Slashdot Mirror
100 Best Companies To Work For
Misha writes "Fortune.com is publishing a list of 100 Best Companies to Work for. Quite a few tech companies, with a few semi-startups, like Xilinx, who 'protected its employees from a nasty downturn in the industry by refusing to abandon a no-layoff policy. Workers took a 6 percent pay cut, but the CEO led the way with a 20 percent cut.'"
Workers took a 6 percent pay cut, but the CEO led the way with a 20 percent cut.
Of course he still ended up making an order of magnitude more than the workers. This is the kind of thing we wouldn't have to worry about if programmers were unionized.
Karma: Good (despite my invention of the Karma: sig)
I just don't get this bullshit about CEOs telling their employees to take a pay cut, and trying to convince them it's OK by cutting their own pay.
20% off of (say) $1 million still leaves $800K - whereas 6% off $50K leaves you with $47K. The CEO can still buy that beach house, but you'll have to cut back on essentials. Thanks for nothing.
Woo hoo. Dance, monkey-boy, dance.
Making trouble today for a better tomorrow...
5. Adobe Systems
After graduating from college (3 years ago), I sent my resume as a PDF to Adobe. They wrote back and asked for it in Word format because they didn't know how to read PDF files....
In the current economic climate, this is sort of like having a "100 Best Girls to Have Sex With" list. Yeah, Alyssa Milano might very well be on it but she's not hiring, so who cares?
My
Limekiller
From the full article (not sure how to get there from the link; I read it a few hours ago after linking from CNN.com), it was actually Xilinx that
'protected its employees from a nasty downturn in the industry by refusing to abandon a no-layoff policy. Workers took a 6 percent pay cut, but the CEO led the way with a 20 percent cut.'
Well, hey, I didn't spend all those years playing Dungeons and Dragons and not learn a little something about courage.
I couldn't get through to the site, but I'm pretty sure they forgot the best one: The Government.
What bothers me about this list is that anly 269 companies applied to be on the list. Making the top 100 out of 269 isn't really that impressive to me. About 40% of the companies who spend the maney and take the time to apply for this distinction make the list. This is definately not a very elite list. In fact, I think the only reason that you would apply for this list is if you feel that you have to have proof that your company treats its employees well. What ever happened to good old word of mouth? I guess it's easier to just buy your reputation by applying for these lists.
The supermarket chain lets workers take off to volunteer and to care for sick pets
How cool is that? I'll bet there aren't many companies that will give you time off to take care of your dog when it gets sick. Until it was law many didn't even offer maternity leave. Some companies just get it. Treat your employees well, and they'll be happier and treat the customers well.
Anyone else notice that glaringly absent from this poll is my employer Hewlett-Packard? Agilent Tech is on there, because they got spun off before the whole massive downslide. They still live the HP Way. Whereas the parent company, and developer of the damn thing, has totally abandoned it. Ask any employee who has been here for more than a few years and they'll tell you the same thing.
Carly is driving us directly into the ground... In my humble opinion. When I started 4 years ago everyone I told said "Oooo... I heard thats a good place to work!". I agreed. But it has slid down ever since.
*sigh*
Jason
He's totally creeping out the Great One, eh...
In this tech depression, a list of the 100 Worse may be more useful. They may be more forgiving of the fact that a resume only lists 30 buzzwords instead of the expected 50. (That is assuming they know of their ranking.)
Table-ized A.I.
and that continue to make money from the
Cheney Rumsfeld regime in their War on Everybody.
And Hewlett-Packard Company, once the proud purveyors of the HPWay, are nowhere to be found in the top 100. This is an accurate reflection of the state of affairs, but sad.
Another employee-centric company culture falls prey to the narrow-minded concepts tought in today's business schools.
He was given a tour of the factory two weeks after he started, and picked it up while he was there.
I hear it the benefits really suck too :)
"History doesn't repeat itself, but it does rhyme." Mark Twain
Each of the companies employs >1000 people. I think it's best to work for a much smaller company, one when you know all coworkers and the CEO says hello to you everyday. I work for such a company and just smile at my friends telling horror stories from the Dilbert side of the reality.
On each of the pages, there are % Minorities and % Women for each company. Why?! Why should this matter. Is this not racist or sexist? Certainly if there was a % White, it would be considered so. Why should the color of a persons skin or their sex be considered over how well they perform their job?
-Vic
Okay I work for a company on the list. And it's sorta rigged...well sort of. Okay, one thing they want to know is 'How much money is spent per capita at the employee store?'. The point is that companies that sell lot's of company-logo golf balls must be a great place to work. Well since every company know this is coming, they make departments buy like normal, everyday stuff like paper-clips and toner from the company store. This inflates the company store reciepts and no one is the wiser. This game is played over and over again to varying degrees in all aspects of this little adventure, like Enron with GAAP.
"This isn't a study in computer science, its a study in human behavior"
I'm sorry, but I can't buy that for one moment. They have a long history of finding bright eyed yound programmers, exploiting them, under paying them, and then shit-canning them after they've abused them and turned them against the entire video gaming industry.
You don't believe me? Do a web-search. Nearly every Game-Industry Horror Story you're likely to find comes from someone who once worked for EA.
The intent of a union is to protect workers rights. In no industry are workers careers valued less than in engineering fields. Engineers / programmers design products that make companies money, but yet as soon as an economic downturn comes around they are let go. "We can always hire some recent grads later." As soon as engineers start getting paid well, they have to worry about being replaced by H1-b workers, or their job being exported to India. Furthermore, employers should be training their employees with new technologies, a union would help to define and dictate what proper training and qualifications are. Everyone complains about PHB managers, and the one way to combat these is to use a unions to your advantage. In some places, seniority can be a good thing. Not always, but sometimes. Unions get a bad rap due to frivolous strikes, and are considered blue coller, but I for one would be proud to join a programmers union that stood up for my rights, and gave me some job security.
-- the computer doesn't want any beer, no matter how much you think it does. NEVER, EVER feed your computer beer.
or are "American Cast Iron Pipe" debt collectors?
http://jesus.everdense.com/
Microsoft's hiring process: .364% hiring rate, or one job for every 274 applicants, I'm not sure if I like my chances.
1,312 New Jobs this last year.
360,000 Applicants...
Uh, thats a
Also:
#63 LensCrafters, while not a tech company, this sounded pretty cool:
"Sunglass Hut, a new sister company, joined this year's Visionfest, where managers and execs donned white gloves, top hats, and bow ties to welcome employees, park their cars, and open doors. "
There's a nonbiased factual statement for you! Way to go "Reality Master 101"!!! I'd ask for a detailed argument backing your assertion up, but the suckiest suck that ever sucked is pretty much all the evidence one should ever need! Thanks dude.
Get your facts straight.
To be more accurate, over 1000 companies applied, and Fortune first chopped that list to 269.
p anies/artic les/0,15114,403820,00.html
This Top 100 is the final cut.
