destroying capitalism.

Not the government--Wall Street sent those jobs to China for windfall profits produced by semi-slave labor.

JDogger
08-20-2013, 08:20 AM
http://www.freesmileys.org/smileys/smiley-basic/atomic.gif

GaryJ
08-20-2013, 08:21 AM
Not the government--Wall Street sent those jobs to China for windfall profits produced by semi-slave labor.

Wall street takes information from publicly traded companies does some analytics and decides what value to put on them. People can buy or not buy. for the companies that moved operations offshore; Do most pay less $ for labor? - sure do. Do most pay less taxes? - Absolutely. If they had higher wages and taxes and produced less profit would they still have been valued the same on wall street? I doubt it and maybe that is why they chose to move offshore.

Its all about the money for most people and since people run companies it is all about the money for companies too.

Marvin S
08-20-2013, 08:42 AM
I hate to break through the beautiful echo, but another point of view is that "Corporations (aka "people" right?) have one agenda which is getting all they can and they don't care if it comes from a minimum wage worker as long as they get it."
Case in point being McDonald's which employs 440,000 workers worldwide. The average full timer earns $18,200 per year. The company typically has an $8 billion profit, which works out to be about $18,200 per employee. Keep in mind that many employees are part time, so the profit per employee is greater than what the vast majority of workers makes each year. The company's own employee budget recommends a second job to make ends meet.

I am curious, what is a fair profit margin per employee for job performed? At what profit margin do you think McDonalds would have any reason to increase wages? When their net profits are 2, or 2.5, or 3 times the typical employee salary? In this economy where corporate profits are at record highs and wages are stagnant or regressing in real world dollars, exactly when is the trickle down supply side economic boost going to kick in? Perhaps increasing wages would increase consumer demand and spur this economy. The other approach clearly has not worker for 10+ years.

Henry - while there are folks on this forum that I would expect this from - I thought you a slight bit more intelligent than that, not a lot, but at least a slight bit :).

The mickey D employee shows up, more than likely having never held a job. This employee receives training, learns job skills, & in many cases advances to a managerial position of some to significant responsibility. Or moves elsewhere with those job skills, the employer does not retain those skills :eek:. I would consider that a fair trade of labor for profit. Don't forget the employee that manages to injure themselves, receives compensation, sometimes for a significant amount of time & contributes nothing to the bottom line.

Though I do agree with the poster that believes some executives are grossly overcompensated. We have to remember they pick their own boards, unless the stockholders vote against that compensation, it happens.

swampcollielover
08-20-2013, 09:42 AM
A whole bunch of you somehow have lost track of what the free market system is all about....a persons wage, prices we pay for products, should all be driven by "the market"! If you are not welling to pay $5 for a gallon of gas, and others agree with you the oil companies will have to lower the price until you start buying the product again. If they don't they will suddenly have a glut of inventory, and start losing profitability fast! The market should drive the balance between price and inventory (Adam Smith called this the Invisible Hand)... it has nothing to do with profits (but in the long run companies must make money or close). Same for wages, if people choose not to work at McD's for the wages they offer, McD's will be out of business fast...it really is that simple...unfortunately, Unions and Governments screw it all up with taxes and demands for wages/benefits that exceed the market norms...over time these external forces force companies to look for other ways to stay in business.....off shore is a short term solution, because in time, unions and governments will push those markets to a point they are no longer competitive....the good old USA is looking more like the USSR and unfortunately a bunch of voters out their do not understand the free market or Capitalism is one of the foundations to what made our country great....

BonMallari
08-20-2013, 09:52 AM
Wonder what percentage of McDonalds employees are full time? And how many will be this time next year because of Obamacare??

Seems to me the Obama administration likes the McDonalds model. Must be why 90%+ of all jobs created during the Obama years have been part time jobs.


I can answer that FIRSTHAND...we have already been put on 30 hr work weeks at the hotel that is the NEW full time standard, there is even talk that the union will drop our "cadillac" insurance program and try and dump it off on the hotel, which in turn will schedule us for less than 30 hrs and make us responsible for paying for our own insurance

its gonna get ugly...

