Slashdot Mirror


Circuit City and the American Dream

An anonymous reader writes "Circuit City said yesterday that it had fired 3,400 of its highest-paid sales staff — 8% of its employees — and will replace them with lower-paid workers. Sign On San Diego called this 'a risky strategy to cut costs that goes beyond the layoffs, buyouts and hiring freezes commonly used by struggling companies.' The fired workers have a chance to apply for lower-paying positions after a 10-week wait, the company said. Quoting a Circuit City spokesman: 'This is no reflection on job performance... We deeply regret the negative impact. Retail is extremely competitive, and if we're going to thrive and operate a successful company... we just have to control costs.' So: work hard, become the best in your field, and get fired so they can offer you a new job 10 weeks later at a lower salary."

835 comments

  1. You have *got* to be kidding me. by Skyshadow · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "Work hard, become the best in your field..."

    Yeah, sorry -- the folks working at Circuit City don't generally really qualify as being the "best in their field", unless you're defining the "field" as "people who work at Circuit City". Besides, Circuit City's not on commission anymore so you can't even argue that these folks were necessarily their top performers.

    But let's accept for a moment the premise of this article. If these folks really are such great salesmen, this is opportunity knockin' at their door -- they can get better jobs at higher-end stores, they can start their own higher-end stores, they can get into selling something that has worthwhile commissions involved with it like software or cars or whatever. I mean, let's face it: Being the best sales associate at Circuit City is along the same lines as being the best cook at McDonald's. If that's where your vision ends, that's almost certainly where you belong.

    That aside, what offends me most is that this thread is this horrific notion that we've devolved to a point where the meaning of the term "American dream" has mutated from 'boundless opportunity in the marketplace and the ability to move out of the economic class you were born into' to 'lifetime employment at Circuit City'.

    Speaking only for myself, if that really were the case then I'd want no part of it.

    The American Dream as I understand it is that when you get laid off from a shitty dead-end job you can go out and find or create something better if you have the drive and/or ability for it. And hey, if your lack the skills or the ambition to go out and work to better your situation, you can always reapply -- I'm sure that red shirt will fit just as well in ten weeks as it does now.

    --
    Every year during my review, I just pray the words "slashdot.org" aren't mentioned.
    1. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by Applekid · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Your analysis on the "American Dream" is spot on. And it's so obviously misplaced here:
      The summary and TFA both have no mention of any "Dreams", American or otherwise.

      Not that crappy old Circuit City doesn't deserve some bias the way they treat some of their customers, but bias none the less.

      --
      More Twoson than Cupertino
    2. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by Rosco+P.+Coltrane · · Score: 4, Funny

      And hey, if your lack the skills or the ambition to go out and work to better your situation, you can always reapply -- I'm sure that red shirt will fit just as well in ten weeks as it does now

      After 10 weeks bored out of your mind on the couch, watching tv with a beer in your hand and listening to your wife pestering you to find another job? not sure the red shirt will fit anymore...

      --
      "A door is what a dog is perpetually on the wrong side of" - Ogden Nash
    3. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by ez76 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Besides, Circuit City's not on commission anymore so you can't even argue that these folks were necessarily their top performers.

      Just because they're not paid for their performance doesn't mean their performance is not evaluated on the basis of sales.

      The whole "don't worry, I'm not commission" line that Best Buy made famous is just that, a ploy to comfort the mark.

    4. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by petabyte · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Ya know, I'm only 20-something but my vision of the American Dream doesn't ever include getting laid-off - and certainly not by a company trying to reduce costs. How do you know these people views this job as dead end?

      It involves working hard, making good money, building a family and a good life for all of us. White-picket fence and all of that (though I hate picket fences - I'll take a split-rail please).

      If these people were the highest paid sales staff and they aren't making commission, then I would imagine they earned that salary buy sticking it out and being with the company for a long time (my assumption, could be wrong). So you stay with a company and work you way up and then someone decides to can you so you can start all over again. JibJab's BigBoxMart video is playing in my head.

    5. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by HomelessInLaJolla · · Score: 3, Insightful

      work hard, become the best in your field, and get fired so they can offer you a new job 10 weeks later at a lower salary Once you've been through this cycle more than twice you will begin to see how the game really works. Then you resolve yourself to waiting out the bullsh*t until a real opportunity comes along. Unless you're some spoiled rich brat you have two decisions: keep recycling yourself back into the game or become homeless while waiting for providence.
      --
      the NPG electrode was replaced with carbon blac
    6. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Again, accepting the premise that these employees were the top of the pile, getting fired in this round is like a glowing reference when looking for new work. You can point to it as an indicator that you were one of their top 8%.

    7. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by mungtor · · Score: 2, Informative

      I think the real problem is related to a previous ./ submission about allowing manufacturers to set the retail price of goods. Depending on your point of view it's either:

      a) Retail is an obsolete business model since the internet offers more convenience for lower prices

      or

      b) Retail needs protection from the internet in order to preserve jobs

      Circuit City is, IMO, doing the only thing they can to try to compete with Amazon, NewEgg, etc. They need to cut costs to keep _some_ people employed or given more time they're all unemployed. It isn't like NewEgg will pick up the slack and need 3400 more people even if every person who shops at Circuit City suddenly started to buy from them.

      There comes a time where you have to decide whether it's better to save $5 for yourself, or spend it so that somebody else has a job.

    8. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by Hoi+Polloi · · Score: 1

      They could differentiate themselves from the internet stores by emphasising personal service but seeing as they are cutting their higher paid people I'd say that isn't going to happen.

      --
      It is by the juice of the coffee bean that thoughts acquire speed, the teeth acquire stains. The stains become a warning
    9. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by Pharmboy · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Then as a 40 something guy who has rode the rollercoaster of business (and done well) let me offer you one piece of advice: The only security you have is in what you can do. You will face layoffs, you will face hard times. If you keep increasing your skills, learning new skills, and improving yourself, then you are less likely to be the one to get laid off. And if you are, you will find it much easier to get a job.

      The "constant layoffs" are not new to 2007, it has been going on for decades. The 80's had a bad reputation for the decade of greed for the same reason. Again, all you have is what you know you can do. No company will ever "give" you security.

      --
      Tequila: It's not just for breakfast anymore!
    10. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by Skyshadow · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Ya know, I'm only 20-something but my vision of the American Dream doesn't ever include getting laid-off - and certainly not by a company trying to reduce costs. How do you know these people views this job as dead end?

      It involves working hard, making good money, building a family and a good life for all of us. White-picket fence and all of that (though I hate picket fences - I'll take a split-rail please).


      I'm sorry that your version of the American Dream relies on such a sense of entitlement. Speaking as someone who is almost 30 and entered the job market right before the dotcom bust, I feel that it's my responsibility to point out that you're living in fantasyland.

      In short, I think you'll find that nobody owes you jack shit. Your employer is paying you to work because it's a good investment for them -- you make them, or allow them to make, more money than they would without you. This is the way things work. Should this cease to be the case, your "expectations" don't amount to a hill of beans.

      I'm sorry if that doesn't seem fair to you, that you feel like showing up to work everyday should earn you the house and the 2.5 kids and all that, but this doesn't change the reality of the situation.

      --
      Every year during my review, I just pray the words "slashdot.org" aren't mentioned.
    11. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by ez76 · · Score: 1

      That aside, what offends me most is that this thread is this horrific notion that we've devolved to a point where the meaning of the term "American dream" has mutated from 'boundless opportunity in the marketplace and the ability to move out of the economic class you were born into' to 'lifetime employment at Circuit City'.

      The American Dream as I understand it is that when you get laid off from a shitty dead-end job you can go out and find or create something better if you have the drive and/or ability for it.

      The thing about the American Dream, as I understand it, is that the dream (including where it begins and "dead ends") is wholly subject to the interpretation of the dreamer.

      And so it is always "mutating".

      So your view, the one that comes part and parcel with condescension to "lesser dreamers", is more aptly named something else.

      Maybe the Skyshadow Dream.

    12. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by Ucklak · · Score: 1

      Retail is a dead end job.
      When your job is in the consumer market pushing products, it's dead end. A machine can do it just as well and with the internet today, well, there you have it. Every employee in retail is replaceable as is the food service industry.
      I'll pay the same price or slightly higher for an item if it's delivered to my door than visit a retail store unless I 'need it now'.

      If you want to take what Circuit City offers and make it a high-end amployment scenario, then take the goods and design an environment that people will pay for in their homes like any home theatre/entertainment integrator. That would be like becoming an executive chef of a restaurant.

      --
      if you steal from one source, that is plagiarism, if you steal from many, well, that's just research.
    13. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by BalanceOfJudgement · · Score: 5, Insightful


      That aside, what offends me most is that this thread is this horrific notion that we've devolved to a point where the meaning of the term "American dream" has mutated from 'boundless opportunity in the marketplace and the ability to move out of the economic class you were born into' to 'lifetime employment at Circuit City'.

      Speaking only for myself, if that really were the case then I'd want no part of it.

      The American Dream as I understand it is that when you get laid off from a shitty dead-end job you can go out and find or create something better if you have the drive and/or ability for it. And hey, if your lack the skills or the ambition to go out and work to better your situation, you can always reapply -- I'm sure that red shirt will fit just as well in ten weeks as it does now.
      --

      While I appreciate your sentiment and agree that the 'American Dream' is MUCH more than lifelong employment at Circuit City, I'd like to offer an opposing view of what is going on here.

      My view is basically this: The American Dream, as you defined (and which I think most Americans would agree with) - is crap. And this action on Circuit City's part only confirms that assertion. It's a lie we tell ourselves to take pride in something that is inherently destructive, something that while it seems good in theory, becomes nearly impossible in practice: Capitalism itself.

      I have spent the better part of my life attempting to understand the intricacies of human nature, particularly with regard to how they influence our social systems (and thus, what the requirements of those social systems are) - and the one point that has always stuck with me is Capitalism itself.

      It seems like such an ideal solution, doesn't it, the economic embodiment of freedom, the nearly boundless promise of free enterprise..

      Except that when you make money the motivating factor for why you do things, the things that SHOULD motivate you as a human being in a human culture - cease to function. The RIAA's recent behavior (suing a 10 year old girl.. come on) eloquently demonstrates this assertion.

      Oh certainly, money need not be the ONLY motivating factor, and for a long time it wasn't. But over time it becomes harder to justify taking a hit to the bottom line just because you care about your employees, doesn't it? Especially when your shareholders are harping on you to increase the stock's value. Especially when there are, at any given moment, dozens of lawsuits against companies for NOT fulfilling their obligations to shareholders.

      And especially, when companies are so richly rewarded for their abuse of the human cultures in which they participate.

      What I am getting at is this: Circuit City doesn't care one whit about the success of our civilization, and accordingly, the value of their employees as ANYTHING OTHER than "human resources" is essentially nil. There is no value in seeing them as people, because well, it makes them just slightly less profitable. Can't have that now.

      No, society falls to shit, and the money-making business doesn't care.. because if the society fails, there's no need for money anyway, but so long as it exists, those with wealth hold all the cards.

      Seeing people as human beings is a liability in a civilization that values wealth as much as we do.

      Quoting Heinlein, "a dying culture invariably exhibits personal rudeness. Bad manners. Lack of consideration for others in minor matters. A loss of politeness, of gentle manners, is more significant than a riot."
      --

      We are the fire that lights our world.. and we are the fire that consumes it.
    14. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by Rosco+P.+Coltrane · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I read your post, and the first thing that sprang to my mind is that you haven't held a serious job yet.

      Your vision of the american dream (the one I had before too) is the stereotypical Horatio Alger story that permeates the entire work culture of the United States, that can be summed up as: if you work hard, you will rise and get a better life. Unfortunately, and this is something that you learn as you get older and have been working for a while for one, more likely several companies, the Horatio Alger dream is just that, a dream. Yes it would be very nice if it was still true, but the reality is that very VERY few better their lives through hard work and perseverance. Very few people start out selling apples and end up millionaires, a-la rockefeller. What happens in reality is that most of the population toils to pays credit, and a sizeable part of the population toils just to make ends meet and stay off the street.

      It's my opinion that the so-called american dream is mostly a myth implanted in people's minds early on in their lives to make them work harder for the same wage, constantly hoping for better days. The reality of America today is that the rich get richer, the poor get poorer, and the middle class finds the "middle" slowly drifting to the bottom.

      Don't get me wrong, I'm not a "leftist" who complains about social inequalities, I have nothing against people being rich, and I myself work hard to have a better future, but without much hope because unfortunately, the social elevator that would allow people to make their lives better through hard work is mostly out of order: most of America is inside the cabin frantically pushing the buttons, hoping that it will finally start to rise, and it doesn't. I think you'll come to realize this too one day.

      --
      "A door is what a dog is perpetually on the wrong side of" - Ogden Nash
    15. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by cayenne8 · · Score: 2, Insightful
      "Ya know, I'm only 20-something but my vision of the American Dream doesn't ever include getting laid-off - and certainly not by a company trying to reduce costs. How do you know these people views this job as dead end?

      Well, open your eyes, it is a big bad world out there in the 'real world', and it is all business, the dollar is the bottom line, and it isn't even close to being supposedly fair. If you go into it knowing that...it can slide off your back when it happens to you, and you won't waste time feeling bad, and can go to the next gig.

      As for the 'view CC job as a dead end?'...well, I think Dennis Miller summed it up best a long time ago: "If you get to be thirty-five and your job still involves wearing a name tag, you've probably made a serious vocational error."

      Really...these kinds of jobs really are only for college and HS students...or should be. You should NOT count on this as a career in this day in age.

      "So you stay with a company and work you way up and then someone decides to can you so you can start all over again."

      Yup..that's the name of the game, especially if you work salaried direct. The days of having a job for life, have been gone for a LONG time. I'd say having a job in one place for 3 years or so is about all you want to do...otherwise you stagnate, and as you age and get more $$ at the same place, your position (unless you progress up the mgmt tree) become less and less tenable...and at some point you will be canned 'cause they can save $$ by replacing you with a noob just outta school. (Heck, think about it...YOU probably replaced and older guy that was canned just before you were hired).

      The company of today, does not care about you or the American Dream, it cares about the bottom line. If you can get the mindset, you can work within this paradigm and succeed, but, you have to quit thinking like an 'happy employee for life'.

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    16. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by afidel · · Score: 1

      Actually, these are basically the remaining folks from the old commission system. The people averaging below $15.75/hour in commission were kept around, but the new cap is like $10/hour, so they are basically getting rid of all the old commission people who were pretty good.

      --
      There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.
    17. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by voice_of_all_reason · · Score: 5, Funny

      After ten weeks of watching cartoons and eating cocoa puffs, I might not want to go back.

    18. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by dougsyo · · Score: 2, Insightful

      If these people were the highest paid sales staff and they aren't making commission, then I would imagine they earned that salary buy sticking it out and being with the company for a long time (my assumption, could be wrong). So you stay with a company and work you way up and then someone decides to can you so you can start all over again.

      This happened to a friend of mine with Best Buy a number of years ago. He had been a store manager for some time (I think close to ten years), and his side of it is that they found a way to get rid of him because he cost too much to keep compared to less-tenured store managers.

      "We want cheap rather than good" seems to be the American way right now.

      Doug

    19. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by EastCoastSurfer · · Score: 1

      The American Dream is only possible because we have the freedom to work hard and do all the things that the American Dream requires. With freedom comes responsibility. This means keeping your skills updated, paying attention to what's going on around you, realizing that for the most part your situation is one that you caused, etc...

      Anyone who watches any news at all knows CC has been having problems. People who work there should have even know before someone like me on the outside noticed. In the broader sense I expect more big retailers to soon start feeling the pinch of the housing ATM collapse.

    20. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by iamacat · · Score: 1

      c) Retail needs to evolve to provide advantages over Internet shopping.

      Build a showroom-type store where you buy low-end items as usual, but for high end items there are only a couple of copies to play with in real life and then get it shipped home for Internet price (since you eliminated stocking overhead). Host LAN parties and get participants to buy hardware and games in question. Provide in-store and at-home customer service. Open an advertise a location in second life where people can fit the items into their room before buying. The fact that the guy with $1.4M salary and a corporate jet didn't even attempt any innovations in a small, inexpensive experimental store just shows that big companies != capitalism.