But don't take Carlos' word for it, see for yourself:
http://www.fortune.com/fortune/bestcom
*Carlos: Exit Stage Right*
"Geeks, Where would you be without them?"
"Got Linux?"
For example, Boston. Where 50K a year is the poorhouse with even a decent one bedroom apartment. Or try New York, SF, and most of the other high tech metropolitan areas. Frankly, 100K a year in these parts is almost minimum wage for a family. With two bedroom condos going for between 280K-330K, just how do you think people can afford to live it up on 50K/yr?
5 Adobe Systems
20 Microsoft
I wonder what they're doing. I'm sure that programmers at Adobe weren't happy about Skylarov, and Microsoft is the company that the book Microserfs came out of.
They must be doing something right... or Fortune must be interviewing all of the "right" people.
From the Xilinx corporate information page:
"Founded in 1984 and headquartered in San Jose, Calif., Xilinx employs approximately 2,600 people worldwide."
" Publicly traded on NASDAQ o Symbol: XLNX Fiscal Year 2002 revenues: $1.02 billion; net income, $52.2 million"
May I have some of whatever it is you're smoking?
Yikes... Rob and the boys must not have provided terribly high marks.
- DDT
So long, michael. Don't let the door hit you...
Maybe instead of calling it a "union", we should call it an "employee-owned labor contractor" to deal with all that right-wing anti-union propoganda that's been going around for the past 100 years. After all, in the areas where unions are strong (like the construction trades) that's basically what a union is -- an employee-owned labor contractor, where employers drop by the union hall and say "I need 50 bricklayers for a commercial building at 5th and Dunlap" and voila. The workers are trained by the union through an apprenticeship program, and often the worker's pensions and benefits are administered by the union in this kind of setup, making it seem even more like an employee-owned labor contract organization.
So someone correct me if I'm wrong -- can we just call it an "employee-owned labor contractor" and get around that whole "union label" thing ("unions are for blue-collar workers or incompetents") that keeps unions out of the IT industry?
Regarding outsourcing IT to India -- that's already being done, both via the H1B program and directly. Don't believe that refusing to join a union (err, "employee-owned labor contractor") will preserve your job. It won't. Your employer right now, as you read this message, is investigating outsourcing your job to India. You can bank on it, unless you happen to be your own boss.
Send mail here if you want to reach me.
Yeah, there are some dead beat CEOs out there, but some of them earn it.....
Our CEO has been working for minimum wage for 18 months (he only takes that so he can keep his insurance coverage). He's traveling 3.5 weeks a month and if we are a little short of cash at the end of the month will write a personal check. He also bought all the engineers new high end workstations on his personal credit card. He works way harder and longer hours than any engineer I've met in my 17 years in the biz.
If this company takes off, he deserves every penny and then some. When you say that you want a regular paycheck and to sleep in your own bed each night, you give up the right to complain about all those folks taking serious risks with both their $ and personal time.
Enron used to rank pretty high up on this list. I was always amused that The Container Store beat us in the rankings, but CEO Ken Lay kept promising we'd do better next year. Of course, he also promised the stock price would go up to $120 USD, the pigfucker.
Though I guess it's not a surprise, given their size, declining market share, and generally uncertain future...
The coolest voice ever.
Since almost 40% of the companies who try to get on this thing do, I really view it as "pay Fortune Magazine some money, and we'll give you a nice-sounding list we'll put you on that you can use as a recruiting bullet item."
And yes, oh yes, we DO use it as a selling point in recruiting. A LOT. We even have one of those nice velcro signs we stick onto the recruiting booth at career fairs for this thing.
Nothing is so smiple that it can't get screwed up.
---outsourcing wouldn't happen (near as much) if corporations weren't given tax breaks up front to move offshore, and if the US leaders cared as much for their citizens as other nations care for theirs and instituted a little sane protectionism tariffs to protect still viable good industries in the US. "Programming" is not "buggywhip manufacturing" as critics like to say about protectionism in general. The root word "protect" is neither a swear word nor a word of derision, although some people seem to think it is. Perhaps a more unified programming/IT guild would have more political clout as an organization rather than as a collection of a million + individuals whom have little clout *as* individuals. There's a reason why coordinated organizations work better than groups of random individuals, else we wouldn't see organizations in any field or endeavor. At least agreeing on the basic premise that "jobs are good, let's keep them" would be hard to argue against.
--unemployed guy driving by walmart, knowing all this stuff is cheap and on sale. He thinks to himself, "uh huh, big deal, doesn't mean as much as it did when I still had a job".
"Entry-level salary" of $60,000.00 for a software engineer!
:)
Id rather work at a small indie developer than EA though, 2,000 programmers on twice my salary would be too much to bear
To preface this, I live in Alameda, which is right across the bay from San Francisco.
I will grant that the rents are a little higher in SF proper than they are in some of the suburbs in other areas of the bay area, but rents aren't that bad, and have been going down par the economy (despite what we renters might think, owners are still keen on renting their spots out, even at reduced rates). For example, a 1000 sq ft apartment rents for about $850/mo here in Alameda. You could definitely afford that on $47k a year (if, as other posters mentioned, you don't spend a grand each month on uneccesary expendatures).
The big gorilla attracts bright people to its bucolic campus, which includes softball fields, a basketball court, and locker rooms with showers. Or if you prefer, get a paid membership in an off-site gym. .... the big gorilla attracts bright people to its bucolic campus... :)
sounds very scary indeed.
just wondering what that huge, hairy gorilla do with those poor people
- Arwen, I'm your father, Agent Smith.
- Well, you're just Smith, but my father is Aerosmith!
(Would I love to go into details, but doing might identify me!)
25% pay cuts across the board, but the management still finds a way to sponsor a (NASCAR) racing team.
There are FEW happy faces at this Acxiom.
The company cut its workforce by 33% last year and it's #34 on the list? Wow, I didn't realize just how crappy last year was.
...I work for number 97!
-WolfWithoutAClause
"Gravity is only a theory, not a fact!"Does anyone wonder why a previously #1 ranked company (Southwest Airlines) isn't even in the top 100 anymore? It's because the application process took so long and involved so many people (voluntarily) that they decided they would rather use those resources to do what they do best, serve their customers, not filling out "pat me on the back" applications.
We the Sheeple...
Nuf said.
What do you think would happen if a unionized trucking company decided it was going to hire 5.00 an hour people to drive trucks?
Truck driver would strike, and the flow of good would come close to halting.
Now imagine if every IT worker in America said "Stop hiring from overseas, or we will strike?"
Imagine what would happen in any company if they got no support, no code, Nno queries run, no reports... it would slow down the first dat, and be completly stopped by the end of the week.
really all we want is fair pay, seniority, and a globle umbrella to by are insurance and 401k from.
I'm not talking about not being able to fire someone incompetant, I'm talking about the need for proof, anf the company to be damn sure a person is incompetent.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
CowboyNeal works there and say it's such a nice place to work!