Uncle Bill
08-22-2013, 01:12 PM
You don't suppose the SEIU overstepped their limits with this latest power grab? As Jackie Gleason used to shout out, "How sweet it is!!!" It's sounding like this may turn out to be another example of 'unintended circumstances' eh? Make my day. It just couldn't have happened to a more ignorant batch of fools.

UB

http://www.redstate.com/2013/08/21/seius-fast-food-strikers-may-legally-be-replaced-perhaps-even-permanently/

huntinman
08-22-2013, 02:43 PM
It's all working out exactly as Obama wanted however. The plan all along was to get employers to dump their employees so the employees would be forced into the socialist system. Who cares how much it costs? Damn sure not Obama.

luvmylabs23139
08-22-2013, 02:58 PM
It's all working out exactly as Obama wanted however. The plan all along was to get employers to dump their employees so the employees would be forced into the socialist system. Who cares how much it costs? Damn sure not Obama.

Isnt that the truth. While we still can't get what our new rates will be from BCBS since
1. We can't keep our current plan ( doesn't fit KING IDIOTS rules) BCBSNC already told us that
2. You will have a SUBSTANTIAL RATE INCREASE ( direct form BCBS NC)
We purchase a private policy and this is what is happening.
We can't plan anything because all we know is that we are getting hit with a huge increase, but have no idea how much. How can anyone plan their budget as we always do.
Sadly, this is the best time of year to purchase a new car and we were planning on replacing my 2002. That purchase will not happen without knowing what is happening to our insurance premium. We are really thinking about dumping medical and paying the fine. I will be damned if I'm forced to buy his crap that I neither want nor need.

Henry V
08-22-2013, 04:34 PM
Henry your not even close here. I have a MBA and I will tell you the profits aren't what you think they are. Good for you. G.W. has an MBA too and he ran this country into the ground. The profits I stated are from public documents.


Your liberal President and union backed Democrats have seen to it that taxes and regulations are such that United states is on the loosing end in the global market. The big companies are doing just what many very rich Americans are doing, taking their toys and leaving the country. Please, he is our president not just mine. How do you square your second and third sentences. On one hand taxes and regulations are killing things and on the other companies and very rich americans are doing great and have been for many many years so they are taking their toys and leaving the country. That seems kind of anti-American to me.


You really think someone who has no education, no student loans, should be paid what??/ 100k a year? No. I do not think it and never stated it. I simply asked a couple questions about what any of you thought was a fair amount of profit per employee. No one phas provided an answer.


If you think this is bad take your own money and risk it with the hard work, then just to have someone like you bash them for their profits. Nothing is stopping you from opening your own business and then paying your employees as much as you want. it's called capitalism, I know dirty word for Obama supporters. Please tell me where I bashed anyone for their profits? Don't worry, if I start a business, I will. Nothing against capitalism here, as long as there is a full cost accounting in the market.

Henry V
08-22-2013, 04:39 PM
Wonder what percentage of McDonalds employees are full time? And how many will be this time next year because of Obamacare??

Seems to me the Obama administration likes the McDonalds model. Must be why 90%+ of all jobs created during the Obama years have been part time jobs.

Well I suspect they cost the public about the sameamount as WalMart employees have for many years. At least several thousand dollars per employee. For example http://washington.cbslocal.com/2013/08/01/study-wal-mart-could-cost-taxpayers-millions-per-year-in-employee-subsidies/
http://articles.latimes.com/2013/jun/07/business/la-fi-wal-mart-wages-20130607

What a great country. Privatize the profits and socialize the costs of doing business.

Henry V
08-22-2013, 04:46 PM
Henry - while there are folks on this forum that I would expect this from - I thought you a slight bit more intelligent than that, not a lot, but at least a slight bit :).

The mickey D employee shows up, more than likely having never held a job. This employee receives training, learns job skills, & in many cases advances to a managerial position of some to significant responsibility. Or moves elsewhere with those job skills, the employer does not retain those skills :eek:. I would consider that a fair trade of labor for profit. Don't forget the employee that manages to injure themselves, receives compensation, sometimes for a significant amount of time & contributes nothing to the bottom line.