    21. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by BalanceOfJudgement · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I meant to add this, because it alters the tone of my post somewhat, but of course Slashdot doesn't let you edit posts:

      There are features of Capitalism which I do actually really like, and that I still think are workable. But since capitalism is a system we invented, we are consequently responsible for how we run it. The choices we make, the values we hold, influence how we build our civilization. We can choose to be responsible in our pursuit of value, or we can choose to cut every corner, cut every throat, in our grasp for wealth.

      Currently, we are increasingly choosing the latter. It doesn't have to be that way. But Capitalism isn't an end in itself, and its purpose can ONLY BE to serve us.. but we have to make it do so. It's hard, to choose to give up wealth for values, but that isn't really a sacrifice, when we consider how much our values actually mean to us.

      Unfortunately, we don't seem to be making that choice. Or we are, and what we're choosing really is this destructive.

      --

      We are the fire that lights our world.. and we are the fire that consumes it.
    22. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      You will face layoffs, you will face hard times.

      Sorry, no.

      I work for the government. I'm a "civil servant". I make high 5 figures, and I'm not management. I'm a member of a union. I will not be fired / layed off / downsized / whatever.

      Have a nice day.

    23. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by GreyPoopon · · Score: 1

      Yeah, sorry -- the folks working at Circuit City don't generally really qualify as being the "best in their field", unless you're defining the "field" as "people who work at Circuit City".

      I think you're missing the point here. The "field" would be "people who work at budget electronics retailers". What's of note is that customers are constantly complaining about how bad the employees are at Circuit City, Best Buy and other retailers with similar market goals. The move that Circuit City is making will only exacerbate that situation, and is likely to spark a competitive war that will leave consumers to choose between expensive high-end stores that provide good service and budget outlets that provide unimaginably poor service. I think most of us would rather have a third choice that combines reasonable prices with reasonable service. I believe that this will ultimately emerge, but not before a period of chaos and consumer discontentment.

      That aside, what offends me most is that this thread is this horrific notion that we've devolved to a point where the meaning of the term "American dream" has mutated from 'boundless opportunity in the marketplace and the ability to move out of the economic class you were born into' to 'lifetime employment at Circuit City'.

      I agree 100 percent. The article summary would certainly be the biggest misinterpretation of the American Dream that I've ever seen.
      --

      GreyPoopon
      --
      Why is it I can write insightful comments but can't come up with a clever signature?

    24. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by dabraun · · Score: 1

      Except that when you make money the motivating factor for why you do things, the things that SHOULD motivate you as a human being in a human culture - cease to function. The RIAA's recent behavior (suing a 10 year old girl.. come on) eloquently demonstrates this assertion.


      Who are you to define what "should" motivate people as human beings? Money IS the defined system of value - and there is no other measurable or accurate system of value. Everything else is prone to PR games - including TFA.

      Who knows if the highest paid employees were actually the best employees? If they were, this is probably a dumb move, but I'll give Circuit City the benefit of the doubt that they probably thought about this before making their decision. You don't fire your best employees, you might fire your most expensive ones if they are merely the most expensive because they have been there the longest. Anyone who remains a sales clerk at Circuit City for a long time is likely not going to be one of the best employees anyway - the best Circuit City employees will find themselves making several times as much somewhere else within a few years.
    25. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by corbettw · · Score: 4, Insightful

      You're confusing the American Dream (being your own boss, owning your own home, having a wife that doesn't work and children in private school) with the French dream (lifelong employment at one employer). The two are completely irreconcilable.

      --
      God invented whiskey so the Irish would not rule the world.
    26. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by 192939495969798999 · · Score: 1

      The saying is: "the rich get richer and the poor get children". It implies that society's classes are morally as well as financially disparate, which shows how old an argument this really is!

      Hard work may not yield success, but slacking off DEFINITELY won't yield success. I'll take the chance and continue to work, it's paid off for me so far.

      --
      stuff |
    27. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by Night+Goat · · Score: 1

      I think Circuit City's having to adapt to getting their ass handed to them by Best Buy. They're getting killed by Best Buy. I remember when I was working at Circuit City (1998 or so) and Best Buy was starting to provide a bit of competition, but CC wasn't worried. Recently though, I was watching "Mad Money" on CNBC and the host, Jim Cramer, was saying that Best Buy is completely dominating the retail electronics market.

    28. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "We want cheap rather than good" seems to be the American way right now.


      Right now? It's been that way for several dozen years.
    29. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think it also has something to do with babies on spikes or something. By contrast, the European dream is about driving little motorized scooters and saying "Chao" in a really cool way.

    30. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by Lord+Ender · · Score: 1

      There comes a time where you have to decide whether it's better to save $5 for yourself, or spend it so that somebody else has a job.
      That's brilliant economic thinking. I know, lets go around breaking windows so that we can employ people to fix the windows. Sure, it costs, money to break windows, but it provides other people with jobs. /In an dynamic economy, one must adapt or die. It isn't fair, but it's reality. Adaptability is much more valuable than "hard work" and "dedication."
      --
      A slashdotter who didn't build his own computer is like a Jedi who didn't build his own lightsaber.
    31. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by AndersOSU · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I agree with you ... to a point.

      I'm in my mid twenties, and am constantly amazed at what people in my age range feel entitled to. I expect to work my way up, and don't expect any particular loyalty from my employer. Pension plan ha - that's a good one - now tell me about social security that cracks me up every time. On the flip side that they expect some long-term loyalty from me is really hilarious.

      However, that circuit city feels that they can exercise their lack of loyalty so egregiously is disgusting. As soon as I read about this I decided not to spend another dime there - not that big a loss since the last three times I went in there prepared to throw money at them they made it so frustrating that I drove the extra 15 minutes to Best Buy (not exactly the savior of the little guy I know).

    32. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by lord_mike · · Score: 5, Insightful

      There once was a time when people living in the richest country in the world had a reasonable expectation that they could share in that wealth as long as they worked hard and played by the rules. It's not an unfair "expectation". After all, the 50's era (a time that conservatives like yourself laud as being the American ideal) was a time where you could get a good job with great security and live well for the rest of your life. You would have health insurance, life inusrance, pension, the whole 9 yards. If someone brought that up today, they would be accused of being a communist, yet this era was considered the capitalist ideal--the idea of the American Dream came from this time period in history.

      Even crappy retail jobs that are being derided on this site had these kind of benefits. A retail person COULD own a house, believe it or not... almost impossible today.

      Of course, back then we had control over markets, imposed trade barriers, and the population had significant union representation. We also actually manufactured things, as opposed to today. Conservatives who want to go back to the 50's conveniently forget these facts.

      But, it is irrelevant... at some point we became so jaded when these ideals were stripped from our society, that we now resent and try to bring down anyone who still has health insurance, union membership, or a pension plan. Instead of demanding more for ourselves, we are demanding less for everyone else--somehow it is better for everyone to be dragged down rather than lifting everyone up.

      It's a little depressing that Americans have been so beaten down by the system that they are afraid to stand up for themselves. What's even sadder is that posters like yourself seem intent on cutting off your nose to spite your face.

      It is no wonder that the United States of America is in such a bad state. It's time for America to rise up and demand the America Dream again. It is our birthright, but only if we stand up for it.

      Thanks,

      Mike

    33. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by homer_s · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The reality of America today is that the rich get richer, the poor get poorer, and the middle class finds the "middle" slowly drifting to the bottom.

      That is simply not true. Did the poor in the 1950s have access to the kind of healthcare that someone on Medicare has to now? Did they drive better cards? Did they have access to the kind of technology ppl have access to today?

      Yes, the rich get richer much much faster than the poor do - but it is false to say that the poor get poorer. That is only true in socialist paradises like Zimbabwe and soon Venezuela.

      Read this for some more commentary. There is also a piece by the leader of the communist party of the USA for more 'balanced' coverage.

    34. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by MightyYar · · Score: 1

      Viva la Revolucion!

      --
      W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
    35. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by mungtor · · Score: 1

      Retail already does, but they don't count for much. Retail allows people to see, touch, and/or hear things before they buy. The problem is that after they do that at a retail outlet, they go buy it on the internet for less money. In effect, they're using the services of retail without paying for them. Even an competent sales person gets burned by that. They spend 20 minutes educating the consumer who then says "I'll have to think about it" which is code for "cool, now I'll go home and buy it from Amazon".

    36. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I'm sorry that your version of the American Dream relies on such a sense of entitlement.

      And as a guy who turns 55 next week, I'm sorry that yours doesn't. If you work hard, you SHOULD BE entitled to the fruits of your labors.

      If you're lazy, steal from your employer, go to work drunk, act like a total jerk to your fellow employees then you should lose your job. But to lose your job when the fat cat CEO earns five hundred times what you do so that the company can hire a replacement for you at a lower pay rate, well, that's just plain damned evil.

      And for you, as a worker, to believe that this is in any way fair or equitable, or that your employer doesn't owe you a living for your labor, well, that's just plain retarded. If you believe that, you fucking deserve to lose your job.

      It's time to quintuple the minimum wage, and then bring back the unions. Bullshit like Circut City never happened back when 75% of workers were unionized. Now that only 10% of us are in unions, they have us by the balls. And it's idiots like you who think it's the UNIONS that are evil that allow this bullshit to happen! Grow a fucking brain, moron.

    37. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by KalgarThrax · · Score: 1

      Nice post, but I would like to point something out: Why ride the elevator "to the top?" What is "the top?" These are legitimate questions I am not going to answer, but everyone who is pursuing "dreams" ought to ask oneself.

      Let me also present two definitions on the word "elite." One revolves around the notion of the people up top who control the rest of us, irrespective of their abilities, just because they have money. The other definition of the same word brings us back to the military meaning. An elite soldier is worth 10 greenhorns.

      I strive to achieve the second meaning, as I find it gives me more happiness.

    38. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by Rageon · · Score: 1

      According to my roommate, a Circuit City employee, they do not get paid any commissions at all. Apparently, they used to, but changed, and I guess it was a huge deal when they did, because people who were previously making $20+ an hour were now going to be making a set salary of $8 an hour, or so.

    39. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by danpsmith · · Score: 2, Insightful

      But let's accept for a moment the premise of this article. If these folks really are such great salesmen, this is opportunity knockin' at their door -- they can get better jobs at higher-end stores, they can start their own higher-end stores, they can get into selling something that has worthwhile commissions involved with it like software or cars or whatever. I mean, let's face it: Being the best sales associate at Circuit City is along the same lines as being the best cook at McDonald's. If that's where your vision ends, that's almost certainly where you belong.

      You've got to be kidding me if you think not only that losing your job is an opportunity but that people at Circuit City get paid enough to start their own stores, or that high end stores won't soon be going out of business in favor of walmart or best buy starting their own "high end sections." Sure, there might room for the 1% of rich people that are too snobby to go to walmart and you can sell to them, but that's not enough to make up a business model in a regular town. Like it or not, salespeople are relegated to this position in the new economy so stop trying to act like Circuit City was doing them a favor by firing them. People have bills to pay, life costs money, firing someone is no favor or opportunity.

      --
      Judges and senates have been bought for gold; Esteem and love were never to be sold.
    40. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by Jimmy+King · · Score: 1

      They could differentiate themselves from the internet stores by emphasising personal service but seeing as they are cutting their higher paid people I'd say that isn't going to happen.
      As an ex-Best Buy employee (as in 10 or so years ago) I'd argue that the top paid/"ranked" employees weren't giving good personal service. They may have been good at making the customer think they were getting good personal service, but that was just part of the sales tactic which allows them to do what really gets them top paid and thought of as a top employee.

      What really gets you to be a top salesperson is sticking the gold plated USB (or parallel in my day)cable in their cart, plus a couple ink refills for the printer they are buying, selling the extended warranty, selling the latest re-branded and/or ISP partnership subscription, and selling them on the overpriced "system maintenance" where the in store techs go through and remove excess software, etc. (which isn't necessarily a bad thing, but hardly worth the $30 or whatever to most people who are going to want some of that crap back and/or just install new junk software instead).
    41. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      And that is what's wrong with American government agencies. There are so many ridiculous protections that people have little motivation to do their jobs well, which is why anything the government does ends up half as good and takes three times as long as the private sector. Oh please, lets do elect Hillary so my healthcare can be run like that!

    42. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Karl Marx, is that you?

    43. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by jythie · · Score: 2, Insightful

      >The company of today, does not care about you or the American Dream, it cares about the bottom line. If you can get the mindset, you can >work within this paradigm and succeed, but, you have to quit thinking like an 'happy employee for life'.

      I think it is less the companies care more about the bottom line then they did in the past, and more the idea of investing in your employees has fallen out of favor. Even in retail, if someone knows their job and has been doing it for a long time, you generally pay them more for their experience because the company benefits from it. Instead you end up with a flock of 1 year drones who don't know anything about the current (much less legacy) product lines, give terrible customer service (since dealing with customers well _IS_ a skillset) and generally makes a worse customer experience,.. not to mention a less efficiently run store.

      So they are trading these people who have built up skills and knowledge that the store and customer benefit from for a short term influx of savings.

      I think people in tech and management tend to be a little too quick to undervalue customer facing jobs and how they can affect a company's success.

    44. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by slashkitty · · Score: 1
      I've been laid-off (from a job I loved) and it didn't hurt a bit. Had a few months off, worked on some independent projects, then eventually got another job. The independent work eventually paid off, and I've since moved onto an even better gig (a job I even love more and even better pay).

      I find the whole working at one company very boring. You get much better experience and knowledge working through different jobs and different situations.

      --
      -- these are only opinions and they might not be mine.
    45. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by drinkypoo · · Score: 3, Insightful

      In short, I think you'll find that nobody owes you jack shit.

      In court, you're right. But to a reasonable person, if I work hard for someone, I deserve and am owed respect and fair treatment. It doesn't mean I'm going to get it, just like having a right to life, liberty, and happiness doesn't prevent the government from doing its level best to interfere with all three.

      The most important message is that respect works both ways, but fear only works in one. If you work for an employer who, when they fire someone, always just drops it on them without notice, that has a chilling effect on your loyalty. If you work for an employer who fires people and hires them back at less pay to save money, well, don't you think that has a chilling effect? It's bad for everyone.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    46. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by Viper+Daimao · · Score: 2, Insightful

      the 50's era (a time that conservatives like yourself laud as being the American ideal) Wow, someone sure likes to put words in strawmen's mouthes.
      --
      "In the game of life, someone always has to lose. To me, if life were fair, that someone would always be Oklahoma." -DKR
    47. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by petabyte · · Score: 1

      Geez, almost as many people jumped on you as jumped on me heh.

      I'm on my 3rd serious job (serious in the sense that I pay all of my bills, work full time, etc) since college.

      But, I'm writing back on your post as I agree spot on with your 3rd paragraph. I'm fully aware the American Dream is just that, a Dream. But I'm also not exactly happy when a group of people gets kicked out of their jobs. I sympathize, but I also imagine most of them will be fine and trade in red shirts for blue shirts (or yellow or whatever).

      On the other hand, it is possible I just haven't become cynical enough (and I'm pretty damned cynical). Oh well, tomorrow is another day.

    48. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      After ten weeks of sitting in the dark because you can't pay your cable bill and no beer money, with your soon-to-be ex wife's lawyer pestering you to get a job, that red shirt may be a bit big for you. (maybe you could get a job as a red-shirt on star-trek?)

    49. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by tomz16 · · Score: 1

      Fantastic. You are 20, so you still have plenty of time to readjust your perverted vision of the American Dream and come down from your ivory tower of entitlement before reality hands your ass to you.

      My parents came to the USA from a communist country 20 years ago with literally the clothes on their back. They knew nobody, didn't speak English, and had absolutely no marketable skills whatsoever. They absolutely worked their ass off at every menial job they could find, working several jobs, night shifts, weekends... whatever it took. When they got fired or laid off, they went out and found another, often better job. They never looked for a handout or a gimme, and growing up I NEVER heard them complain. They saved every penny that they possibly could, and now they own property in several states and their annual income is an order of magnitude above the American average. The American Dream is not about a good life for ALL of us, the American Dream is about boundless opportunity for those willing to work for it.