Who else here isn't surprised about Pfizer being on the list? :P Talk about job satisfaction...
For me and about 6% of the U.S. population, I think the best company to work for is just about ANY company right now. All I want right now is a job! A couple of years ago I might have taken an interest in this list. But now... I am going back to HotJobs, Monster, etc. to look for any company that has an opening!
P.S. Hire me!!!!!
So this CEO, who normally contributes 20 times as much
I do not buy into the assertion that because a CEO is earning 20x, he's contributing 20x. Nor would I buy into its converse (the assertion that he's getting 20x because he contributes 20x). CEOs are grossly overpaid, and the reason is simply that there's a good ol' boys network of MBAs networking their way to these obscene salaries, and company boards that are so lacking in vision that the boldest thing they can do is burn money by hiring the most expensive person possible for the ceo role. This is one of the most fundamentally wasteful and distasteful facets of US biz, and must change as a prerequisite to the average American deriving security and self respect from being in the workforce. As in may other cross sections of the workforce, some CEOs are visionaries while others are flat out idiots... but unlike most other sectors, there is virtually no correlation whatsoever between CEO salary and CEO merit. One obvious example is Fiorina but there are many others, and most aren't even high-profile in the media. Somewhere along the line people have somehow elevated CEOs to the status of gods, where they don't even think of questioning how value is truly being created and will simply go by the numbers. Sure, the CEO has the power to fire his workers... but you still won't find my nose up his rear end.
.
- First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then ???, then profit.
I'll just point out that publically-chartered corporations are collectivist systems, whereby a large number of owners appoint a small number of board members to oversee their interests. It seems that you are engaged in more than a little hypocricy to blast one collectivist system without blasting the other. As Enron shows, the fact that it's called a "corporation" rather than a "labor contractor" or "union" does not render it immune to corruption -- any organization where a few people are selected to defend the interests of the many tends to turn into a system where those few people defend their own interests, and to [bleep] with the many.
Send mail here if you want to reach me.
... if it includes Intel in the top 100 companies to work for. I've heard nothing but nightmares. Check out www.faceintel.com.
So who wants to write an open source resume blaster? 8-)
Protectionism is a refuge of the selfish. Why should you deny Indians (or whoever else they decide to outsource programming to) jobs? Are they somehow inferior to the citizens of your own country?
If Microsoft decided to outsource half their workforce to India, what would happen? A few thousand programmers would go on the job market-- highly qualified programmers, whatever you say about Microsoft. The average programmer's wage would probably go down some, and, after a while, the numbers of new coders coming out of college would decrease to compensate. The programmers that lost their jobs would hardly be starving in the streets-- IT workers are generally adaptable people-- they could go back to school, become teachers, or something else that's needed.
However, for the 3rd world worker, an IT job seems far more important than to a (relatively) wealthy American. For them, a job programming could mean the difference between food on the table, and the gutter.
There are other, more tangible, disadvantages to protectionism. If the US is taxing Indian Software, India will probably return fire. Trade wars like these could be devastating to all sides.
Oh, and they ceased to be called 'Silicon Graphics' years ago. Since all the staff left there isn't actually anyone left at the company who knows any graphics.
Doesn't it make you feel good to know that our freedoms are protected by politicans, lawyers and journalists.
http://www.ieee.org and http://computer.org
Okay, so the IEEE isnt a union, but they do take software engineering VERY seriously (check out the qualifications for thier certification, or pick up a copy of IEEE Computer magazine) and they DO give you a voice by lobbying politicians.
I read in some other news piece about this that HP were excluded by Forbes because they went through a merger (as opposed I guess to a takeover) -- this is apparently a rule of the list.
I am not a number! I am a man! And don't you
1)Varies states are making exception in there labor lwas for Saoftware people, purely for exploitation.
2)Seniority. Companies willo fire an older employee for 2 reasons
1)pay. however it has been my experience that the difference is slight in the IT field.
2)perception. Companies will percieve an older person as being 'behind the times'.
3)puttimg a large number of people under the same 'insurance umbrella' allows for cheaper insurance.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
http://www.multinationalmonitor.org/mm2002/02dece
That list is an eye-opener!
Ali
Ph33r m3!!!
Sony isn't on this list. They must know what I know.
A "Movie of the Week" about bulimia beats the hell out of one about anorexia, any day.
Ok, so it is patting myself (and my company on the back), but Adobe is truly a great place to work. It is a challenging, highly ethical environment, which provides a great place to create fantastic products. I have been in the industry for 20+ years and worked for a number of "icon" companies, and I have to say Adobe is the best place at which i have worked.
As for being a semi-startup, I can say that is only in spirit. In terms of employees (almost 3K), revenues (1.2 billion, second largest desktop software company), longevity (20 years and counting), and presence("Everywhere you look", refers to the fact that every piece of media you see has been touched by one or more Adobe products), we are a well established company.
It is a great company and we owe that fact to the culture established by John and Chuck when they founded the company. Think about the kind of company that has someone like Bob Sedgewick on its Board of Directors.
Sun's down to #77. IBM isn't on the list. Sun is more and more like IBM borg these days(filled with needless beaurocracy). The management likes it that way, and the lowly techs hate it that way. Expect it to drop another 10 or 20 points in the ranking by next year, unless it reverses this trend.
Although you and I would enjoy sex with Alyssa Milano, 98% of slashdot readers would find the ides repuslive, since she was born without a penis.
/.
Therefore, the post was inappropriate for
Some of these companies are not known for moral behavior within their sector. Take Microsoft at 20 which is known for dancing on the backs of the average user for their lovely baseball stadiums.
I'm guessing that the article was written by the Fortune Magazine PR department. Friends of mine at Intel are routinely overworked, because Intel will not hire enough people.
Remember, Fortune is a "what the rich want you to think" company.
I think the poster has a valid point. Take a look at what you put in your statement.
"15k for car, including payments" If you are spending 15,000 a year for a car you are overspending and could downsize your life to get by a little easier. There's public transportation (~$30 per month), car pooling ($negligible), a $1000 used car, or SUPER-SIZE it and get a $7,000 car for $199 a month for two years.
People just don't think of VOLUNTARILY downsizing their lifestyles. Once they get to 40-50-60-75-100 k a year any regression means pain. It all has to get stripped away via reposession or bankruptcy. Which usually happens after they've lost their jobs and blew through their limite savings trying to find that next 'perfect' job. They never think: "I'll get something to fill that gap until I can something good comes along". Meanwhile people in bahrain work for 30-50 bucks a week and will travel hundreds of miles on foot to get jobs like that. People here complain about walking a quarter mile, they get in their damn SUV's to go two blocks to the store.
When a CEO takes a 20% pay cut so that employees don't have to take a 100% pay cut I think that's a big deal. Especially considering that most people could give a shit about what happens to their coworkers much less what happens to the below way below them on the corporate ladder.