Though I do agree with the poster that believes some executives are grossly overcompensated. We have to remember they pick their own boards, unless the stockholders vote against that compensation, it happens.
Marvin,

I believe I asked a fair set of questions. I totally agree that this is low skill job. I also would sure like to know when the huge profits and the huge increase in wealth of the top 5% is going to trickle down. Maybe you know? Why isn't paying employees a bit more money a good way to start the trickle?

luvmylabs23139
08-22-2013, 05:07 PM
Marvin,

I believe I asked a fair set of questions. I totally agree that this is low skill job. I also would sure like to know when the huge profits and the huge increase in wealth of the top 5% is going to trickle down. Maybe you know? Why isn't paying employees a bit more money a good way to start the trickle?
Gee, when I was a lot younger this was just a high school part time job. When did working at Walmart or McDonalds become a career? When did this suddenly earn the same pay as a worked for and earned skill?
Many many years ago in high school I worked a job in fast food. Bust your butt and even as a high school student you can get a promotion(if ya call it that) and more money.
Better example would be going from a cashier to the office(ie customer service, check cashing etc) in the 80's at a grocery store. Yeah, work hard do your best and get more money even when you are 17.

huntinman
08-22-2013, 05:44 PM
Marvin,

I believe I asked a fair set of questions. I totally agree that this is low skill job. I also would sure like to know when the huge profits and the huge increase in wealth of the top 5% is going to trickle down. Maybe you know? Why isn't paying employees a bit more money a good way to start the trickle?

The fact that they have a job is the trickle. Those types of jobs are not meant to provide a "living wage". But if Obama and the libs keep it up...that's going to be on the high end...

When I was 14, I started out working at a car wash. The next year I got a job at country club working at the pro shop doing grunt work like emptying trash, mopping floors, stocking the fridge etc... Then I worked in an agricultural plant bagging potatoes... Talk about dirty work! I also assembled fireworks variety packs, drove a school bus while still in HS. All of these jobs paid minimum wage to start and maybe I got a little raise.. I think the bus driver job I may have started a little higher. Anyway, I never thought for one minute as a teenager that any of these employers was cheating me out of anything. They were giving me an opportunity to make extra money while I was still in school that I could use for my car, clothes, entertainment etc... I was also learning how to work with and for other people in a structured environment (sometimes not so structured). Looking back as a 55 year old man on those part time jobs and others I held while in college and in the military... They helped me become who I am. Those employers did me the favor, not the other way around. That's the main problem with you libs... You think the world owes you something. Nobody owes you or the current crop of kids growing up anything more than maybe a chance. It's up to them to determine what they do with it.

caryalsobrook
08-22-2013, 06:06 PM
Good for you. G.W. has an MBA too and he ran this country into the ground. The profits I stated are from public documents.

Please, he is our president not just mine. How do you square your second and third sentences. On one hand taxes and regulations are killing things and on the other companies and very rich americans are doing great and have been for many many years so they are taking their toys and leaving the country. That seems kind of anti-American to me.

No. I do not think it and never stated it. I simply asked a couple questions about what any of you thought was a fair amount of profit per employee. No one phas provided an answer.

Please tell me where I bashed anyone for their profits? Don't worry, if I start a business, I will. Nothing against capitalism here, as long as there is a full cost accounting in the market.

You asked "what is a FAIR amount of profit a company should make per employee". Let me answer first by asking a similarily simple question. What do you think is a FAIR amount of the employee income that he(she) should pay back in the event the company LOSES money?

luvmylabs23139
08-22-2013, 06:27 PM
Marvin,

I believe I asked a fair set of questions. I totally agree that this is low skill job. I also would sure like to know when the huge profits and the huge increase in wealth of the top 5% is going to trickle down. Maybe you know? Why isn't paying employees a bit more money a good way to start the trickle?
Employees should be paid the value of their work. If someone wants to work for x and someone else wants y it is up to the employer to decide what is resonable.
If a job is available nobody should be allowed to refuse such job and STEAL( yes it is theft) the hard working taxpayers money!!!
I do not work so that someone else gets my hard earned money by choice and it is about time someone showed me where they have any right to what I worked for !