      "Opportunity is missed by most people because it is dressed in overalls and looks like work."
      -Thomas Edison

    50. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by AndersOSU · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Really I think the beef isn't so much with capitalism as it is with corporatism.

      Most of the problems really emerged with widely held companies. Every investor wants a return, and everyone is an investor. The problem is that this is a self-defeating proposition, because to increase profits means to cut costs, and the investor is also an employee. Essentially the investor is urging for his own termination.

      Not that there aren't serious problems with private companies, but when only a few people make the decision they can sometimes be convinced that the parts of the business that cost a lot are precisely what makes customers want to buy their wares.

    51. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by melchoir55 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Then as a 40 something guy who has rode the rollercoaster of business (and done well) let me offer you one piece of advice: The only security you have is in what you can do. You will face layoffs, you will face hard times. If you keep increasing your skills, learning new skills, and improving yourself, then you are less likely to be the one to get laid off. And if you are, you will find it much easier to get a job.

      The "constant layoffs" are not new to 2007, it has been going on for decades. The 80's had a bad reputation for the decade of greed for the same reason. Again, all you have is what you know you can do. No company will ever "give" you security. One of the main points in this article is that the people who DID work hard and improve themselves were the ones who got laid off. Saying they [skilled workers] can just go get a better job elsewhere seems shortsighted since, if they could easily go get a better job, one would presume they'd have already done so.
    52. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It attitudes like yours that has killed community and workers rights. Chances are you never be anything more than little people anyway. We a human beings not a fricking commodity. Is that what you really want, to be a fatted calf slaughtered by the corporate system. Wake up a revolt while you still can. Or be a miserable consumer and slave to the man.

    53. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by Pollardito · · Score: 1
      everyone seems to be dodging around the fact that these people made more money than the other workers because Circuit City felt that they should make more money. forget about if this is contrary to the American Dream, it's contrary to every possible notion that someone could teach a manager about motivating their workers, and it's probably going to get them sued. quotes like this in the article really leap out at anyone that takes the time to RTFA:

      They weren't given the option of taking a pay cut, Circuit City spokesman Bill Cimino told Bloomberg News.

      "This is no reflection on job performance," he said. "We deeply regret the negative impact. Retail is extremely competitive, and if we're going to thrive and operate a successful company for our shoppers, employees and shareholders, we just have to control costs."
      why not scale back raises, or maybe freeze salaries?

      "If you've been there three or four years, you get your salary up if you're any good," [George Whalin of Retail Management Consultants] said. "So they're saying, 'We'll get rid of the most knowledgeable people who have been around the longest and hire people who haven't a clue.' It doesn't make sense to me."
      exactly! how is anyone who still works there going to feel that this company has any prospects for them? i'm not talking "work at this same job your whole career" prospects, i'm talking "maybe i'll be manager in a couple years" or "maybe i can get a good raise over the next few years" prospects. they fired people because those people took raises that they gave them
    54. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by cayenne8 · · Score: 1
      "I think it is less the companies care more about the bottom line then they did in the past, and more the idea of investing in your employees has fallen out of favor. Even in retail, if someone knows their job and has been doing it for a long time, you generally pay them more for their experience because the company benefits from it...."

      Possibly....I dunno. In the past, I think there was a 'little' more humanity to employment...I mean, there used to be jobs 'for life' if you performed well for the company. I think today....well, it is more the bottom line. I've worked retail before while growing up. I've sold clothes, shoes...I've worked in the restaurant business, from washing dishes (my first job) to waiting tables, to bartending (the good money back then). Yes, it takes a talent to face the public. This is especially so when you see how freakin' rude, stupid and ignorant most of the 'general public' is. You have to be able to have people skills, etc. You'd think the companies would see and value this...but, they do not.

      "So they are trading these people who have built up skills and knowledge that the store and customer benefit from for a short term influx of savings.

      I think people in tech and management tend to be a little too quick to undervalue customer facing jobs and how they can affect a company's success."

      Like I said...I've done it through my career before landing in tech. I'd dare say that my people skills, and not having a fear of actually getting in front of people and speaking have brought me a long way. In fact, I'd dare say that I've gotten jobs, and had longevity over people that were technically MUCH more skilled than I was....it shows that those skills are very valuable, but, often at the very level where employers of customer facing jobs are, they do not seem to understand that valuable lesson. Hence...all the really crappy, non-existant customer service friendly public establishments we live with today.

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    55. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by cyberchondriac · · Score: 1

      I don't think any one single system is the "answer", be it capitalism, or some form of communism or socialism.
      That's why our current system is something of an integration of capitalism and socialism, like a system of checks and balances, each hopefully strengthens where the other has a weakness.
      No system, however, will ever be perfect, even the hybrids, because it all comes down to human nature, and we are not perfect. For that reason, I don't see us as capable of creating a perfect system, but the hybrid system is probably the best.

      It boils down to this : people need motivation. For hypothetical purposes, let's say we have a Utopian society such as that in Star Trek; all needs are provided for, there is no poverty, and there doesn't seem to be money, either, for that matter. What then, would motivate people to work, or more importantly, take on the harder jobs from the pool of jobs that are available? What about jobs that were dangerous, tedious, or required a lot of education and work ? If everyone gets the same "pay" and the same living conditions, why might someone feel compelled to become a brain surgeon when they could enjoy the same life comforts as a mailman ? Capitalism addresses this human condition whereas other systems seem to wear rose tinted glasses; but, like you point out, Capitalism also has it's problems; the other extreme leads to greed.
      There is only one deadly sin: Greed. The other 6 are merely variations and different degrees of greed.

      --

      Look back up at my post, now look back down, you're on the Internet. Now look back up. I'm a signature.
    56. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by danbeck · · Score: 1

      I agree with your point and well said! The American dream has never been about becoming a corporate drone to hawk overpriced electronics to ignorant consumers.

    57. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by petabyte · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I suppose I've had a different experience. I my field, I'm somewhat in demand so people try to keep me. However, I've been seriously working for 3 years and changed jobs almost every year. As openings come up, I climb up the ladder. My employeer has both a "penison" and a 401K - I only have faith in the 401K.

      I understand what Circuit City is doing. As a company I'm pretty convinced they're over with. I can't recall the last time I went to one of their stores although I think that was for giftcard or something. They're trying to save money in whatever way they can. I really think they have to change how they do business and the way their stores are setup to compete with BestBuy but I really think it is too late for that. Anyway, I'll probably be buying stuff online.

    58. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Even in retail, if someone knows their job and has been doing it for a long time, you generally pay them more for their experience because the company benefits from it."

      The thing about investments is, it's all about return. Retail at Circuit City does not require a ton of experience. Don't get me wrong, an experienced sales person is better than inexperienced sales people But it is one of the most trainable jobs we have. 16 year old high school kids can be GREAT CC sales people, I've seen them! The law of diminishing returns plays into effect here. After a certain point, every additional month (or year, or week, whatever) you have buys you less and less. Taken to an extreme: someone with 10 years CC experience is probably not that much better than someone with 3 years experience.

      Companies need a reason to invest in employees. It has to mean they are going to make more money. These are not charities. They HAVE to make money to grow or they can't employ ANYONE.

      When all is said and done, a sales associate at CC is a gateway job. It should either get you sales experience and you move on to a better sales job, or experience in CC and you move on to management. Companies sometimes need to layoff people. The people they laid off will likely get better job. It happens. It's business.

    59. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That is to funny. You mean the France where anyone under 30 can't even get a job?

    60. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by UbuntuDupe · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I recently suggested a solution to this dilemma based on someone's remark on that topic.

      Basically, someone should set up "stores" that don't make money on sales at all, but essentially just rent you access to the showroom so you can figure out what you need (and then perhaps rate the people there based on how informative they are -- like Slashdot) and then find the cheapest place online to get it (either using their computers there or just go home having a better idea of what you need). They would have no qualms about telling you, "ah, you don't need this stuff".

      Depending on the money needed to make it work, you could either run them for-profit or as a co-op where your "membership fee" is all or partly your service of working there part-time in a department you're already knowledgeable about. You help people find what computer they should get, and in return, old folks there teach you what gardening equipment you should get (for example).

    61. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by rolfwind · · Score: 1

      You can still get a decent job with important benefits (health insurance) and security - be a teacher in a good (rich) school district or work for the government. I'm not kidding.

      BTW, I wonder how many overpaid executives got laid off...

    62. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by danbeck · · Score: 1

      Er, I guess that should be "hock" and I didn't even really use that correctly. You get the point. =)

    63. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by Shotgun · · Score: 1

      Except that when you make money the motivating factor for why you do things, the things that SHOULD motivate you as a human being in a human culture - cease to function.

      Dude, you talk like you think greed is something new. Grow up. It was greed that has driven the US to be the greatest nation in the world. It will one day drive this world to be the greatest in the universe.

      Capitalism is the only system that deals with humans as they truly are. Greedy peons who worry for little more than themselves and those closest to them. I don't deny for a second what I am. The ideal of capitalism is that individual greed can be channelled into societal greed.

      "Your labor is a commodity," someone very smart told me 20yrs ago (damn, I'm getting old), "you need to go out and sell it to the highest bidder."

      These Circuit City employees would quit immediately if they got an offer for a better job, and none of us would blame them. Why shouldn't CC send them packing if they can find someone to do the same job for less money? If a guy bags groceries for 20 yrs, is he worth more as a grocery bagger than the guy that's been doing it for 6 months? If these employees are so good, it shouldn't be to hard for them to sell themselves to someone needing like services.

      --
      Aah, change is good. -- Rafiki
      Yeah, but it ain't easy. -- Simba
    64. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, because when the outsourcing doesn't go well and causes costs to ballon, or when the people buying for a retail channel miss the mark and dedicated all kinds of space and money to things that no one wants in their house, let alone to pay for, it's the guys at the bottom that are at fault.

      Answer me this Alex P. Keaton, why does medicare run with only about 4% of the program going to overhead, and the private (supposedly more efficient) sector need more like 20%? Oh... That's right, capitalism in well-regulated markets where the businesses are small with respect to the over all market are efficient. When businesses are dominant over large pieces of the market, they tend to become less efficient until they're wildly inefficient monopolies. The fact is most of the wealth nations enjoy are the direct result of government policies. In fact the "private sector" mantra as practiced by the republicans in particular results in a almost comically grotesque swindling of the government. See Haliburton.

    65. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by Number6.2 · · Score: 1

      Interesting. I agree with your position. Here's another perspective that comes to the same conclusion:

      I'm half Irish. Do you know why so many people died in the potato famine (did you know there was a potato famine in Ireland? Just ask a Boston cop...) Anyway, Ireland had enough arable land to be self sufficient. it's just that the people who *owned* that land...lived in England. And They wanted cash crops. So guess what didn't get planted.

      I see the same problem with corporatism. The shareholders don't see pain and suffering, they only see "the bottom line". "Sentimentality has no cash value" (an interesting line from "We're No Angles", a classic Bogie movie). And as long as those dividend checks keep arriving, The Owning Class doesn't care.

      Until, of course, the riots start.

      Personally, I think that any company larger that 500 people is starting to slide into the Dark Side. I work for a large financial with thousands of employees, with Galactic Headquarters in the midwest. Way too big.

      But that's just my 2 cents.

      Thanks for your insight.

      6.2

      --
      "If god did not exist, it would be necessary to invent him" --Voltaire
    66. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by jeffeb3 · · Score: 1

      A little Circuit City history for you. Before they took away commission (In Jan 2003, I think), some people were making a lot of money at circuit city. They changed the rules. Anyone making more than $40,000/year, based on their average comm./hour, was either given a manager position or shown the door, with a severance package based on the years they served. Anyone who was on commission and made less that 40K (~$16/hour) would get their average hourly rate to keep working. As long as they kept up enough not to get fired, they would keep their rate. I worked on commission there for three years (I was 16-19 yrs old) and I worked a lot harder than peers that were making hourly wages. If you've never worked on commission, you should realize that it takes a lot of energy to me happy every day at work. After they had an hourly wage, they didn't have to work as hard, but got paid the same. Sounds like a cushy deal to me. Any new hires had a cap on their hourly wage (something like $9.75/hour). I imagine that was competitive to the Best Buy wages at the time, but I don't know that personally. So there was a large gap of people who were working for $10-$16 per hour and doing the same job as the new people no matter who was smarter or harder working or more honest. My guess is that Circuit City just fired all the people who were making more than their current hourly wage cap. Seems to make sense to me. If the workers are actually worth that much, then they will find another job that pays well. If not, then they were getting paid too much. Pretty simple. I don't see this as any different then when they were working for commission. People that made the money, got paid the money. Simple concept.

    67. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by Dun+Malg · · Score: 1

      Sorry, no.

      I work for the government. I'm a "civil servant". I make high 5 figures, and I'm not management. I'm a member of a union. I will not be fired / layed off / downsized / whatever.

      Incorrect. The risk may be lower, but a government job doesn't make you immune to layoffs.
      --
      If a job's not worth doing, it's not worth doing right.
    68. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by EastCoastSurfer · · Score: 2, Insightful

      If you work hard, you SHOULD BE entitled to the fruits of your labors.

      It's called a paycheck. Unless I missed something these people were paid every week or 2 while they were working.

      It's time to quintuple the minimum wage, and then bring back the unions. Bullshit like Circut City never happened back when 75% of workers were unionized. Now that only 10% of us are in unions, they have us by the balls. And it's idiots like you who think it's the UNIONS that are evil that allow this bullshit to happen! Grow a fucking brain, moron.

      That's a great idea. Let unions milk another industry and run it into the ground like what happened to the automotive industry.

    69. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      A dream can be anything that you work towards.

      If you limiting it to reality 2.0, then it is no longer a dream - just a goal.

    70. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by svendsen · · Score: 1

      But if we lived in a Utopian society we wouldn't need jobs...if we need to work to survive then it must be a non utopian society. I think the utopian society would be one of Greek mythology where you wake up and realize all you have to do is eat, sleep, and have sex.

    71. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by johnlcallaway · · Score: 1

      All jobs are 'dead end' jobs. I don't know of anyone who has worked at one company for 20 years and advanced from mail clerk to a VP.

      All jobs bring with them opportunities to learn things, no matter how menial. I worked retail for 6 months to earn some extra cash and somehow managed to gain from it. I improved my interpersonal skills by learning how to say 'hi' to strangers, improved my negotiation skills by learning how to sell service agreements on cheap ass products I knew would break and would be needed. I also learned how to tell my boss 'No, I'm not working this weekend' in a way that wasn't confrontational and allowed me to keep my job until I wanted to quit. I learned how to deal with difficult customers without losing my cool. I look back at it as a good experience and would recommend everyone do it at least once.

      I started my work career as an office clerk many years ago and learned how to do my job every day no matter how boring it was while learning new tasks and making myself more valuable. In two years I was able to advance into computer operations. While in operations, I learned how to program and left the company. Then I learned how to do system administration, database administration, and web development.

      That first job was 20 years and 8 or 10 different jobs ago. Now I eat peanut butter and jelly sandwiches because I want to, not because I have to.

      Every job comes with opportunities, it depends on what you are willing to do with it. To paraphrase, the common thread in all of your failed jobs is you.

      --
      I rarely read replies, it's my opinion and if you thought about your opinion a little more, I'm OK with that.
    72. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Good point. Lets encourage most of the industrialized world to go to war with each other and destroy most of what they have so they have to buy from good 'ol USA again.

    73. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by Moridineas · · Score: 1, Interesting

      The reality of America today is that the rich get richer, the poor get poorer, and the middle class finds the "middle" slowly drifting to the bottom.



      Ok, back that up. Let's see something empirical... hell, even anecdotal will do, becuase I've got nothing.

      Are you claiming that the poor of today are worse off than the poor of 25 years ago? 50 years ago? 100 years ago? What are you claiming? By what metric are the poor getting poorer?

      Are you claiming that the middle class is worse off than 25 years ago?

      I mean good lord, all you need to do is look at cable tv penetration rates to tell something weird is up.
    74. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by t0rkm3 · · Score: 1

      Unless you never gave that money to spend in the first place.

    75. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by hondo77 · · Score: 1

      My view is basically this: The American Dream, as you defined (and which I think most Americans would agree with) - is crap.

      Then again, the American dream I was brought up with is that you give your children a better life than you had. I know it's terribly provincial and doesn't work for, say, the child-less but I like it.