When people get to a certain lifestyle they forget how to rewind and downsize to their previous lifestyle. They forget that they can go without that dinner out, those nice clothes, that 20+k SUV, that nice house. They forget that at one point they struggled in a $24k job and before that they struggle under a $14k job. They think they should just keep continuing to struggle under a $40 or $50k job. They forget that they once lived in a shithole with roaches and peeling walpaper and no cable. They forget that they worked flipped burgers or mopped floors. They forget working two jobs. They forget that they used to spend so much time with work and family and friends that the electricity bill for the month was the same as a dinner out. They forget that McDonald's is a convenience not a necessity. They forget that they could feed a family of 6 on ~$300 a month. They forget that they once didn't have a cell phone/pager or the internet. They forget that way back when wasn't really that bad.
People forget that their ancestors (voluntarily or otherwise) travelled thousands of miles in the worst conditions to make it somewhere for work. Again I'll say it, some people bitch about walking less than a mile to get somewhere.
It has a lot less to do with geography than it does with perspective. I'm sure that if you looked where you live you could find plenty of people nearby living on substantially LESS than what you make. Be thankful you have the OPTION of going from 50-40k instead of possibly being a $18-0k person.
People look at the CEO and say "BFD he's already overpaid so what if he takes a cut". The fact is that he didn't have to, he could have cut some employees, hell he could have done like most CEO's and jumped ship to another company, or just taken the 6% pay cut every other employee got. He could have just covered his own ass but he didn't. Think about how many people here would take a pay cut so that others could stay employed or a company succeed. How many people here would think "hmmm.... maybe it's time to start looking for something else" or "well if they just got rid of 'John' that's enough for people to not have to take a cut".
"Do not be swept up in the momentum of mediocrity." - anon
I know people who would kill for them if asked. They would literally eat fire for that company.
I saved for seven years and bought a two-family a ten minute walk away from Harvard U, in Somerville. I live in a dump, will spend the next five years fixing up the property, and am in debt up to my ass... but my housing expenses are very cheap (took the smaller of the two units), and I expect that even with a 20% decline in housing values due to the Boston property bubble I'll be just fine if I wait it out ten years.
:)
But yeah, for most folks out there it's pretty fucking rough living in a real city, even with 50K a year. I make more than double that, between sarary and rental income, but it's still tough and I still have to pay close attention to my expenses. Cash flow is king...
But you're right, if I were willing to move out to the boonies I could live easier. However, if I were willing to move out to I495, I might as well move to Montana. JMO.
Cheers...
Training is one arena where a tech union might really make a diffence. Why?
1). For the most part, US employers no longer invest in training. They expect workers to be responsible for their own skills upgrades and maintenance.
2). 100% responsibility (freelance or FT employee) for your own training can be expensive, time-consuming, and (sometimes) almost obsolete before you finish it.
3). By banding together, workers can build their own training programs that are high-quality, evolve rapidly to meet industry demand, and are cheaper (for members) than similar offerings at a community college or university.
Case in point: WashTech/CWA in Seattle WA has built its own IT union training program from scratch. It now offers ASP.NET, XML, Java, Flash, Perl and more. Members get significant course discounts. No other local union in the country is offering such training. Member dues help to subsidize discounted training for everyone. If you take one WashTech class in the course of a year, the savings compared to non-members course fees can equal or surpass one year's dues.
Details:
http://www.washtech.org/wt/training/
perhaps if SAIC would put more into actually BEING a good company for employees and not just mouthing "employee owned" every couple of days this might be different. Until they start focusing on their employees, quality of work and policing their middle and upper management then it will only be just another big company relying on the glory of its past.
--"protectionism IS selfish, as in "I sort of prefer keeping my income and job and home and making sure my immediate family and nieghbors and country keep theirs as well". And the deal is there's nothing wrong with this. Nothing at all. It is the nature of a marketplace to seek a profit-even an individual profit. It's also the nature of a "marketplace" to band together to "protect" itself from an "attack" from outside, be it economic or physical. You can be protective WITHOUT being predatory, and therein I think is where the confusion arises.
I own a home, I help to protect my home by firmly locking the door when I leave. I have the option of answering the door when someone knocks on it, or I can ignore the knock. That is my right and option. If I think in my judgement opening the door at that particular time is a "good idea", then I am free to do so. I hear a knock, there's a girl scout selling cookies. No probs, it's a "good deal" to me, I am happy with the trade. On the other hand I hear a knock and I see someone I don't wish to speak to-for any reason-it is my right to not answer the door and talk or do business. I am "protecting" myself based on my evolving analysis of "life".
There comes a time you have to make decisions on what is important not only for yourself personally, but for your family, your neighbors and neighborhood, and your nation as a whole. The US is now in a spiraling-->down deficit in economics and in good quality jobs(yes it's headed that dirtection), in diverse vertical manufacturing and agriculture and in informational technology, both hardware and software. We used to be great at that stuff, but now we seek others to do the work, but for short term profits for *some folks* here.
I am of the opinion that we would be more advised to "protect" these industries over the long haul rather then to trade them off for short term profits in the near term. That doesn't mean we can't trade, and it also doesn't mean we should just give away the store so that 1% of our population can get fabulously wealthier, and the other 99% enjoy cheaper stuff for a few years then go broke and out of work. What happens in the other nations is not completely our business, nor should it be. We can be friends, ewe can trade, but we aren't required to just give it away. We as a nation went through that development phase long ago, it just isn't our fault to ensure that rapid change takes place "over there" at our expense. We can pick and choose on it, and by and large we are a generous people. the world is changing though, and swiftly.
Anyone has to ask themselves, if a large nation basically gives away(sells off cheap) it's manufacturing base, then gives away (sells off cheap) it's informational services base, and gives away (sells off cheap) it's food production base..uhhh..what's left? Really, what's left?
If you follow our trends over the past two decades, then extrapolate them to any sort of logical conclusion, you will see that this "future" if followed as being done now would result in the US as primarily a two class society with WARFARE as it's only profit making export.
Think on it, see if that is correct. Take away eventually all the normal jobs the US middle class has, what is left over?
Now, ask yourself, you REALLY want to see that? If all we in the US have left for work in this nation is manufacturing weapons, manufacturing prisons, and that's it,throw in bread and circuses crap like hollywood and pro sports and videogames for grins, well, what do you think we'll be doing for a living here? Big hint-you won't like it.
I already don't like it and I live here. My momma didn't raise no son who couldn't learn from history.
"Protecting" my nation from that fate is a *good deal*. "Protecting" anyone else's "your" nation from that you should consider as an even "better" deal.
Lots of electrical engineering and non-technical companies. No pure software engineering once again. In fact I've never seen a software engineering firm listed in this study. Of the hardware/software companies, the reason they get on this list is probably their hardware side. I wonder why software is so hard to manage effectively. Is it because you don't have a reliable measurement of employee productivity? Is is because software is hard to modularize?
I'd rather cut my salary 12% and still keep that company alive. But history is not that we can turn back.
Less is more !