      --
      I live ze unknown. I love ze unknown. I am ze unknown.
    76. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by (trb001) · · Score: 1

      But, it is irrelevant... at some point we became so jaded when these ideals were stripped from our society, that we now resent and try to bring down anyone who still has health insurance, union membership, or a pension plan. Instead of demanding more for ourselves, we are demanding less for everyone else--somehow it is better for everyone to be dragged down rather than lifting everyone up.

      I call BS. We don't bring down people for having those things, we bring down people for expecting those things to be provided to them, whether they work for it or not. I'm not working for anybody that doesn't offer those benefits, and I've worked my ass off to make sure I can require that as a condition for accepting a job, or I'll take my employment elsewhere. *That* is standing up for ourselves, not whining because you don't have something. Don't work your ass off to be well qualified for a good job? Tough luck.

      --trb

    77. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by Emperor+Cezar · · Score: 1

      Words you mention in your post lead me to think that you do not understand what free market capitalism is. The United States does not have and for the most part, never has had, a free market. "Stocks", suing based on copyright (RIAA), etc. are _not_ free market, it is corporatism. Corporatism is a form of state capitalism, which is only wrongly called capitalism because a physical object (money) is used as an intermediary. A real free market could have exchanged based on money, or even a gift economy. What works would be what survives. As it is now, all of us are forced to operate inside the current system where businesses are beholden to their shareholders based on Federal law.

    78. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by HikingStick · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I believe there is a couple key point to the American Dream that you (and many others) inadvertantly miss. First, the American Dream cannot be realized by most people if they are willing to work for someone else. The American Dream--time and again--has been realized by those who, for whatever reason, could not or would not allow themselves to be wage-slaves. They started cottage industries--some failed, and some succeeded. Those who succeeded saw the American Dream fulfilled. Those who did not succeed faced a choice--either try again (to achieve the Dream) or believe that the American Dream is a lie. There is a third choice for those who taste failure. Most accept it as the default option but they typically will not assent to it: the American Dream is real, but they reinvent it as being something different--having a modest wage, access to credit, and some luxuries that fit their preconceptions. For them, that is good enough.

      The second point that is often missed when discussing the American Dream is what made it possible: something I will call the "American Spirit"--that we, as a people, are willing to reach out and give others a hand along the way. I, by no means, suggest that this spirit is unique to America, but I do believe that--at one time--the world would have been hard-pressed to find more of it per-capita than anywhere else in the world. Today, sadly, it is in decline. Up-and-comers demonstrated this spirit by giving good jobs to their employees, and by contributing to those in need. Socially responsible corporations, while tending to long-term profitability and short-term objectives, did this by having a sense of loyalty to those who helped build the corporation. If we, in America, have had any failure, it is in this second aspect--a failure of the American Spirit.

      What disgusts me most about the Circuit City scenario (which is also played out in many other industries every day) is that these "artificial persons" (for what is a corporation if not a legally recognized entity under law?) have forsaken their responsibility to society in order to worship at the altar of profitability.

      Don't get me wrong. I'm not saying that businesses cannot take action to maintain their profitability--my degree is in business management and technology, so I understand the factors--but I would argue that it was a failure of management that brought them to this place. Had the leadership of Circuit City fully exercised their duty to their business, the could have stemmed this time years ago. Yes, I know many of you will scream "armchair quarterback" or "20/20 hindsight," but it was clear (to me, at least) that Circuit City expanded too aggressively, they did little to differentiate from their fierce competitors, and they never looked (successfully, at least) strategically at their industry and market trends. In other words: they should have seen this coming and made a minor course correction before they were thousands of miles at sea.

      After reading the article today, and other recent news on Circuit City, I'm just glad I never accepted a position with them back in 1997. The American Dream is not holy writ that allows us each to pursue our interests at the expense of our neighbors. It is objectification of the notion that we all have the opportunity to reach toward a lofty goal--of establishing a place in this world, a good home for our families, adding stability to our communities, and having a (positive) impact on society along the way. Do all achieve this dream? No, but we can be part of it.

      --
      I use irony whenever I can, but my shirts are still wrinkled...
    79. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by L0rdJedi · · Score: 1

      This is correct. Circuit City employees use to get commission. That's where Best Buy's line "Don't worry, I'm not on commission" came from. Best Buy doesn't employ this line anymore since Circuit City employees aren't on commission anymore.

      The change is very obvious from the way things use to be. Go into a Circuit City during dead time. You won't feel like you're swimming amongst sharks these days. It use to be that the moment you walked through the door during a dead season (basically anytime it's not the holidays), someone would ask you if you needed help with anything. Now, you're lucky to find help unless you look really confused. Hell, if it's not a busy season now, you won't get help without asking. They have no incentive to help people as much as they use to since there's no money in it for them.

      I use to hate shopping at Circuit City because I wanted to avoid the salesmen until I had a chance to look at some product. Now, it's not much different than shopping at Best Buy.

    80. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Good points on both ends. It is very true that your skills are the only security you really have, but corporate culture really does need a change.
      I love how all of the large retail business like this are always stressing "team work" and "family" to employees and expect employees to be devoted to the company when most of these same companies will ruin the lives of their employees the second it is 0.001% more profitable for them to do so.
      I particularly love the occasional business article that pops up in which employers have the audacity to complain that new employees show no loyalty to their companies and aren't willing to invest in their jobs. Well, that's because we aren't all morons. Corporate culture set the tone and will now have to live with the results.

    81. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by uradu · · Score: 1

      > the dream [...] is wholly subject to the interpretation of the dreamer

      Or as Ricky Gervais in the original The Office would call it, "The American Pipe Dream".

    82. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by UbuntuDupe · · Score: 5, Funny

      I wasn't trying to be funny :-/

    83. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by Fulcrum+of+Evil · · Score: 1

      I think Dennis Miller summed it up best a long time ago: "If you get to be thirty-five and your job still involves wearing a name tag, you've probably made a serious vocational error."

      Don't mechanics wear name tags?

      --
      "We returned the General to El Salvador, or maybe Guatemala, it's difficult to tell from 10,000 feet"
    84. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by L0rdJedi · · Score: 1

      Or they were happy making $30k per year. Yeah, the high paid ones were making $15 per hour. That doesn't exactly scream improving oneself to me.

      As another poster said, why not go start their own business. These employees should get together and start a new company. If they're all intelligent and willing to work hard, maybe they can beat CC at their own game.

    85. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by suggsjc · · Score: 1

      I wanted to mod this up, but I decided to go ahead and respond because I completely agree.

      On the whole, government agencies are completely apathetic, I know I've been involved with some of them. Now here is where politics get interesting. One side thinks that government programs are good (and most are, or at least have good intentions). Their noble goals make you seem like a bad person to oppose them. So they get funding. Then the reality that no matter what happens they will probably keep that funding sets in...and so does the apathy. The result, good intentions gone wrong and a whole lot of tax payer money as well.

      I am not against government programs. But I am against government programs being run like government programs. If I knew that everything would *just work* then I would say get rid of all gov't programs and let the private sector figure it out, because hey competition is a good thing. But there are many unprofitable aspects/programs that are essential, that would be neglected.

      I know that this was a huge oversimplification, but the concept remains. *Most* government programs are inefficient due to lack of competition. I want my government small, and to do what government is supposed to do...govern and get rid of these people: "I work for the government. I'm a "civil servant". I make high 5 figures, and I'm not management. I'm a member of a union. I will not be fired / layed off / downsized / whatever."

      One last thing. There is no way in hell that I would vote for Hillary. I'd take 4 more years of Bush before that...but hopefully we'll have better options.

      --
      When I have a kid, I want to put him in one of those strollers for twins and then run around the mall looking frantic.
    86. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Duh, they can't be fired. No wonder anybody in France only gets a job by knowing the right people (which today is true for most countries). Contrast that to the free USA that once was. Back then you could just get a job, because you worked. And if you were a bad investment, they could just fire you. (Yes, and back in those days you could start your own business without much regulations or interference, if all employers just wanted to screw you. Upward mobility now isn't what it used to be under Freedom.)

      Would YOU give these people a job? I wouldn't, because I couldn't afford it. And to think that all these young people voted and demonstrated AGAINST the CPE...

    87. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      People in the US tend to ignore the fact that in the '50's, most of Europe and Asia was still trying to recover from the war. The post-war prosperity of the US was a bubble. The US as a whole would be well served to "get over it".

      It's unfortunate there aren't many folks left who were around who can you tell you about life in pre-war America. While schlepping across Europe long ago, I shared a train compartment with such a fellow and what he said changed the way I think of and expect from the "American Dream".

    88. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by AndersOSU · · Score: 1

      The real problem in the last 100 years or so is that often times a country will identify itself first and foremost by its economic system. When the economic system becomes identity people will refuse to change it.

      In the US we've been fiercely defending capitalism since before the cold war (nevermind we've been weakly socialists since at least the "New Deal") that the adoption of anything that is perceived as socialist is considered unamerican. This limits our ability to fine tune our economy and allows for the current situation where big-business gets to make all the tweaks in its favor.

    89. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by t0rkm3 · · Score: 1

      Interesting... So what you're saying that it would make more sense for them to lay off the bottom off their workforce. Whatever that number would be... considering an employee who has been there longer might also have other costly benefits, such as medical, dental, and vacation.

      So, back to my statement, You would rather they lay off ~8000(out-of-thin-air) employees so that service would degrade, less work would get done, and then the store ends up losing more money until they finally shrink their workforce down to the one very highly paid chap that closes the door on the last day?

      As a business owner, you have to look at what asset gets the least return per dollar spent and figure out a way to get that dollar back. This is their best shot. Perhaps, in a year's time, or whenever they recover their footing they can pay their associates slightly more than the other Box-stores but provide a higher degree of service and efficiency, all the while keeping more people gainfully employed.

      I hope that the OSU in you nick isn't Oklahoma State, I would think the Cow-Pokes could teach economics and business acumen more effectively than that.

    90. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by j-pimp · · Score: 1

      The fact that the guy with $1.4M salary and a corporate jet didn't even attempt any innovations in a small, inexpensive experimental store just shows that big companies != capitalism.

      Actually, it shows that (big companies != innovation). Big Box retail is profitable by following the formula.

      Also, small companies are not necessarily better at innovation. A one storefront company would probably go out of business in the face of outside disruptive innovations, E-Commerce in this case. Those that survive probably didn't need to adapt, e.g. boutique shops whose original formula stressed customer service, etc.

      --
      --- Justin Dearing http://www.justaprogrammer.net/ We're just programmers.
    91. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by R2.0 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      "It's time to quintuple the minimum wage, and then bring back the unions. Bullshit like Circut City never happened back when 75% of workers were unionized. Now that only 10% of us are in unions, they have us by the balls. And it's idiots like you who think it's the UNIONS that are evil that allow this bullshit to happen! Grow a fucking brain, moron."

      Bwahahah - I haven't had a laugh like that in a long time.

      "Quintuple the minimum wage". So everyone will make a minimum of $27.25. Cool. So what will a latte at Starbuck cost - $25? See, if you artificially set a floor for wages, ALL wages go up across the board, and so all costs of goods go up. The CEO will still make 500x what you do - it will just be measures in billions instead of millions.

      As for unions, look in a mirror. In the 70's, the AFL-CIO decided to concentrate on lobbying in order to protect their position against changing economic conditions. This had some short term effect - the unions still have a power in Washington disproportionate to their representation. But they never figured out that no government mandate could replace organizing efforts, which they totally abandoned through the 70's and 80's. The unions gained their "75%" on their own - why did they feel the need for the Feds to help them keep it?

      lying asshole promised reform and got in bed with the Democrats and got kicked out, which brough a HOFFA back in, for God's sake. I also was a member of the USW when I spend 8 hours a day shovelling sand in an iron foundry - the regulars there told me point blank to make sure I went back to school at the end of summer because they knew the job was a total dead end. I work with Union and non union craftsmen in the building trades, and I've even worked with sprinkler fitters that voted to disband their own union because the leadership sat on their asses, collected dues, and didn'y do a damned thing.

      "And it's idiots like you who think it's the UNIONS that are evil that allow this bullshit to happen! Grow a fucking brain, moron."

      Unions aren't evil - union officials are. And you (and I) voted them in. I did grow a brain - apparently, you've decided to stay a moron.

      --
      "As God is my witness, I thought turkeys could fly." A. Carlson
    92. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "they have us by the balls."

      Who's us? Certainly not me. I make a comfortable salary and enjoy the great prices on consumer goods manufactured by non-union employees and sold at non-union stores.

      "And it's idiots like you who think it's the UNIONS that are evil that allow this bullshit to happen! Grow a fucking brain, moron."

      I certainly don't think unions are inherently evil (although, they have been corrupt). But don't think that unions are any thing but brokers of labor. Why should I care if I buy my TV from a union employee or non-union employee? Either way, I make the decision 100% on my own. And, in that case, I prefer my order be taken by a zit-faced high schooler making minimum wage, rather than a higher paid union employee that serves to do nothing than raise the cost of the TV.

      My question for you is: How does Circuit City having an employee union increase the benefit to me as a consumer?

    93. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by chris_eineke · · Score: 1

      (lifelong employment at one employer)
      I have vague memories of the Japanese society mostly being that way.
      --
      "All you have to do is be fragile and grateful. So stay the underdog." Chuck Palahniuk, Choke
    94. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by ConceptJunkie · · Score: 1

      What? You mean people aren't guaranteed a right to a comfortable living? How vicious and socially Darwinian of you.

      And I wouldn't want it any other way. I've been laid off 3 times in the past 5 years, and you know what? I went and found another job each time, in two cases, much better than before. I'm very happy that I got laid off last time, because my current job is much more interesting and fun. I might have to work harder, but since I'm enjoying it, that's not a minus.

      It's called capitalism. If you can't deal with it, move to Europe where they are more welcoming of people on the perpetual dole. Just make sure you're comfortable with the idea of becoming a dhimmi in the next decade or so.

      --
      You are in a maze of twisty little passages, all alike.
    95. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by L0rdJedi · · Score: 4, Insightful

      If you're lazy, steal from your employer, go to work drunk, act like a total jerk to your fellow employees then you should lose your job. But to lose your job when the fat cat CEO earns five hundred times what you do so that the company can hire a replacement for you at a lower pay rate, well, that's just plain damned evil.

      You're right, it is evil. Hopefully this news will keep people from applying to Circuit City. I know I sure as hell would not want to work somewhere that's going to do something like this. With no one wanting to pickup those jobs, they'll just fall further and further until they've declared bankruptcy and closed down the whole chain. In fact, even if I wasn't one of the ones layed off, I'd definitely be looking for a new job now. Despite the stock price going up, this is going to prove to be disastrous for them. Hell, start a boycott if you want. They may sell some decent stuff, but they treat their employees like shit, so there's no reason to patronize them.

      Hopefully people will remember this so that if the mere idea ever creeps into another CEO's head he'll forget about it instantly or risk losing his company.

    96. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by Lovesquid · · Score: 2, Insightful

      What kills the ideal of Capitalism is the same thing that kills the ideal of Socialism, and it's not going to go away any time soon: human greed.

      Don't be greedy. Just because you CAN step on another human being and pocket a small percentage of his or her paycheck doesn't mean you SHOULD. And that's exactly what CC is doing, here. Their reward for employee loyalty, for those who've worked at their ridiculously crappy store for the longest, and been foolish enough to have some faith in their employers' morality and endure their crappy job for more than the rest, is that they are fired first when hard times arrive. I know how the system works -- I'm realistic enough to see that. But it doesn't change the fact that it's just plain wrong. These are people they are dealing with here, not just money, and I agree with the parent post. When wealth is the primary, overriding priority, then the system needs to change, as it's horribly broken. Employers DO have a responsibility, morally, to provide their GOOD, LOYAL employees with job security and plain old human compassion commensurate with the work they provide day in and day out.

      If CC want's to compete in this market, and they are having problems, then why not provide people with what works -- reasonable prices (CC is NOT doing this -- at all), good service (firing their best people is not an improvement, here, and they are going to completely demoralize the ones who are lucky enough to avoid the axe), and selection (if they HAD what I want, and at a reasonable price, I'd shop there over NewEgg any day) and convenience (walk in, see and hold what you are buying, which is an advantage over online shopping, and walk out with what you want the same day, no shipping, no delays).

      Really, people... take what you need, as much as you require to live a happy, enjoyable life and to pay for what you require, throw in a bit of spare money for some reasonable fun now and then, and then be satisfied. We don't all need BMWs to be happy. But all most of us have been taught is 'more, more, more'. Be satisfied.

      Flame me for being a care bear all you want, but I still don't think that what CC is doing is right. In fact, it's a perfect example of what is wrong with this country's pseudo-capitalist system. Failed capitalism is, at its worst, just as bad as failed socialism or any other ecomomic model, and we are heading down the wrong road, here.

    97. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "which begs the question"

      No it doesn't beg the question. "Begging the question" is a form of logical fallacy in which an argument is assumed to be true without evidence other than the argument itself. It does not mean "to raise the question."

      I hope this helps.

    98. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by marck · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Wow, what country have you been living in?

      All I've seen is that any time someone applies themselves they rise up. Some examples you say? Sure:

      * one of my best friends spent summers in college selling cars ... now he owns a chain of profitable dealerships.
      * one of the people I first hired for a very low salary in my company was able to take on any task and do it perfectly. He's now a manager at Microsoft with a net worth in the millions.
      * a family member who started with your basic Chemical Eng. degree, then got his MBA and a Doctorate from MIT. He worked his way into upper management at Exxon then went into business for himself.
      * at 26 years old I was on my second major technology related job and decided to start my own business developing software electric utility companies.

      That was 18 years ago and we are still going strong.

      I could give you many more examples, the point is simple. If you believe in yourself, work hard, accept nothing but the best from yourself and don't expect help from anyone then you can end up anywhere you want. That's all the America Dream promises, the opportunity, but the rest is up to you.

      However, if you think for a second that you are entitled to a handout of any kind, you will fail. If you think someone owes you something, you will fail. If you aren't willing to put in 80 to 100 hour weeks when needed, you will fail. If you think that things should be fair, you will fail. If you think that you can do it without taking risk, you will fail. In other words, if you can look in the mirror and say "everything that happens to me is completely up to me" and you act on it then you have a great shot of making anything you want happen. Otherwise you aren't gonna live the dream without a lot of luck.

      As for these guys, look at Circuit City's choices:

      1. go under - everyone gets fired
      2. do drastic cost cutting moves - some people get fired

      Does it suck? yeah! But that's life, these guys just need to find another dead end job. There are lots of them around. If they want something better then that is up to them.

    99. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by nearlygod · · Score: 1

      I want to buy an iPod but no one will sell it below the MSRP. So much for free enterprise.

      --
      The Tools Of Ignorance wanna be a tool?
    100. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by DaVinciPC · · Score: 1

      First of all I was one of the people let go yesterday. I worked for Circuit City for 10 years. In that time frame I was a manager for 4 years. I ran the number one computer department in the entire company of Circuit City. I have repaired, programmed, designed and built information systems. I also had a list of clients that would only deal with me beacuse of my knowledge about technology in pc and video. I guarantee you that I am the best in my field and the top performer. How dare you insult me and others like my with your narrow minded thinking. You need to do some research before spouting your mouth off. When we were paid commission I pulled in over Sixty thousand dollars a year. I was supposed to be laidoff when we switched but luckily I had Higher contacts in the company. I took a hughe pay cut but I needed the health insurance because my wife had a brain anuerisym burst. No heath provider will take you after that. Am I sad? NO! Pissed? Yes. Will I bounce back? No problem. But when small minded indiviuals like you make a judgement without any knowledge about who got cut that pisses me off even more. Granted Circuit city just cut off their right arm and will probabnly fail this fiscal year, But you should cut out your tongue before lowering the intelligence of the rest of the internet community

    101. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by ChemGeek4501 · · Score: 1

      Mike my boy, you need to wake up and smell the Starbucks. The "American Dream" was created by those that took risks, failed over and over again, then tried again. They have a spirit of "do it yourself" and not, as you suggest, "give it to me." Notice the one of the founding documents, the Declaration of Independence states that our "inalienable rights" (granted to us by a Creator, I might add) are "Life, Liberty and the PURSUIT of Happiness" (emphasis mine, not Hancock's, or any of the other 50+ signers of the document). That means you have the RIGHT to PURSUE the "American Dream," not have it handed to you on a plate. Get up, get a job, get another if you have to, and start realizing the dream. ChemGeek - a 40-something, successful, entrepreneur.

    102. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by EastCoastSurfer · · Score: 1

      I was going to write a response to the GP until I saw how you summed it up perfectly. Well said!

    103. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by spun · · Score: 1

      I read your post, and the first thing that sprang to my mind is that you haven't held a serious job yet.

      I read your post, and the first thing that sprang to my mind is that you are an abject failure in your life.


      I read your post, and the first thing that sprang to my mind is that you have nothing useful to contribute to this conversation. Maybe people mod you down all the time because you're an enormous tool. That's probably why you have twice as many freaks as fans. "Relevant and useful" my ass.

      People here obviously don't like you, and for good reason. Why don't you hang out at digg where your style of "debate" is more accepted?
      --
      - None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
    104. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm sure it helps that they pay less than the full cost of treatment.

    105. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by FrostedChaos · · Score: 1

      They have places where you can find information about products now. They're called wikipedia, Consumer Reports, and trade mags. Or you could www.justfuckinggoogleit.com

      --
      "Any connection between your reality and mine is purely coincidental." -Slashdot
    106. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by heinousjay · · Score: 1

      It's also possible that your friend was expensive and bad. I'm not saying he is, but since you're just going for anecdotal evidence to back up your "cheap rather than good" statement I think the opposing side needs to be spelled out.

      --
      Slashdot - where whining about luck is the new way to make the world you want.
    107. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by IdleTime · · Score: 1

      These actions would have been illegal were I come from, the company charged and prosecuted, the news media would have a field day and people would not shop there anymore.

      This is the result of unadulterated capitalism without limitations. The responsible in the company would have had to spend a few years behind bars, the company would have been heavily fined and the layoffs reverted.

      --
      If you mod me down, I *will* introduce you to my sister!
    108. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by AndersOSU · · Score: 1
      Wow that editorial is a slanted piece of garbage.

      Lets start with this:

      What's a luxurious, frivolous or unnecessary item? Start with bottled water -- as long as your tap water is safe to drink -- and move up from there.

      Safe and dangerous water is not binary. Bottled water may be a tad overprieced, but how much does the average American spend on bottled water - I'd say I spend ~$150/year - clearly a luxury I shouldn't be entitled to...

      The whole thing just says - we've elevated the bottom, so don't complain if you can't make any headway. After all you're better off than you would have been if you lived in the dark ages, so stop complaining the Bill Gates has holographic art.

      And then there's this:

      A poor person having a heart attack gets the same treatment as a rich person
      Could someone please repeat that with a straight face? Now what about non-life threatening injuries or non-immediate health concerns, such as preventative care or cancer screening. There is a vast difference in quality of care between the poor (who frequently don't have health insurance, because Wal Mart or Circuit City reclassified them as part time) and the rich who can afford "elective" treatments that any sane doctor will say is mandatory.

      The fact that the middle class is eroding is best demonstrated by looking at average debt. If we have nice things, but don't own them per say we don't have wealth, and we never will. Sure today the average middle class family still lives in a single family home, but unless something changes I don't see this continuing (remind me what is happening to foreclosure rates and home values). The middle class is slipping, and we're ceding our wealth to the top 5%. If something doesn't change soon the middle class ON TWO INCOMES won't be able to afford a house anymore - the author conveniently left off the part where in days past the middle class survived on ONE income.
    109. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by Harry+Coin · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It's my opinion that the so-called american dream is mostly a myth implanted in people's minds early on in their lives to make them work harder for the same wage, constantly hoping for better days. The reality of America today is that the rich get richer, the poor get poorer, and the middle class finds the "middle" slowly drifting to the bottom.

      The "American Dream"(tm) is both a myth and a branding strategy. Most of the components, a big house, a nice car, fancy clothes, are strictly materialistic. Every corporation that has something to sell desperately wants to have their product be part of your vision of the American Dream. Ford and Chevy trucks have been pulling this for years. The iPod is now de rigeur for Americans who want to be percieved as cool. It is important to the commercial sector that people believe that they can just go out and buy the lifestyle that they want.

      Aiding them in this is the banking industry, which has been extending credit to people whether they can pay or not. Need $20k rims for your whip? Just sign here. Why wear generic blue jeans when you can have some Guess jeans? Buy now, pay later! Need a 20 room house to show the neighbors just how much status you have? We'd be happy to loan you the money. And, in the time it takes for you to sign your name, you've just enslaved yourself for the time it will take to repay that loan. Want to travel? You only get a week of vacation (if that). Want to go to school and improve your lot? Can't afford to be away from work for that long. Can your family barely remember your face becuase you're working double shifts? Sorry, that mortgage can't wait. I'm not saying that loans can't be made responsibly, or that they're not a useful tool. I'm saying that if you are going into debt in order to appear wealthy, you're a fool.

      My American Dream is to invest enough money for my family's security, then use every other cent to buy back my time and freedom. Your children only grow up once, and if you're not there, you can never get that time back. Relationships need care and maintenance, and this takes time. If you want to control your own life, you have to make careful financial decisions, forego status symbols, avoid debt, and invest in yourself. A paid-off trailer is a castle, a McMansion with a mortgage is the bank's.

      --
      That's pre 7-11 thinking....
    110. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by Pig+Hogger · · Score: 1

      I don't know of anyone who has worked at one company for 20 years and advanced from mail clerk to a VP.
      I do. At 20, during the Depression, my grandfather started working as a clerk in his grandfather's distillery. When he retired, in 1969, he was the president.

      And before you say that it was because he was the grandson of the owner, his brother who was hired at the same time as a clerk retired as a clerk.

    111. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by Risen888 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      if they could easily go get a better job, one would presume they'd have already done so.

      Ain't necessarily so. I have the skills and experience to get a better job than I have. But I don't, and the reason is that I'm too goddamn busy doing my job to even look.

      --
      Hey, I finally got my first freak! Took you long enough!
    112. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by pitdingo · · Score: 3, Insightful

      How can you blame unions for the US auto industry failure? Unions did not design the crappy cars coming out of the big three. Unions did not cut out R&D from the budget. Unions did not force the big three to "diversify" rather than reinvest in newer production lines and tools. Unions do not force GM to pay out stock dividends when they should be keeping that money to invest in better designs and quality.

      By far, the largest contributor to the failure of the Big Three is due to complete and total mis-management. If you are not designing cars people want to buy, surprise, surprise, no one is going to buy them. If no one is buying your cars, then you are going to have trouble paying the bills. Bills like health-care and pensions.

    113. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by tthomas48 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Oh yeah, it's the unions fault. Is it still the unions fault? Is the fact that every single car GM builds is a fucking ugly piece of crap, with a gigantic plastic dashboard, no safety features, and no standard features the fault of the unions? I can only bear the "unions raise cost" argument so far. At some point GM and Ford have to build cars that people want to buy.
      GM may be having problems because of pensions, but remember they made the promises in the first place. They could have invested to make sure they could pay out on those benefits, but instead they followed the modern corporate motto - "If you can no longer compete, buy some random crappy companies and increase your debtload". So they squandered money on investments that in no way made their automobile business more competitive as their market share dwindled. Ditto for Ford. Those are poorly run companies. They ran afoul of the unions and could no longer compete in labor, sure. But that was only one bad business decision among thousands. Having billions of dollars in medical and pension costs is only a problem if you aren't selling cars.

      So what's your problem capitalist? Go sell some fucking cars and all your problems will go away.

    114. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by UbuntuDupe · · Score: 1, Redundant

      Yes, I know. The point is so that you can talk to a real human in person, and see the items in person, so as to supplement those other resources.

      Much as it may shock you, some people aren't adept at using Wikipedia and google, some people like talking in person, some people are uncomfortable about spending a lot before they can see it in person, and some people -- okay, most people -- would benefit from in person assistance on using technology.

    115. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by jamesmrankinjr · · Score: 1

      (remind me what is happening to foreclosure rates and home values)

      I agree with most of what you are saying, but:

      1. home values have had a pretty darn good ride. that they are coming down slightly after a meteroic rise does not mean the sky is falling.

      2. I think the individual needs to take SOME responsibility for buying more house than they can afford. I'm sorry, but anyone who thought an interest only, adjustable rate mortgage they could barely afford when they started payments was a good idea is in serious need of a hard earned lesson in fiscal sanity.

      -jimbo

    116. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by Shaltenn · · Score: 1

      Yeah, sorry -- the folks working at Circuit City don't generally really qualify as being the "best in their field", unless you're defining the "field" as "people who work at Circuit City". Besides, Circuit City's not on commission anymore so you can't even argue that these folks were necessarily their top performers.

      Yes, lets knock people at something they've worked at. Just because they aren't working at *insert favorite retail shop* doesn't mean they can't qualify as being "the best in their field". These kind of people who belittle others for their own enjoyment/amusement piss me the hell off. Like the other day on the bus I hear these two people talking about how well they did in highschool (one was a Valedictorian). I get to class and two people who were on the bus with me start laughing about how stupid these people were for being proud of being highschool valedictorian. Pisses. Me. Off.
      /rant.
      --
      If you were offended by anything I said... No, I'm not sorry. Please lighten up.
    117. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by superbus1929 · · Score: 1

      Is that a bad thing?

      Let's not let Stars and Stripes interfere with our better judgement, if that's what you're getting at.

      --
      Let's stop dilly-dallying and just change "-1: Overrated" to "-1: Disagree" or "-1: Doesn't Subscribe to Groupthink".
    118. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by paeanblack · · Score: 1

      I'd argue that the top paid/"ranked" employees weren't giving good personal service. They may have been good at making the customer think they were getting good personal service.

      There is no difference between the two. If you don't understand that, get out of sales for your own career's sake.

    119. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by Feezle · · Score: 1

      The employees may have worked hard to improve themselves, but apparently they didn't improve themselves in a way that was valued by their employer. Sometimes all the employer wants (short sightedly or not) is an employee who is good enough.

    120. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      don't worry, I'm not commission
      Thats what I tell all the girls.
    121. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by FirstTimeCaller · · Score: 1

      You're confusing the American Dream ... with the French dream

      Thankfully he didn't confuse it with the Wet dream (of which I shan't go into details).

      --
      Wanted: witty unique signature. Must be willing to relocate.
    122. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by paeanblack · · Score: 1

      There comes a time where you have to decide whether it's better to save $5 for yourself, or spend it so that somebody else has a job.

      To put it another way, there comes a time when you have to decide whether it's better to become a member of the lending class or to remain a member of the borrowing class.

    123. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      When the workplace had real safety concerns, I can understand why there were unions. Nowadays, unions just cause the cost of goods to go up in comparison to imported goods.

    124. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by el+americano · · Score: 1

      I think most of us would rather have a third choice that combines reasonable prices with reasonable service.

      That seems like a reasonable assumption, but I suspect that the reality is that people will accept terrible customer service and even a less durable product to save a buck or two. This works even better if you tell them that you have great customer service and great products. Just imagine back a few decades when stores would sell us full service and genuine quality. Then, look are where we are now. As we accept the new lower standard, they continue to surprise us with how much lower it can get.

      I shudder to think where this train is heading.

      --
      Those are my principles. If you don't like them I have others. -Groucho Marx
    125. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by mdozturk · · Score: 1

      heh

      I suggest you talk to these people: Bud Cummins, Carol Lam, David Iglesias, John McKay, Daniel Bogden, Paul Charlton, Kevin Ryan, Margaret Chiara (hint: they used to be federal procecutors)

    126. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by SpatialVacancy · · Score: 0

      CC lost their top people several years ago when they switched from commission to hourly. I worked at CC at the time, and they made us all watch videos about how the new pay structure was going to net everyone more $$$. This was obviously not the case, and they lost a lot of good people.

      Over the course of my employment at CC, they also introduced a "Awesome new scheduling application" that will "optimize everyone's schedules." Basically they had everyone write down their availability and the computer automatically generated our schedules. Doesn't sound too bad, right? Wrong. I wrote that I was not available on Sundays. The manager came to me concerned that the computer may reduce my hours, since I am not offering full availability, so basically everyone in the store was forced to write "Full availability."