I worked for a company that one tough year request "No pay raises for exec's", but then declared a 20 cent dividend. All exec's in the previous year had been given 100,000 shares (Not bought, given!). They thought the employee's would notice 100,000 times .20 = $20,000 /qtr x 4 = $80,000 a year to the exec's. None of the exec's complained about no getting a "pay raise". They often pointed out that they didn't get a raise, some of the exec's even managed to say it without laughing.
Case in point, unionized workers at GE are threatening to strike because they were asked to pick up ~$300 of the ~$2300 increase in health care costs.
Employee sycophantic loyalty is a necessity if you are to require them to write illegal code, or to perjure themselves in court in order to stop said illegal code from being published.
The Fortune study must very cheaply value the employee's immortal soul.
The real problem is that 74 of the 100 worst would be out of business between creation of the plates and distribution of the magazine.
No no, the worse companies to work for, not necessarily the worse companies financially.
Table-ized A.I.
How noble, now the CEO of Xilinx only makes 400x the average Xilinx worker's salary rather than 532x, the average for CEOs. (disclaimer: that 532x is a rough memory, it's in the 500's tho)
I once worked there - it's an engineering country club. All employees arrive at 8:00, the all dash for the door at 4:30. Since it's an FFRDC, it's all government/defense work.
Terrific summary. Bravo.
Well hello to you too!
Transformers, more than meets the eye.. Transformers, Robots in disguise.
And i dont buy the argument that america is headed down the crapper. Our wages, adjusted for inflation, contiune to rise, not as fast as they did right after WWII, but they still have been rising for years, not just for the rich either.
But trade does tend to equalize wages worldwide.
It's just that rising productivity and education allow us to pay higher wages.
In fact, rising productivity is what raises our living standard, fundamentally. Economics just sorts out how our scare resources get distributed, including all the money you are saving. You save and invest, dont you? Cause if you do, then you are part of the "rich some people" that you talk about.
----- Question authority, but not ours. Hate the man, but we're not him.
I would imagine if programmers unionized a lot of programming would be outsourced to places like India.
What you are envisioning is already happening -- and it's one of the best arguments in favor of a tech workers' union. Not only is work being outsourced to second and third world countries, but tens of thousands of H1-B visas are being issued to allow companies to bring in foreign nationals to keep tech wages down in the U.S. (It's not like there is a shortage of unemployed Americans in the tech sector).
A union would give tech workers a much greater ability to resist such outsourcing. Right now, if an employer decides to start outsourcing software development, there's not much the individual software engineer can do about it. Now imagine a picket line in front of the company with unionized tech workers (software engineers, hardware engineers, system administrators, etc.) refusing to cross the picket line. Imagine television reporters interviewing them. Is the light bulb coming on yet?
I used to work at Welch Allyn as a contractor on the Y2K project and I will attest that it was a wonderful place to work!
Hey, when you are done slashdotting, check out Pajonet.com
Quickly becoming the #1 site on the webbbbbbb
What's with technology companies out of Canada, anyway?
A while back, I applied for a job at Optimal Robotics, another Canadian firm that seems pretty successful at selling robotic/automated checkout systems.
Not only was the pay pretty sub-par for an on-site service tech. job of that type (basically, you're on call 24 hours a day, just like a doctor - and you have to provide a 1 hour response time), but the recruiter informed me that it took them a LONG time to even agree to compensate people for mileage. He even commented that it was a "Canadian thing".
A linux-shop ISP with great co-workers...what more could you ask for? Even Stef is good for a few marketing-related jokes and 1000 Quake frags. [userfriendly.org]
In this economy (and the latest unethical corporate practices), a fictional company would get my vote. Even then, A.J. would argue the "fictional" bit.
Why should you deny Indians (or whoever else they decide to outsource programming to) jobs? Are they somehow inferior to the citizens of your own country?
The important thing is that they are not citizens of my country. And the focus of the American government should be to promote the interests of U.S. citizens, not act as an employment agency for the third world.
A few thousand programmers would go on the job market-- highly qualified programmers, whatever you say about Microsoft.
"Go on the job market"? What bullshit-speak! Translation: A few thousand programmers would lose their jobs. Many would have trouble finding work. Some would lose their homes and cars after being unable to make the payments. Many would incur debts and financial troubles that would hound them for decades. Others would be forced to move far away from their families and friends to accept work elsewhere in the country. You don't dump a few thousand people out of work and then expect that they will be absorbed back into the job market within a few weeks.
The average programmer's wage would probably go down some, and, after a while, the numbers of new coders coming out of college would decrease to compensate.
So why should I be satisfied if my wages go down? Should it be okay by me if I can't live in as nice a home? Should I not mind having to save-up for things that I can easily buy now? Am I supposed to be happy to be forced to hold on to a car until it is no longer in good condition?
The programmers that lost their jobs would hardly be starving in the streets
I know qualified tech workers that have been out of work for many months. They are having trouble paying their mortgages, rent, car payments, and utility bills. One was reduced to cleaning people's houses so that she could pay her bills. Don't start your preachy shit about how it's okay for people to lose their jobs.
-- IT workers are generally adaptable people-- they could go back to school, become teachers, or something else that's needed.
How the hell am I supposed to give up a good income while I "go back to school"? Am I supposed to sell my house and tell my family to come live with me in a dorm? Become teachers? Have you even looked at how little pay the average teacher gets? Why not suggest that software engineers who lose their jobs apply at McDonalds, Walmart, and JC Penney?
However, for the 3rd world worker, an IT job seems far more important than to a (relatively) wealthy American. For them, a job programming could mean the difference between food on the table, and the gutter.
If you think that they need your job more than you do, then why don't you take a job at McDonalds so that some third world IT worker can have your job? Have you gone into your boss's office and tried to convince him to bring in a third-world worker to replace you? You seem to think it would be fine if it happened to "several thousand" people at Microsoft, but I don't see you volunteering to give up your job for the benefit of random strangers in third-world countries.
No, thats a bullshit thing. Trust me. You're getting strung along by either someone who doesn't have the capability to agree to your terms, or have permission to agree to them.
Its my experience that Canadians are every bit as competitive as their American counterparts, and have the advantage of having a dollar weaker then the US's.
This sounds almost as bad as those J.D.Powers things where every company seems to win because the categories are rigged with categories something like "Best mid size imported sedan in initial quality" and "Best mid size import sedan in the first two years."
On a clear disk you can seek forever
I used to work for Cerner which is a hospital clinical information system provider. They are the most full of shit company I've ever heard of. When this Fortune poll questionairre came around, it came with a letter stating that not only would the managers read the responses but that if you didn't have everything nice to say about the place, you weren't supposed to fill out the questionairre. Then they gave them to the people who they assumed would have nothing but glowing things to say about the place. They did make the list, but it was pretty close to the bottom.
Now they wouldn't be able to make the list no matter what. They had an executive memo leaked that the CEO expected the parking lot to be full on weekends, which actually made it into a Dilbert strip. Now they can only buy their way into decent rankings in unethical magazines.