      The end result is people no longer got paid commission *and* could never request to have an afternoon off for personal reasons, we were told "No. The computer does the scheduling, we cant change it." I know now that the computer optimized CC's bottom line, not the Associates schedules. I was about to start college so I knew it was time to leave.

      Now they are doing the same thing over again. Not that it's a big suprise, but make no mistake - CC cares about dollars, not the well-being of their associates. I don't think I will shop there anymore. (Disclaimer: I am not saying that Best Buy, et. al are any better.)

    127. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, my contract says if my job goes away, they have to find me an equil position at another agency. Contract, as in legally binding.

    128. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by Citizen+of+Earth · · Score: 1

      most of America is inside the cabin frantically pushing the buttons, hoping that it will finally start to rise, and it doesn't.

      Most of America is stupid and up to its eyeballs in debt because it lives beyond its means and does work of limited absolute value. Working harder does not necessarily mean getting rich; for many people it means getting done a dead-end job a little earlier in the day and needing to look busy for a while. You need the right training in the right fields and to do the right things, take intelligent risks, save, and live within your means. Expecting a retail-sales job to pave your way is expecting a little much.

    129. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by Politburo · · Score: 1

      Hint: They were in political positions, not civil servants, and not in a union.

    130. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by kmac06 · · Score: 1

      Yes, and those sources are excellent. I probably spent 15+ hours or so researching plasma, lcd tvs, different brands, warranties, screen sizes, picture quality, best deals, etc, etc before finally settling on one. I'm sure there are many people that would love to research the topic in such depth but don't have the time--but do have the money to get advice from someone knowledgeable. If there were such a place to walk in, get all the details on all the TVs as listed above with no incentive to suggest certain items, that would be an option.

    131. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by jedidiah · · Score: 1

      Well, it used to be that the "American Dream" was there for you
      even if you chose to be a cog in someone else's machines. Contrary
      to popular opinion, we can't all be alphas. Someone has to do the
      gruntwork. If we don't treat the grunts with some decency and give
      them even a false hope then they're going to revolt and slaughter
      all us "ambitious types".

      No, you are just trying to offer a lame excuse to return to the
      19th century mindset where employees and people in general were
      treated as disposable commodities not much better than livestock.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    132. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      A word of advice though, be careful who your children date. There are a lot of damaged people out there. Get involved romantically with one, get a little careless, and boom a lifetime of hard work, careful saving, prudent investment and deferred satisfaction is destroyed.

      You'll have bad choices, put her in jail if she stole your SSN and opened credit accounts without your knowledge, or be poor and miserable for years as you pay off the damage. Hard even if there aren't children involved, nightmarish if there are, "Daddy put Mommy in Jail..." All In The Family

      Hey, it happened to me, and I realized I'll never really recover from it either financially or emotionally. I've seen it happen to a lot of other people I know as well.

      One of the status symbols you can't afford? A spouse...

      Oh, and this kind of usury? The kind that will carelessly allow your son or mother to apply for credit in your name and leave you stuck with the bill... it's new and recent development, I wonder where it will lead?

    133. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by psmears · · Score: 1

      Who are you to define what "should" motivate people as human beings?
      A human being, perhaps?
    134. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by Joe+The+Dragon · · Score: 1

      http://www.tigerdirect.com/ was on line only and they they added Retail Outlet Stores and the one near me is part of the warehouse so you can get anything that is stock there.
      http://www.tigerdirect.com/retailstores/naperville .asp

    135. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by Pig+Hogger · · Score: 1

      Dude, you talk like you think greed is something new. Grow up. It was greed that has driven the US to be the greatest nation in the world. It will one day drive this world to be the greatest in the universe.
      Tell that to the Ferengi!!!
    136. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I am well over 40 and have started over 3 times...yes, that means I started at the bottom and worked my way back up. Many times I had to work for younger, less experienced supervisor or boss, and it sucked. I did realize my future is MY future so I did what I had to do.
      If you think you can jump in the job world making 20 bucks an hour with no skills, think again. You are entitled to nothing...you will have to work for it. I have little sympathy for those of you who think you are entitled to a good job because your not.
      I do have sympathy for the workers at Circuit City, but they need to tell CIrcuit City goodbye and start over somewhere else, hopefully with an employer who has a little more interest in their employees future.

    137. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by hal2814 · · Score: 1

      "yet this era was considered the capitalist ideal"

      You're 30 years too soon on that one, smart guy.

      Q: What 20th Century decade is the capitalist ideal?
      A: The 80's

      And for what it's worth, this conservative is happy right where he's at. I have more money (even adjusting for inflation) and work less hours than my parents did. Then again, I learned long ago that I have to aim higher if I want to make a decent living. And it's a good thing too because my family occupation (residential construction) is near impossible to make money in today. But much like retail pay/benefit decreases, you could see the trend coming for at least a decade.

    138. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by Nephilium · · Score: 1

      Allow me to say, well said, and I thank your family for coming over to our country to help make it stronger.

      Nephilium

    139. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by Frosty+Piss · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I know that this was a huge oversimplification, but the concept remains. *Most* government programs are inefficient due to lack of competition. I want my government small, and to do what government is supposed to do...govern and get rid of these people: "I work for the government. I'm a "civil servant". I make high 5 figures, and I'm not management. I'm a member of a union. I will not be fired / layed off / downsized / whatever."

      Why? You think it's conducive to team building and happy productive employees that get paid reasonably good wages to hold the possibility of layoffs a la corporate greed over their heads? I'm the original poster, and I'll tell you this: The agency I work for has very high standards, excellent employees, and is an all-around great place to work. This is good since we fly planes. It would be extremely hard to attract the quality of personnel that we have if we didn't offer an extremely stable employment environment. We rely on the continuity of experienced employees that don't have to worry about keeping an eye on the Help Wanted ads. All jobs should be like this, people would be a lot happier. With happiness comes productivity.

      When I hear people bitch about the benefits that government employees enjoy, I think two things: Most wish they had those same benefits, and are jealous that they do not. The fact of the matter is, the reason that most people outside the rarefied air of the executive class don't have these benefits is corporate greed.

      Don't blame government employees that they have it so good, blame corporate pigs that they screw their employees.

      --
      If you want news from today, you have to come back tomorrow.
    140. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by Fulcrum+of+Evil · · Score: 1

      Money IS the defined system of value - and there is no other measurable or accurate system of value.

      Bullshit. Money is a medium of exchange - it has no intrinsic value. There are plenty of other things of value that mena more than money or else we'd be all scheming against everyone to get a bigger piece of the pie.

      --
      "We returned the General to El Salvador, or maybe Guatemala, it's difficult to tell from 10,000 feet"
    141. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by avronius · · Score: 1

      Of course, back then we had control over markets, imposed trade barriers, and the population had significant union representation. We also actually manufactured things, as opposed to today. Conservatives who want to go back to the 50's conveniently forget these facts. hmmm....

      imposed trade barriers Trade barriers, sanctions, taxes, levies, duty, etc. These are all aspects that lead to the great depression. As each country felt the need to "protect their markets", they increased trade sanctions to such an extent that people couldn't use money to buy necessities. The stock market crash was merely another symptom of this much greater problem.

      significant union representation While I will not argue about the benefits that unions brought to the average worker 50+ years ago, they provide little real value to the workforce today. Safety issues that were brought to the forefront by unions have been addressed by legislation. For this reason alone, unions in general were a good thing. As soon as you rely on a union to provide raises based on tenure rather than performance, you lose my respect.

      actually manufactured things Interestingly enough, quality control and unions have contributed as much to the "off-shoring" of industry as any other factor.

      Every generation will look back and marvel at how much better things once were. I am certain that as I get older I'll look back at a decade and comment on how much better things were. Back in the 90's when a retail person could own a home. Back in the 80's when a retail person could own a home. when a retail person could own a home. Well, here we are in 2007...

      In the city that I live, a retail person could *not* purchase a home today. Interestingly enough, it is a result of the influx of people more interested in living in the larger centres than in the rural communities. The cost of the home isn't as important as the *promise* of a better life. Interesting that people will sell their home - complete with picket fence - for the opportunity to live in a rental unit in the big city. They fail to realize that $20/hour in the city is equivalent to $5/hour in Nowhereville.

      But, that's progress for you. It's just another word for change in a different direction.
    142. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by jedidiah · · Score: 1

      Private insurers do the same thing.

      In this regard Medicare/Medicaid is no different than an HMO/PPO.

      Both are pretty much out to screw the doctor.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    143. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by LMariachi · · Score: 1
      Who are you to define what "should" motivate people as human beings? Money IS the defined system of value - and there is no other measurable or accurate system of value.

      Accurate? Using that standard, Donald Trump and Vince McMahon are more valuable to humanity than Mahatma Gandhi and Albert Einstein. Just because other metrics of value aren't as easily quantifiable doesn't mean they're invalid. How much money did you pay to fall in love? How much money would you betray your country for? How much to give up your child?

    144. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by magarity · · Score: 1

      After 10 weeks bored out of your mind on the couch, watching tv with a beer in your hand and listening to your wife pestering you to find another job? not sure the red shirt will fit anymore
       
      Given that scenario, I bet it would fit around your neck.

    145. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by Kelbear · · Score: 1

      The American Dream of white-picket fences and two-car garages on a single working man's income wasn't really the case for the majority at any point for America, though it may have been the case for some. It has always been just that, a dream. Through the years there has been varying levels of success through the population ranging from poor to rich. I don't believe that it has improved significantly in recent years either.

      Still, while it is good to hear that you're working hard to have a better future, I'm saddened to hear that you lack hope for reward. I believe that if you work hard you can improve your circumstances and I would rather have hope than despair, if only for the sake of having hope. I'm "making it" alright for now, and I am still confident that I can do better. Despite all the troubles that have befallen America, by its own hand or otherwise, I still value my life here and I'm happy to be here.

    146. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "In court, you're right. But to a reasonable person, if I work hard for someone, I deserve and am owed respect and fair treatment."

      Sure I agree with this. It has absolutely nothing to with me replacing you with another worker because you cost more than you're worth in relation, but I certainly agree.

      What it does mean is that I feel bad that you're a good employee who worked hard, acquired a diverse, useful skillset, then sat comfortably in a job that you thought would never see anyone better (or comparable) come along. Well, someone did, or as an alternative, we found a cheaper way to do what you do, or technology made it easier, or SOMETHING changed while you were sitting by feeling untouchable.

      At what point does your complacency become my fault? At what point do I owe you more than a pay check, a safe work environment and the respect due a professional?

    147. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by jedidiah · · Score: 1

      Only if you ingore all of the real details that are actually involved in starting a real business.

      A little thing like capital for one.

      People who crow about how others should go and strike out on their own undoubtedly have no actual experience with this.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    148. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by Fulcrum+of+Evil · · Score: 1

      or that high end stores won't soon be going out of business in favor of walmart or best buy starting their own "high end sections."

      Walmart and BB are predicated on selling cheap (and for BB, midrange) crap to cheap and poor people. They don't attract the demographic that will be able to afford high end stuff, so adding a high end section will end up diluting the name as they try to chase two different demographics. BB might be able to pull this off, but their salescritters don't know much about the stuff they sell now, so why would they impact the high end stores? It's not like they're going to suddenly hire people who can afford to learn about this stuff and not push extended service plans on every goddamn thing (they tried that for a video game!).

      --
      "We returned the General to El Salvador, or maybe Guatemala, it's difficult to tell from 10,000 feet"
    149. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by Brandybuck · · Score: 1

      To quote an old saying: "Capitalism is the worst economic system... except for all the others."

      But even that is a product of mistaken thinking. Capitalism isn't a system. It's the absence of a system. In every other economic environment, there is a system of planning to direct economic activities. But economic activity is *human* activity, and you cannot plan an economy without some level of tyranny to coerce humans to the planners will. Capitalism (as the term is commonly used) is synonymous with freedom. There is not system. There is no dictator directing human behavior. Just free people interacting with each other voluntarily. All the rest of the economy arises from that.

      --
      Don't blame me, I didn't vote for either of them!
    150. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by jedidiah · · Score: 2, Insightful

      You've simply been conditioned to low expectations. That's really sad.

      People suffered and died for the current working standards in the West.

      It's not a sense of entitlement to expect better.

      A little civility is what keeps civilization from imploding completely.

      People seem eager to forget that.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    151. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by sjames · · Score: 1

      For hypothetical purposes, let's say we have a Utopian society such as that in Star Trek; all needs are provided for, there is no poverty, and there doesn't seem to be money, either, for that matter. What then, would motivate people to work, or more importantly, take on the harder jobs from the pool of jobs that are available? What about jobs that were dangerous, tedious, or required a lot of education and work ? If everyone gets the same "pay" and the same living conditions, why might someone feel compelled to become a brain surgeon when they could enjoy the same life comforts as a mailman ?

      Because the sort of people who become brain surgeons now would be bored out of their skulls delivering mail. Would anyone want to have their brain operated on by someone who hates being a surgeon and does as little as they have to to remain employed? People who take dangerous jobs fall into two categories. Those who do it out of desperation to eat and those who find it a rewarding adventurous living. Arguably our economy is exploiting the former shamelessly.

      As identity thieves have discovered, meth heads love tedious work like taping dumpster loads of paper shreds back together. The way meth turns people into obsessive drones, I'm surprised it's not been legalized.

      Ideally, our economic goal SHOULD be to replace ALL workers, particularly those with dangerous or tedious jobs. Of course, first we need to make sure those who are displaced can make a living somehow. I'm fairly sure most of us would be willing to work a few less hours to make room for them if we could keep our standard of living in the process.

      Unfortunatly, those goals are practically impossible to meet at the same time under capitalism.

      An interesting side effect of an economy where anyone COULD afford to just quit at any time would be that we could simply delete great swaths of labor laws with no consequences. It would also do away with a$$hole managers.

    152. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by jedidiah · · Score: 1

      The Europeans have it. It just doesn't come with a detached house or an SUV.

      That's why some of us think you're all such saps for being so willing to put up with it.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    153. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by bitt3n · · Score: 1

      You say that Horatio Alger stories are now a fantasy, but Horatio Alger stories have always been more or less a fantasy. You have your latter-day exceptions, people like David Geffen, Barry Diller, Michael Ovitz, all of whom rose up from the mailroom (literally) in the same way that a handful of Alger-style industrialists did in the past, but these cases have always been anomalies. Your argument appears to be a case of "things aren't like they used to be, and never were." Furthermore, I'm having a hard time understanding what you are implying we do to solve this supposed recent problem. Is your solution to make the mailroom a more comfortable place to work, so people won't feel compelled to find something better?

    154. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I personally decided to stop giving them any of my dimes when they tried to pawn that crappy Divx DVD crap onto the masses. I still don't know what they were thinking with that, but this story shows their management can still come up with the great ideas.

    155. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by technomom · · Score: 0

      "After all, the 50's era (a time that conservatives like yourself laud as being the American ideal) was a time where you could get a good job with great security and live well for the rest of your life." ....if you were white....and male.

      Details, details.

    156. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I say they should fire their CEO and board and all senior managers, and replace them with new graduates, not like they need experience to make hair-brained decisions like this. And think of the money they could save! Hell, let the CEO reapply for his job, at 1/100th the salary.

    157. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by jedidiah · · Score: 1

      Shit like this should rightfully get any Circuit City management tarred and feathered.
      That's right. People in general should hear about this crap and be up and arms. They
      should think it completely uncivilized and unacceptable. The reaction really should
      be the spontaneous formation of lynch mobs armed with large quantities of tars and
      feathers.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    158. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Does this mean the CEO and 3399 of his VIce Presidents were fired? Seems to me if cutting salaries is the object they should start at the top.

      Even tho Circuit City generally offers better prices, my business is gone from them.

    159. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by cartman94501 · · Score: 1

      Maybe they can't get a better job than the ones they were laid off at, but can get a better job than the new lower-paying one they will be offered after 10 weeks.

    160. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by dsanfte · · Score: 1

      So you want to run a non-profit Costco for electronics.