Sure, I'd love to work at Microsoft and have four hours of leisure time a day (at least, according to the article), but do I want to risk the embarassment of working for the company who makes Windows Me?
Last Sunday I had dinner with an Intel employee. I told her I thought that one of the reasons Andy Grove (former Intel CEO) got cancer was because he worked too hard. She told me something surprising: She said she had heard that Mr. Grove thought that too.
Burning out employees is a recipe for disaster. It is not a way to make more money.
Whoever put IBM on the list obviously hasn't worked for them.
And all the talk of us making sacrifices, and he's the one who's going to benefit the most when we go public, or more likely, when he sells us off to an offshore company that's probably going to take the IP and high-tail it back across the Big Pond.
In the meantime, it's longer hours for us!
If only the job market didn't suck so much.
Posted anonymously for great justice!
I guess you can class it as propoganda, but I term what I write as merely open promotion of a viewpoint,and I usually provide at least *some* background that leads to the reasoning. Best I'm gonna do on short internet forum posts.
---I "save and invest" but not in the usual manner, not really. Zero stocks or bonds, etc, none.Not even close to being classed as wealthy in any sort of traditional dollar figure way.
I "invest" in things differently, I always strive to eliminate middleman steps and costs for my goods and services, like I bought solar power, so I have a guaranteed minimum electric supply paid off now for years and years. Long term food,open pollinated heirloom seeds,etc, etc what is considered "normal" in the survival and preparedness community but not what is considered normal in "mainstream" joe six pack everything "just in time" community. All of my wealth is (well more or less) in tangibles assets of some form or another. As to money for money's sake, nope, never been a real high interest of mine, and yes, I know that's considered weird but other's opinions of that are not really my concern. Different strokes and all.
Umm, economically your data might need to be rechecked. Just a few thoughts here. We went from the world's largest creditor nation to the world's largest debtor nation in roughly 25 years. If that isn't considered "going down the crapper" I don't know what is. It's not all the way flushed yet, and the swirling around is contributing to the razzle dazzle, but she's been flushed. Check-just for a few-the top ten US banks derivatives exposure, the fortune 500 pension funds exposure, and re-run the social security ponzi scam projected numbers. Check population demographics in the US again. Just look at those, now add in true governmental borrowing/debt as opposed to them calling a reduction in spending once in awhile as a "surplus". Now look at international balance of trade figures. Now look at successful new business starts as opposed to closings and bankruptces and off-shore moves. If you want even more go back and uncook wall street historical indices by re-including the companies they pull off the bottom of the lists when they tank. That little *gem* of a misdirection is used to keep the numbers artifically inflated, it's a great shill.
I don't consider "accumulated debt combined with offers of more credit" to equate "produced accumulated wealth", although, again, I realise most people think they are the same or similar.
Now I don't think it's hopeless, but I do think that there seems to be an agenda or two out there to make things "bad" for awhile and to do it on purpose. You may ponder what that purpose might be for. I have some theories on it. I will term it a "controlled socio/economic implosion with some good plausible deniability" leading to yet another term which is "technofeudalism". Hope I'm wrong, not seeing a lot of evidence to dissuade me, look as I might.
Economically I'm a neo-bear right now if I can coin a term, socially for the US with politics as it is and some other factors I am a hardcore pessimist. Hardcore and not trying to dodge it whatsoever. I don't want to be but I am. The term used is "dragged kicking and screaming" to that position. I make provisions accordingly, and any friendly advice I give people is based on that, same as anyone else comes to conclusions and might offer a view or some advice. I know during the bubble I kept telling friends who were heavily "into" the market to take the profits while they could and not try to ride it to ridiculous heights that were so far out into implausible-land as to be laughable. Some did, some didn't, oh well. What I DO do is change my viewpoint occassionally based on new input and better data and changing current events,and I consider nothing man does as "carved in stone".
Xilinx is not a "semi-startup". They were founded in 1984, currently make over $1 billion a year, and own 50% of the PLD market. (Who writes these things???)
I know people who work at many of the companies listed, and with the exception of SAS Institute (which a few friends working there have told me is an outstanding company to work for) I have heard nothing but horror stories about every single one. My friends don't seem like cynics, but I wonder if it's human nature to complain more than praise?
However, [government] is also grossly inefficient since as a general rule there isn't any competition..
As a rule, this just isn't true. Yes, there are excesses and bureaucracies in government the same way there are the private sector. But in the U.S., by and large, most government institutions are as efficient as or more efficient than their private sector equivalents. Medicare, for example, has overhead costs of only 2 to 3 percent, while the 1500 private health insurers in the United States now consume about 8 percent of revenues for overhead.
Most $1000 used cars are far from reliable and badly overdue major repairs. 25 years ago, you could get decent $1000 dollar used cars. I have had the best value with cars under $5K with 40-60K miles. Most of those have seen regular oil changes and maitnance to qualify for the factory warrenty. After the warranty has expired, they tend to become a hand-me down car which gets abused by a starving student and others who neglect routine maitenance then ditch it when it becomes unrelaiable or won't pass emissions tests. My current car, bought used, got an engine rebuild at 100K miles and is now over 200K and going strong. A little care goes a long way.
When I sell it, it will be one of the worn out $1000 dollar wonders on the back lot. I will only continue to drive it as long as it remains reliable. Believe me, you won't want it. It will be due for major work. Since I've had it for 6 years, the cost including all repars has been under $500/ year. Now if I can figure how to get insurance cheaper than my car, I'll be doing well.
The truth shall set you free!
But are those 100 companies the best companies for an engineer or programmer?
He IS the boss!!! Ahh!!
Sorry, original AC - couldn't resist! I hope you get a better job soon.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
...of this list, particularly since I work for one of the companies on it. Let's just say that, while it's not a sweat shop, this list doesn't take 'level of chaos in the workplace' into account.
Hey that's funny - how is it that no "Linux" companies aren't on that list????? I know! I know! THERE'S NO MONEY TO BE MADE GIVING SOMETHING AWAY. Read that sentence again and again and again. It will make sense to you eventually. I did, however, notice that Adobe and Microsoft were on the list. Hmmm. They make money selling software. Ohhhhhhhhhhh...that's right, I forgot. It's not ethical to SELL software, but it's perfectly OK to copy Windows or Photoshop and give it away to your 2 friends. Isn't that a hoot???
Of course Fortune is a US magazine. But with globalisation, they could have made a worldwide ranking. Would be interesting. And difficult too.
Have you ever BEEN to the Yakima Valley? Look before you leap, man, look before you leap.
"All animals are created equal, but some animals are more equal than others." - George Orwell
Where the hell is Nokia on that list?? They have forgotten it.
Fortune.com missed the #1 which should be the government !!
We need a Lobby, or a PAC. The EFF, FSF, etc. are great for defending the rights of Joe User and his computer. But are seriously deficient when it comes to defending the common ITer. And maybe this is on purpose, I don't remember anywhere on the EFF site saying they exist to help the IT workers. So it's up to us.