      --
      occultae nullus est respectus musicae - originally a Greek proverb
    161. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by sadler121 · · Score: 1

      Unions are evil, just like business monopolies are evil. We tend to sympathize more with unions because they are suppose to be for the working man and not the fat cat executive. However unions are just the same as a business monopoly. Unions have a monopoly on wages just the same as a business monopoly has a monopoly on their specific business. Both screw with Adam Smiths "invisible hand".

      The minimum wage is the worst form of socialism ever invented because it keeps low skilled workers from entry into the market place because they may not be "worth" whatever the minimum wage is. Further reading here.

      What needs to be done is to eliminate both unions and business monopolies, and the minimum wage. Let rational people negotiate their own wage, and stop focusing on the AMOUNT of money one gets, but how much the money is WORTH.

    162. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by hobo+sapiens · · Score: 1

      You make an interesting point. On one hand, even the poorest of Americans have at least one of these: cable TV, cell phone, internet access.

      On the other hand, think about the way employment has changed over the years. Just one example: retail (like Circuit City). 50 years ago, sure, people worked in retail. They worked in smaller stores, where often the owner worked in the same building. The owner knew his employees and cared for them. It's much hard to care for ones employees when you have 50K of them and you never see them, which is the case in these large retail stores. 50 years ago, people got health insurance at their jobs, even if it was some piddly retail job. And housing costs were lower too (relative to wages). Additionally, 50 years ago, the US actually used to make stuff. And that meant that many people who nowadays work retail would at least have a factory job, which would pay better and provide a bit more security that today's retail jobs.

      We have shifted from a society of producers to a society of consumers, and our employment reflects this.

      And if you want anecdote, then here it is: I recently did a property search on a popular real estate agency's website. I did this for a particular neighborhood in the city of St Louis (where I live). St Louis city is seeing a bit of a resurgence (old houses are being rehabbed like crazy), but it is still one of the cheapest cities in the US. I was hard pressed to find a 3 bedroom house for less than 180K that was livable unless you want to live in the GHETTO. Now, if you are making 8-10 an hour, how much house can you afford? Well, assuming you work 40 hours a week, you can afford a house that costs $550 / month including PMI and insurance. That's not going to get you much house, and that assumes that you can spend 1/3 of your gross salary on housing (which is close to the max debt/income ratio you want for housing). With a 30 year mortgage, at 6%, that is maybe 60K for a house (rough guess). If you have two incomes, that helps, but if you have children child care costs will eat up a $10/hour salary so you might as well have just one person working. Not sure what percentage of Americans owned homes in the 1950's, but it would seem that things were more conducive to home ownership. Personally, I don't understand how anyone can live on $10/hour, much less have a family.

      --
      blah blah blah
    163. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by jedidiah · · Score: 1

      Visit any construction site dominated by illegals. You will see safety violations galore. The work of the unions has by no means disappeared. They have just been so successfully smeared by republicans such that they aren't worth much anymore.

      ConAgra likes illegals for the same reason.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    164. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by recharged95 · · Score: 1
      "really are such great salesmen"

      Really, if they were great salesmen, Circuit City wouldn't be in the situation it's currently in. Salesmen don't have a standard book for "how to sell", it's about adapting.

    165. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by AndersOSU · · Score: 1

      Actually, the point about home values wasn't about the current stagnant condition of that market, but rather that the previous "meteoric rise" has made it impossible for many new home buyers in the middle class to buy a house that they can afford - which results in adjustable interest only mortgages. Honestly at this point, as someone hoping to buy a house in the next five years or so, I'd see a decrease in the home values as a benefit.

      Apologies for not being clearer.

    166. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by UbuntuDupe · · Score: 1

      I know I keep bringing this up, but I suggested combining the two functions such that you can get low prices and service.

    167. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by don_bear_wilkinson · · Score: 2, Insightful

      There's a middle ground that is often ignored in order to fuel the ranting and rhetoric.

      Let's describe a spectrum of human ambition and another of 'talent'.

      Some people will do well in the world because a large amount of talent. Something about them that makes them 'better' at being an artist or a designer or an engineer or whatever. They will tend to rise to the top and be highly employable on the basis of their gift. Some people don't have much talent. Others have a moderate amount while others have none (that they can 'sell', anyway)

      Then there's ambition. The desire for certain things out of life and the willingness to 'work your ass off' to get there. Some people have a lot of drive to go for the best. Some have nearly none. Most people have moderate capacities for putting their goals for success in employment/business/etc at the forefront of all things.

      The problem I see is that people who are only mildly talented, or whom possess moderate (but substantial) ambition, are told that they do not deserve even a little piece of the pie. That only the talented and the crazed workaholic deserve some prosperity and security.

      If you "don't work your ass off", then screw you!

      It is not whining to suggest that people are willing to do a good solid amount of work, with modest expectations about how far that will take them down Paycheck Lane or LongTerm Security Road, be treated with some respect and care. You shouldn't have to resort to overworking yourself, forego a social life, neglect your family, become obsessed with gaining every advantage OVER others, etc., in order to have a modest and comfortable life.

      We've got more than enough to go around in the US. But, as long as this culture is tuned to selfishness and greed, well... I'll save you the time of reading that rant. :)

      --
      In Nature, stupidity is a capital offense. In human society, too many get off with less than a warning.
    168. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by UbuntuDupe · · Score: 1

      And this, folks, is why I have my current sig.

      Let's review:

      -It's not necessarily non-profit.
      -It's not limited to electronics.
      -It doesn't actually sell you the stuff.
      -It doesn't warehouse the stuff on-site.
      -You must have a membership or pay a cover to get in, not merely to get the discounts.

      If someone's doing what I suggested already, I'm interested, but please make sure you understand the idea first.

    169. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What I am getting at is this: Circuit City doesn't care one whit about the success of our civilization, and accordingly, the value of their employees as ANYTHING OTHER than "human resources" is essentially nil. There is no value in seeing them as people, because well, it makes them just slightly less profitable. Can't have that now. Of course Circuit City doesn't care about our civilization. The objective of capitalism is to harness greed for the betterment of all. The mechanism is competition. With healthy competition, your competitors and, most importantly, your potential customers, put significant consequences on your actions. If it's just Best Buy and Circuit City competing, then you can't call that healthy competition. It might better be referred to as an oligarchy. Look around the United States and see how monopolized industries of all types have become. Then look at the political power held by corporations vs. We The People.

      The problem here is not the greed of Circuit City or the fact they don't care about the quality of our civilization. The problem is that our capitalistic system may be failing to maintain the "rules of the game" such that greed-borne choices over time do benefit the society as a whole.
    170. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh, STFU you stupid cunt. It's never been as bad as you idiots claim, and it's never been as good either.

      It's funny how you morons scream about stereotypes until you find one that's convenient for you.

    171. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by paanta · · Score: 0
      Have you ever worked for government? Because in my city government, people bust their asses for less money than they'd make in private industry. As for healthcare, the last time I looked, we lived shorter lives and paid more for our health care than most or all of the western world.

      Yes, there are certain inefficiencies associated with government, but just off the top of my head there are a few things it has going for it that private industry doesn't:
      A) It doesn't have as much of a short term profit motive. Good government can take a longer view. It can also do things that would be next to impossible to make money on.
      B) It pays it's employees less money. Around here, it gets maybe 2x the employees for the money.
      C) It doesn't waste huge chunks of its money on advertising.
      D) Government employees, while perhaps more apathetic than their private industry counterparts, stick around for so long that their institutional knowledge is _incredible_. And it's not like large corporations don't have their share of slackers.

    172. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by technomom · · Score: 1

      Anonymous. Coward.

    173. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by ml10422 · · Score: 1

      One of the main points in this article is that the people who DID work hard and improve themselves were the ones who got laid off.

      And Circuit City's choices about whom to lay off were very unusual (and bone-headed). Normally, companies lay off their poorest performers. Cleary, Circuit City sucks and I have confidence that a lot of their laid off employees will land jobs at their competitors. Hopefully, Circuit City will go into bankruptcy soon and be bought out by more competent management.

      (The article doesn't say anything about whether the laid-off employees found new jobs or not. It would be a pretty major research project for the author of the article to track them down.)

    174. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by jedidiah · · Score: 1

      Perversely enough, the existence of easy credit and
      "a helping hand to the poor" is driving a lot of
      that home inflation to the point where you have to
      buy more house than you really need just to avoid
      being in the hood.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    175. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by Citizen+of+Earth · · Score: 1

      The two are completely irreconcilable.

      The French Dream is also irreconcilable with reality, which is an issue that France is grappling with now.

    176. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by couchslug · · Score: 1

      "That is simply not true. Did the poor in the 1950s have access to the kind of healthcare that someone on Medicare has to now? Did they drive better cards? Did they have access to the kind of technology ppl have access to today?"

      Americans are brainwashed by media propaganda idealizing the 1950s as a better time. Well, maybe if everything was just like the sanitized boolshite Hollywood puts out, but it wasn't.
      Health care and emergency medicine were primitive, cars and trucks were pretty but unsafe (watch Signal 30 on YouTube for what crashes looked like!), racism was normal, etc.

      Poverty stats:

      http://www.irp.wisc.edu/faqs/faq3.htm

      "In the late 1950s, the overall poverty rate for individuals in the United States was 22 percent, representing 39.5 million poor persons. Between 1959 and 1969, the poverty rate declined dramatically and steadily to 12.1 percent. As a result of a sluggish economy, the rate increased slightly to 12.5 percent by 1971. In 1972 and 1973, however, it began to decrease again. In 1973, the poverty rate was 11.1 percent. At that time roughly 23 million people were poor.

      In 1975 the poverty rate increased to 12.3 percent. It then oscillated around 11.5 percent for the next few years. After 1978, however, the rate rose steadily, reaching 15.2 percent in 1983. Thereafter it remained mostly higher than 13 percent. In 1993 it reached a new high of 15.1 percent, and then began to fall slowly. In 2000, 31 million people were poor (11.3 percent of the population). In 2001 the number of poor and the poverty rate both rose as economic difficulties moved into recession, and the rate has continued to rise; in 2003, 35.8 million people were poor by the official measure of poverty. By 2005, the number had risen to 37 million people (12.6 percent of the population)."

      --
      "This post is an artistic work of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact."
    177. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by suggsjc · · Score: 1, Interesting
      Ok, well you might be the exception. But don't let that distort the bigger picture.

      If you are good, you deserve a good wage. As long as you continue to be good, you shouldn't have to keep checking the Help Wanted ads. If there are better employees to be had, that are willing to work for your same wage. You NEED to be gotten rid of. If you continually improve yourself and stay ahead of the game, then THAT is what should create your "stable employment environment." and All jobs should be like THAT.

      Corporate greed can be a good thing. It forces a bottom line. Which in turn benefits consumers with cheaper products (cost). Now that has to be balanced with corporate greed cutting corners and customers getting cheaper products (quality).

      With happiness comes productivity
      Nope, productivity produces productivity. Hire productive people, keep productive people. Get rid of anyone that isn't.

      Bottom line, workers are a commodity and should be treated as such. At the same time, workers are also human beings and should also be treated as such. A good corporation is one that knows how to balance the two.

      FYI, I'm not yet a business owner (but I will be). That said, I have zero expectation or desire of being kept here at my job "just because." However, I fully believe that I am worth the wage that I am paid because I produce results. I wish others would adopt this mindset and stop feeling like they are entitled to a job despite their abilities/qualifications/whatever, or lack thereof.

      Don't blame government employees that they have it so good, blame corporate pigs that they screw their employees.
      I'm not blaming government employees. If I could get money for nothing, I'd probably take it. However, I DO blame the government for allowing such entities to continue ineffectively using tax money (my tax money). So this isn't a personal attack against you. I just wish that you could be fired...that is only if you weren't as good as others competing for the same job. In fact, you should want that. Because then they could pay more for your position as they wouldn't have to continue to fund other non-productive employees that "will not be fired / layed off / downsized / whatever"
      --
      When I have a kid, I want to put him in one of those strollers for twins and then run around the mall looking frantic.
    178. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by AndersOSU · · Score: 1

      How much difference do you suppose there is between a highly paid sales associate and a poorly paid sales associate. Pulling my own number out of thin air I'd say 50%. So rather than fire 3400 highly paid sales associates and re-hire 3400 poorly paid sales associates, perhaps they should have simply laid off 567 highly paid sales associates permanently - thats what about one for every 2 stores, and at least wouldn't look so bad. Or they could lay off 1700 poorly paid sales associates (~2/store) permanently.

      Good management is about more than the immediate bottom line. Consider how this would effect morale. Now I can't imagine that previous to this announcement everyone at circuit city loved their job - you know since I've been to one - but after this announcement their retention is going to be horrendous, and hiring people due to high turnover isn't cheap either.

      Go Bucks!

    179. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by BigAssRat · · Score: 1

      What the F$#* are you talking about?? I own two GM vehicles and have never had an issue with either one. They appear to me to have the standard safety features. One is a 2001 Tahoe with 66,000 miles and the other is a 2002 Escalade with 45,000. Tell me what is wrong with my vehicles please...I would love to know what I am missing here. I do take care of them however, maybe that is why they haven't fallen apart?? BTW, my in-laws have had nothing but Japanese cars and they dont' take care of them, and yes...they are falling apart.

    180. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by AdamThor · · Score: 1

      The sweet thing about being an American in the '50's was how incredibly fucked up the rest of the world had been due to WWII. Europe and Japan were trashed, and everyplace else was pretty much poor anyway. Hell yeah, America manufactured stuff. Who the hell else was gonna do it? The Russians? Only if you were Eastern Block, comrad!

      Then, after 30 years or so America started noticing that the Japanese were making cars. Then we had to start trimming the fat off of our workforce. Don't get me wrong, it would be nice if everybody could have a cushy life, and I totally think big biz takes advantage of the little guy. But going back to the lifestyle of the '50s doesn't require that Americans stand up and demand the American Dream - it requires that America return to having a stranglehold on the economic life of the rest of the world. And that's a situation that doesn't sound particularly just to me either.

      --
      -- "Oh. This guy again."
    181. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by durdur · · Score: 1

      > There is no way in hell that I would vote for Hillary. I'd take 4 more years of Bush before that...but hopefully we'll have better options.

      I hope you're kidding but I'm afraid you're not. I'd vote for practically anything with a pulse before 4 more years of Bush.

      I don't really get why people are not willing to let the government (which is nominally devoted to the public welfare) run something like healthcare, while they are willing to trust a large, voracious, profit-driven corporation to do it. There's a fine recent NYT article about insurers deliberately denying long-term care to elderly, frail, and confused patients who've paid for long-term care insurance. The private sector is plenty efficient - but it's efficient at making money for itself, not delivering public goods.

    182. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >

      I do too....wouldn't have it any other way

    183. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by rah1420 · · Score: 1

      circuit city feels that they can exercise their lack of loyalty

      Loyalty? You're looking for loyalty from a company? Tom Peters said it, and is saying it: Logo loyalty (loyalty to a firm) is dead. The only kind of loyalty that you need to cultivate is Rolodex loyalty - loyalty to your network.

      --
      Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens.
    184. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The American Dream--time and again--has been realized by those who, for whatever reason, could not or would not allow themselves to be wage-slaves. They started cottage industries--most failed, and few succeeded.

      Fixed that for you. It's also worth mentioning that it is almost solely the offspring of the well-off who become well-off.

    185. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by suggsjc · · Score: 1

      government (which is nominally devoted to the public welfare)
      I'm not going to continue this since it is soo offtopic, but haven't you ever heard of the saying "crooked politician"? Just to give the counter argument, I don't know why people are so quick to put government up on a pedestal? They (politicians) are going to make choices that are beneficial to them (buyouts, kickbacks, etc).

      All of this said, I'm not (overly) critical of government. I just think that it has more power than it should.

      One thing I find amusing here on /. is that in other arguements (M$ vs linux or Intel vs AMD) there is a consistent mantra "choice is good for the consumer" and "monopolies are bad." Well what exactly do you think private sector programs are? The government has a monopoly on most of these programs...where if there were in the public sector then there could be multiple companies competing...which if I'm not mistaken another commonly quoted line is "competition is good for the end user."
      Ironic, isn't it?
      --
      When I have a kid, I want to put him in one of those strollers for twins and then run around the mall looking frantic.
    186. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by costas · · Score: 1

      How exactly has capitalism broken down here? I am not saying it's a perfect system, but Circuit City's move has not played out yet: if they survive this, then they will be a stronger company and be able to hire more people or at higher wages. If they don't (or if their results get worse), then other companies will shrink back from following their lead.