It's obvious that money talks in Washington, and you need LOTS of money. You know why seniors are so listened to and placated by Washinton? (And they are, big time) Because the AARP has LOTS of money and they use it.
Here and Today I suggest and offer to form the IT Political Action Committee (PACIT) -- heh packet -- anyone want to join me?
Si hoc legere scis nimium eruditionis habes
Starbucks #47, WOOOHOOO. Oops, gotta go back :-D
and slide cafe
If you have managed to get yourself a good education in India (=rich family), I doubt that you will end up in the gutter no matter what...
Why not outsource the management to India? Why is THAT not happening.
Where do I sign up??
... and then there were none
#!/bin/ksh
for company in `list 100_Best_Companies_To_Work_For`; do
sendresume $company
if [ $? -eq 0 ]; then
add $company fuckedcompany.com
fi
done
I really don't give a fuck where you're from as long as you pay taxes, just like me.
Let's reason through what will happen in your scenario. Someone lives in a third-world country where the average annual wage is less than the typical American makes while taking a dump at work. He seeks a job in the U.S. via the H1-B program. Company X sees that he will work for half of what they pay U.S. programmers, so they say, sure, we'll sponsor him. That means an American is out of work and instead of collecting taxes from that American, they collect half that much from the H1-B worker while paying unemployment to the displaced American worker.
So, who made more money? Company X, of course. But they won't pay taxes on it, because they have an entire staff of accountants and lawyers to make sure that they don't pay any taxes. In fact, despite the fact that they are a defense contractor, they'll probably figure out how to get farm subsidies for not growing alfalfa in the field that is now their parking lot.
Feed this, muther fucker
The employees are just happy to keep their job.
Sounds to me like he's doing something pretty damn wrong. If he's spent over 1.5 years working minimum wage, what's happening to the company? Are people getting paid on time? On one hand I kinda respect it, but on the other, I think, this guy is probably nearly legally retarded.
You'd think in 1.5 years time he could make some kind of turn around. Then again, the US economy is horrible.
Gas from the past
Enron was named today one of the "100 Best Companies to Work For in America" by Fortune magazine. Climbing to number 22 from number 24 last year, Enron is the highest ranking global energy company on the list.
"Our corporate culture and our world-class employees make Enron a great place to work," said Kenneth L. Lay, Enron chairman and CEO. "We are proud to receive recognition as a top workplace; it's a reflection of our commitment to our employees and to their key role in our company's success."
The Fortune survey is based primarily on feedback from employees, who were randomly selected to fill out a 57-question survey developed by The Great Place to Work Institute in San Francisco. The remaining part of Fortune's scoring was based on a culture audit and a detailed human resources questionnaire.
Enron adds the "100 Best Companies to Work For in America" distinction to its "Most Innovative Company in America" accolade, which it has received from Fortune magazine for the past five years. The magazine also has named Enron the top company for "Quality of Management and the second best company for "Employee Talent."
This idea that the CEO is trying to be mister nice guy by taking a 20% pay cut is ridiculous.
A quick financial look shows that the Xilinx CEO Roelandts has over 4 million options worth $122 million. 20% of his $580k salary is NOTHING to him. What is important is stock price. A round of layoffs could deflate his options by $60 million or more if the stock price fell as a result.
If the company is on hard times, then the employee must also adapt to it. If it means longer hours and lower pay, then so be it since it at least puts food on the table and pays the bills.
There have been newspaper articles whereby a company burned down and therefore the employees are out of a job. But, the owner/CEO took money he had and kept every employee on with pay until the company was rebuilt. This was in a town where the only employer was him. Thus, in doing this he got deep employee loyalty to the company and this will be remembered for a long time. A town in New England.
There was another story whereby during the 1930's depression a local company which built the town and owned by a local tycoon business man who grew up there was told by his foreman about a new invention -- the steam shovel. The foreman told him it could replace 40 men and save money. He told the foreman forget about the steam shovel and put the 40 men to work! This was remembered and when the union came knocking at the door a few years later, it was the employees themselves who rose up, supported this man and forced the union out of town. This company was the HERSHEY CHOCOLATE COMPANY in HERSHEY,PA. USA. It worth about $5 billion today.
In the end it's all about people!!!
Of course that the numbers do get a bit inflated, but living on 50K a year is harder in Seattle, Silicon Valley, Boston, or NYC than it is from where I live, in say Western Massachusetts. Companies that are in the gold rush areas have to pay people more so that they can live there.
For instance. Microsoft pays their employees more if they work in the Silicon Valley campus than they do on the Redmond campus. Why? Because in Silicon valley it's more expensive with less cheap suburbs to live in. This internal memo talks about the compensation differences being (at one point), as high as 25%. This is all because of the premium costs of programmer labor in that environment.
If you live in Western Mass, or the Dakotas or rural Pennsylvania where the cost of living is dirt low, then you're all set. Otherwise, making 50K stretch in Silicon Valley is just a bit tougher.
And yes, I understand XBoxes and the like aren't essential, and that there are many people with a lot less. No sense in not being grateful for when fortune smiles upon you.
--jaybonci
Wegmans is one of my local supermarkets. Many years ago they figured out that the secret to sucess in retail is to provide excellent customer service. They also figured out that it takes good workers to provide good customer service. The question was how to find these good workers.
Most supermarkets (around here, at least) hire a lot of high school students to fill part-time positions. One of their Wegman's secrets is to offer an incredibly good college schlarship program for their high school age employees. This program is so good that most of the top students in the local high schools want to work there. The result is that Wegmans can pick and choose who they hire for part-time jobs, and the ones that they do hire are motivated to do well on the job. It also gives Wegmans an opportunity to identify future high-potential candidates for management positions, well before these kids even enter college. It's a long term strategy that is definitely working.
It really surprises me that more retail companies, as well as firms in other industries, don't copy this practice.
SRA is the slimiest place that I have ever worked for, and they will sell any of their employees up the river.
On the contrary: witness Nortel, who pays their Ottawa-based engineers way less than those in North Carolina (which has a similar cost of living, with the reasonable assumption of currency exchange-at-par).
/electronics equipment is generally 1.5x more expensive in Canada due to exchange. My new Powerbook G4 17" laptop is going to be over CAD$6500, what would be (with sales tax) maybe USD$3600 in NYC.
Yet Roth, the CEO, in a widely publicized press statement, blamed the Canadian government's tax system for the brain drain. No, it's stupid pay policies that don't recognize NAFTA creates a "North American Employment Zone" through TN-1 visas. Anyone with a technical degree can jump ship.
(Here's my anecdote. I intend no offense to those unemployed, or affected by the economy, my financial pains are trivial compared to those down and out. I empathize.)
I happen to work in Toronto now at a significant paycut. I make 20% less per paycheck than my last job in NYC as a salaried consultant and trainer. The only reason I took this job is that it was a career move, the people I'm working with and what we're trying to accomplish will be a big resume bonus. But the pay & compensation really wasn't competitive for a senior-level technical lead in software development ("architect", whatever).
I'm still getting compensated significantly above average for a technical position in the area -- because my hiring VP basically gave me "senior manager" level pay, even though I have no subordinates. And she had to fight for that, hard. One quote was: "We don't have engineers, we have programmers." (shudder)
And U.S. computer
That's the general mentality of IT in Canada -- they still believe in paying "managers" more than "performers". A programmer is an interchangable unit of productivity, they never seemed to learn that 10:1 ratio nugget that I believe Capers Jones figured out 20 *YEARS* ago. Seniority and the peter principle rule.
Perhaps some companies are changing. My boss is keeping me satisified with conferences and educational opportunities (a budget she also had to fight for, "WTF do techies need training for?") Thankfully the CIO is on her side.
Wall Street, on the other hand, tends to give enormous compensation packages (even AT PAR, with NYC's cost of living difference) to technical leads that perform.
(std disclaimer, views expressed are mine alone)
-Stu
First off, who do we organize? All IT workers or just the programmers?
:-D
OK, say it's just the programmers. Do we go after the big "body shops"/consultant companies, the independent contractors, or the in-house programmers?
What about the guy who runs the servers and does a "little bit of programming on the side"? How about the guy in accounting who writes all of their spreadsheets? Is it more practical to organize the server rooms first (after all if THEY go on strike...)?
IT is just too amorphous a thing to try to organize it. Not to mention many people work with computers to avoid socializing.
Finally, what do you do with the open source movement? (After all if you're trying to stop code from being produced...)
--- I wish I could hear the soundtrack to my life. That way I'd know when to duck.
you can get some really good cars cheap if you shop around - mine cost GB£1000 (roughly US$1600) last year, with full service history, and is good for several years yet.
Are these companies also rated by the level of political bullshit that their employees have to deal with? To me that is one of the strongest measurements of a how good a company is. I rate that above pay.
GE isnt one of these (before I look I bet $100 USD)
I can't understand why Intel would even be in the top 1000. They're notorious for being horrid slave-masters.
However, I know a guy who works at Xylinx, and they do, indeed, tongue his ass.
These are my friends, See how they glisten. See this one shine, how he smiles in the light.
You have my sympathy. One of my coworkers in Virginia was told that he had a choice: unemployment or work in Arizona. He's been in Arizona for months while his wife and kids try to maintain the family home and their lives. Moving is really not an option for his family for various reasons -- including the fact that the job in Arizona is just temporary.
I think you're missing the point of this thread. The original post (not the article but the top-level response) suggested that an exec making 20 times the salary of an end contributor was therefore (i.e. logically, was the implication) contributing 20 times as much to the well being of the company. Subsequent statements in this thread have focused on (a) the fallaciousness of that notion, and (b) the broader question of whether CEOs can in concept be worth large multiples of end contributors.
I use farming as the example perhaps because great men like Jefferson wanted the US to be an agricultural economy not just in the literal sense but in how business was done. I frankly, do not trust any of the managers I work under currently... either to do what is best for the long term of the company or the employees directly. They are nothing but the modern mercenaries who have learned to present a front of false loyalty and fabricated concern of the organization. Their actions, if actually observed longer than the attention span of most executives is, indicate a rape, pillage and retreat mentality. I respect the business leaders that have figured out that not only can they save a buck (or two... hahaha) but at the same time can take care of their employees. Which by the way, a good leader also realizes is the best way to increase productivity and positive results. Interesting how these lessons of leadership from millinia ago still apply regardless of the buzz words in use today.
"There's public transportation (~$30 per month), car pooling ($negligible), a $1000 used car"
Great. With that used car, you still have insurance (which in CA is a friggin rip-off) and maintenance, and $2 bridge tolls. ($5 if you take the Golden Gate Bridge. yes, FIVE DOLLARS to cross the BRIDGE)
$30/mo for public transportation? Please. I can't afford to buy a $700k condo in San Francisco, so I have to commute to work. BART raised fairs. It's now $3.75 *each WAY* for me to get to work. That's just BART. Then I have to pay $1 for MUNI and $2.25 for Caltrain. That's $7 each way. $14 round trip.
5 days a week.
Public transportation may be cheaper in some places, but chances are if you live where public transportation is going to be cheaper for you, then you're paying a hell of a lot more in rent.
It just ain't the case anymore. What really sucks is the fact that I can't save reciepts and use commuting/transportation expenses as a tax write-off. My company doesn't subscribe to "commuter check" or any similar program, because I work for a lame contracting company.
I'm just happy to have a job in this industry these days.
When people never hear "this is the first black, woman, gay, etc [job position] in [job area] of [geographically delimited boundry]" then we can start to grow up. Basically this is another reason to shout, "just drop it already." I can tell you that such crap only hurts. First people roll their eyes, then they openly scoff... soon they say, "Let them niggers make their own company, they're doing it anyway." Racism is racism and this crap does not help. Be a part of the solution not the problem.
... I dare you to put your hands in these nasty flames if you can swear there is no discrimination and that people will be always judged based on merit an not in other unfortunate considerations.
"Racial quotas" as you disingeniously called them have a reason, which should be evident to anybody that knows a bit of history which reminds us how there used to be some people more equal than others in the land of the free.
IANAL but write like a drunk one.
Tell Skylarov {sp?) that.
Great company indeed.
IANAL but write like a drunk one.
What a load of rubish....
IANAL but write like a drunk one.
You people make my brain bleed. One question. Who's getting the profits? Have you ever noticed that even when a company like Consolidated Freightways goes bankrupt, the execs STILL get their salary plus a year-end bonus (in alot of the cases)? I'm tired of hearing about how unions or otherwise cause problems. It's not a question about how much the COMPANY makes, it's about how much profit must one have in their pocket?
I only ask that I make enough to keep the simple things... hearth & home... a car I can rely on. I was recently reduced to driving a car I couldn't put my kid in, because the exhaust fumes that bled into the car were unhealthy.
Why is it okay for one class of person to profit on other people's loss, no matter WHO it is that is losing out?
I had 10 years of good, stable employment, and then suddonly, BANG! "Economic crunch" "Profit loss". The last company I worked for let 12 people go because they were "losing money". Do you know what that meant? Not that profit was down. They still brought in a profit, just not the profit they EXPECTED. They hadn't reached their GOAL. The company still MADE 2.8 million dollars!
Jeezy-Kreezy people.. WAKE UP!
-=+=-=+=-=+=-=+=-
following my instincts not a trend...
or soup...
reading this whole thread has made me tired, and depressed. I think I'll go commit suicide now, and have my wife await the "no great loss" posts.
-=+=-=+=-=+=-=+=-
following my instincts not a trend...
ok ok here: you're a big important man everybody fears you and respects your irreplaceable skills please let us line up to lick your boots and thank you so much for showing us what worms we are
better?