      The underlying problem of big-box stores like CC and CompUSA is that their customers are moving to direct sales, and the stores end up little more than showrooms --in which case, higher-cache brands like Apple or Sony (which are *expanding* into retail) have the advantage.

      This is no different than what's facing bookstores, CD sellers or any other business model that relied on having inventory close to the customer. The main difference being that computers are not an impulse purchase like a CD or a book, so these stores have an even harder time adjusting. That doesn't mean that they can't, nor does it mean they shouldn't try.

      FWIW, I agree that this is a pretty bad move when your competitors are trying to differentiate themselves on quality of service, and you just de-moralized all your remaining floor employees... but it's too soon to call this.

    187. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by Maxo-Texas · · Score: 1

      Hey!

      You left out "and a mistress on the side".

      I mean- if you are going to dream french, then keep the dream alive.

      --
      She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
    188. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by UbuntuDupe · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Partially right. To be as succinct as possible (please read to the end to make sure I don't address the response you have in mind):

      1) Yes, pension/health care obligations cause bad cars. When you have a large, unproductive expense [wait, wait, wait to the end], that your competitors do not have, your best people will be bid away to work for them.
      2) Yes, GM should have (Heaven forbid!) funded the obligations in advance, unlike, say, Social Security.
      3) On the other hand, when it's the union that asked for the benefit in the first place, don't they have some kind of obligation to educate themselves on where the money is coming from? A pension is deferred compensation. Workers are senior to bondholders in who gets paid first. (and bondholders are in turn senior to stockholders) So, credit agencies should have counted the obligations as debt senior to GM bonds. The union should have made sure the pension obligations were rated along with the rest of GM's debt, but like today's SS proponents, they have a hard time understanding that a promise to pay a pension *is* a debt.

      The whole wretched scheme was based on the fantasy that GM would remain perpetually more profitable than other companies so they could fund legacy obligations. Management took advantage of unions' incompetence, but the reverse happened too!

    189. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by apexdawn · · Score: 1

      I always felt cheesy when I told customers I didn't work on commission. They were much happier with me answering their questions, giving them options and allowing them to make decisions which I was happy to oblige them with. I just stopped saying it, much to the chagrin of my supervisors.

    190. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by Maxo-Texas · · Score: 1

      It's getting harder as more "fake" reviews get out on the net.

      In 1998 the net was much easier to search and the information was much denser and more helpful.

      --
      She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
    191. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by tthomas48 · · Score: 1

      That's great. I never said that GM or Ford build crappy cars (although they've built a pretty good reputation for doing so). They do, however, only put in safety systems as mandated by law. My guess is your 2001 Tahoe does not have standard side-curtain airbags like my Volkswagen does.

      But that's great that you love your ugly-ass pimped out minivans. A lot of American's love them too. Just less and less each year. And as gas prices go up, people love them less. And GM and Ford have no established products to fall back on. That's my point. GM and Ford have been making bad business decision after bad business decision. You know what? They were right. SUVs provided amazing short term gains in sales. People loved them. Gas prices are going up now. What do they have to fall back on? Toyota has SUVs that get 30+ miles to the gallon. They have hybrid SUVs. They also have tons of economy cars. They have economy cars targeted to teenagers. They have sensible cars for young professionals, and for grandmas. GM and Ford have ugly ass cars that have reputations for being unreliable. I understand they're getting better. But they're only getting better because Toyota has eaten their lunch. Not because they did anything to stay on top. They stagnated. A competitor has come in, and there's little they can do to survive except start putting out revolutionary cars. Not evolutionary ones. Labor has nothing to do with it.

      You don't have to agree with me. You can think your GMs are the best, prettiest, coolest things on earth. That's great. But the sales figures agree with me.

    192. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by Maxo-Texas · · Score: 1

      The last time we had layoffs at my company, it was in this order:
      a) people who had angered a manager (regardless of how good everyone knew they were)
      b) completely random people
      c) a few people who made big mistakes over the last couple years.

      Since that layoff, we've lost about 20 more people (about 95% "A" folks) who figured if we were going to layoff anyway, they might as well take the higher pay that the oil field offers. (Sure you get laid off every 3 years, but while you are working you make 20% more per year).

      --
      She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
    193. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by Thomas+Charron · · Score: 0

      A legally binding contract with a government entity which you couldn't sue..

      Interesting..

      --
      -- I'm the root of all that's evil, but you can call me cookie..
    194. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by nasch · · Score: 1

      Did you read his whole comment, or stop there? If you think upselling customers on crap they don't need is good personal service, I hope I don't try to buy anything from you. :-)

    195. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by tthomas48 · · Score: 1

      Yeah, I agree with most of what you said. Except that I still don't think that labor is the main problem. GM and Ford have been building poor product after poor product. They've just assumed that people would want to buy their trucks forever. That no one would ever get into their neighbors foreign truck and lust after all the fantastic standard features. They spent the entire eighties building products that were substandard and relied on the "buy America" slogan to get people to buy their crap.
      Here's an idea for them. Turn their lobbying power on Congress to get national health insurance. Then they can get out of their obligations. And then everyone will see that the reason they're losing market share is completely because their management keeps insisting on building crappy cars.

    196. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by UbuntuDupe · · Score: 1

      You said:

      Here's an idea for them. Turn their lobbying power on Congress to get national health insurance. Then they can get out of their obligations.

      and a lot of people say the same thing, casually assuming the last sentence follows. But I don't see it. National health insurance does not, by itself, void GM's contract with the union. You would have to have NHI *and* a separate act of Congress (which would be very unusual) to void that contract.

      Anyway, I don't disagree that GM and Ford have produced poor cars (and run their plants inefficiently), I just think that that problem is itself ultimately derivative of legacy costs.

    197. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by Maxo-Texas · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Really it's this.

      The strongly religious folks got into an unholy union with the rich and corporations because they hoped to overturn abortion and gay rights.

      Consider some points:
      The "conservative" party has been remapped from "small government/pro business" to "anti-abortion/pro corporation". (i.e. small businesses are struggling under some of these laws).

      The rich have had the rules changed so now the top 360,000 make as much as the bottom 150 million COMBINED.

      Corporations have extended their rights to the point where "conservative" governments support taking people's property for use by other private citizens.

      The business ruling class has gone from earning 20 times the average workers pay to earning over 300 TIMES the average workers pay in a single generation.

      ---

      I spoke to a major democratic lawyer on a flight last year and he said privately that he wished the republicans would finish packing the court and overturn abortion so that we could get on with the fact that the business class is basically raping the country and now appears to be preparing to leave it entirely once it is drained. The unions have had many of their strike rights taken away so they business has all the power right now.

      ---

      I HOPE AND PRAY that we slam back a 50% tax on everyone making over $300 grand a year and similarly lower the taxes on anyone earning under $44,000 a year (the "average" wage + 10%). I think business CEO's and so on should be taxed at 90% for everything over 20x the average salary (so currently about 800,000).

      ---

      These are not unreasonable dreams. With 220 million of us getting the shaft from an increasingly small portion of the populace (now down to under 1%), at some point we must wake up and say, "Wait a minute. Screw ME? SCREW YOU BUDDY".

      --
      She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
    198. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by Thomas+Charron · · Score: 1

      Newp. Unions are the ones who force a company to pay all their members as much as possible. On average, a union member earns roughly 25% more then a non union member, simply because of a unions ability to cripple a company if they don't.

      The day of unions giving a crap or existing FOR the people is gone. Now it's just greed.

      --
      -- I'm the root of all that's evil, but you can call me cookie..
    199. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by StikyPad · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Don't worry. First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they.. uh oh.. RUN!

    200. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by Thomas+Charron · · Score: 1

      And the UPS worker who gropes another employee and can't be fired for it becouse of the union improves safety? Bullshit.

      Yes, unions can do good.

      But the vast majority of large unions don't.

      --
      -- I'm the root of all that's evil, but you can call me cookie..
    201. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by Columcille · · Score: 1

      A guy at my school is one of those who lost his job. He's working on his master's degree and has worked at Circuit City part time for 8 years now to work his way through school. The "American Dream" thing from the submitter is pretty silly, his job had nothing to do with the "American Dream" - it was just a way (a good way) for him to work through school. But despite his hard work and good work, the company has fired him. Sure, he can get a job elsewhere (and is now looking around) but he isn't looking to make a career, he's working his way through school. Obviously Circuit City isn't in business to help him get through school, but nonetheless I can understand his own frustration that now, despite his history with the company, he will have this new concern and pressure of having to find a new job then get adjusted to the job. Just something to get him through school, but the whole process of looking for a job adds stress that wasn't there before. I can understand his frustration with them.

      --
      I love my sig.
    202. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by StikyPad · · Score: 1

      Why, is the doctor hot?

    203. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by NoBozo99 · · Score: 1

      If I had the points I'd mod you up.

      --
      I may not be a smart man, but I know what an inode is.
    204. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by twbecker · · Score: 1

      There are enough people out there that are still commited to buying American to overcome a good portion of the quality and appeal deficiencies of American cars. The truth of it is that the unions are spending these companies into the ground. When I hear about Joe Bob that's getting let go from Ford after 25 years, my first thought is that I hate to see anyone lose their job. Of course, Joe Bob works on an assembly line and makes about as much money as I do as a Software Engineer. But then you find out that Joe Bob gets a big check as he's going out the door, and also is going to be paid his FULL SALARY for something ridiculous like a year or more after he's NO LONGER WORKING. If that's not enough, he gets to keep his benefits package during this period, which incidentally is way better than mine. Ford will also pay 100% for him to go to college to learn a new trade. Now I don't feel sorry for Joe Bob, I feel sorry for Ford, for being fucked over this hard by the union. Incidentally, we do still make good cars in this country. Their made by Americans working for Japanese companies. And I believe they're not unionized.

      --
      "The problem with internet quotations is that many are not genuine" -Abraham Lincoln
    205. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      I have repaired, programmed, designed and built information systems.

      For definitions of 'information systems' that include XBoxes and Play Stations. 'Programming' isn't about setting up a VCR you know?

      Seriously dude. Claiming skills you clearly don't have hurts your case. You peak salary is equal to starting salary for someone who knows their head from their ass in the areas you claim. You're just a marketer with an inflated self opinion (I know that's redundant).

      Now get yourself a good sales job (hint: Car salespeople are still on commish, so are funeral plot and insurance salespeople).

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    206. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by DDLKermit007 · · Score: 1

      Exactly, because those of us who have, keep quiet usually. We hope those people don't get fed up, and strike out on their own. Afterall, they are no good to me if they work for themselves, and I can't get a crack at them for less.

    207. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Every investor wants a return, and everyone is an investor."

      Not really.
      The bottom 80% of the population only owns about 4% of all stock.

    208. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by EastCoastSurfer · · Score: 1

      I agree they were/are poorly run. First order of business should have been to move factories out of the unionized north down south where Honda and Toyota make most of their cars. Of course I'm being sarcastic, but I see things like lack of additional safety features, lack of innovative design, same parts they've been using for 20 years, as mostly a cost issue. American car designers aren't any worse than those in Japan (heck, I bet a lot of Japans designs end up happening here), but they probably have to fit in budget constraints that are much tighter.

      Unions were once a good thing. Back before there were employment laws. We now have so many employment laws, even in right to work states, that unions are for the most part not needed anymore.

    209. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by HiThere · · Score: 1

      That was, indeed, the saying. There's no evidence that it was particularly true, however, and his rephrasing of it appears to more accurately describe the situation. (Yes, I've read the occasional newspaper stories. I've also studied data summaries reported by the Census. And I was employed professionally as a statistician. [I didn't do any statistical tests on the data testing this particular conjecture...but I have a rough feel for how it would have come out in the 1960 census, which is the one I worked with.])

      In so far as I am aware of it, the data support more rich people having large famlies than poor people. This is not what common mythology dictates, but that's created by newspapers, who generally have an ax to grind. (E.g., in almost all cases reported in the news, the poor family is living on communally supplied funding. Rich people don't do this, so they don't raise the same degree of outrage. Occasional outrage helps sell papers.)

      --

      I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
    210. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by marck · · Score: 1

      Your statement implies that well-off parents are sort of a requirement, which is misleading.

      Its easier to follow a good example, but the same path is open to anyone. You don't have to have well-off parents in order to pave the way to success. That is very much a misconception and a common excuse that gets used even though there are thousands of examples that contradict it.

    211. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Exactly. This is another perfect example of the usual corporate double-speak. I'm sure all of these retail giants train their employees to work in ways that make them maximally productive for the company, and I'm sure most if not all of them use some sort of performance evaluation in determining raises, but then Circuit City pulls a typical US corporate move and turns around and punished all of these people for actually doing what they were encouraged to do.
      Corporate culture in this country is really screwed up. Think of all the little things - like how it's considered "unprofessional" to quit a job without giving two weeks notice (and many places will whip out that "loyalty" line on you), but yet it's considered completely acceptable for a company to fire huge numbers of employees with no notice at all for shaky reasons. I'm sure a corporate manager might say "well, you can't tell people in advance because some of them would quit immediately and, after all, there's a business to run". Right, and the people you just fired don't have bills to pay? Jobs are best treated like snakes - no matter how docile it looks, you cannot and should not ever let your guard down completely.

    212. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by cHiphead · · Score: 1

      At this point I will vote for anyone, ANYONE, who can speak in complete sentences.

      Cheers.

      --

      This is my sig. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
    213. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by AeroIllini · · Score: 1

      If you want to control your own life, you have to make careful financial decisions, forego status symbols, avoid debt, and invest in yourself. A paid-off trailer is a castle, a McMansion with a mortgage is the bank's. You're absolutely right about careful financial decisions, and I agree with you completely on the materialistic nature of the American Dream, but I take exception with the last zinger.

      <rant type="financial_misunderstanding">

      When you say that a "McMansion with a mortgage is the bank's" you're not taking into account the value of the house itself, which is yours. Yes, you need to avoid debt, but a mortgage is not necessarily considered a net debt.

      Someone said to me once that the difference between rich people and poor people has nothing to do with the amount of money each has. The difference is: rich people use their money to obtain assets, and poor people use their money to pay for liabilities that they *think* are assets. Rent is a liability; money flows out, but you don't own anything (it feels like an asset, because it's your own apartment/house/whatever). Cars are a liability; the moment you buy it, the value drops, so the amount you owe is greater than the amount you own, and the value will never increase: it's a net debt (but again, it's *your* car, so it feels like an asset). Houses, on the other hand, usually increase in value over time (not universally true, but stay with me here). Thus, when you pay $X for a house, you mortgage $(X+Y), with Y being the interest. Except that over time, the value of the house increases, but X remains constant, hopefully eventually exceeding X+Y. At any time during the mortgage, you could sell the house and move, and the sales price you get would be used to instantly pay off the mortgage. If you time things right and choose your real estate intelligently, you can usually make money on the sale of the house that way, even with interest on the mortgage. Thus, because your assets (the market value of the house) typically outweigh your liabilities (the remaining debt on your mortgage), it's not a net debt. It's a net asset. Once the value of your mortgage(s) is greater than the market value of your house, then you can consider it a net debt. Choosing houses in neighborhoods that are increasing in value, and then taking proper care of the house during ownership, will help avoid the net debt situation.

      That being said, I agree with your statement about responsible financial planning and avoiding debt. But when that debt is giving returns higher than the initial investment (such as the proverbial "McMansion," in a well-chosen neighborhood, whose value is increasing faster than the interest on the mortgage), then that's called leveraging your debt, and it's actually very smart from a financial perspective. Well-run companies do this all the time: they will get loans from the bank that they then invest in operations, and the profit from those operations outstrips the interest on the debt, thus creating net gains. There's a limit to how much you can do this, of course, but don't scoff at the "McMansion" simply because it has a mortgage. It may actually be making more money than the paid-off trailer you mentioned.

      Consumer credit cards (not business credit cards), car payments, cash loans, home equity loans, etc.: all these things are true debt, and falling prey to them (instead of balancing them with other assets) is a great way to end up poor. A McMansion with a mortgage is not on that list.

      </rant>

      Otherwise, bravo on the comment.
      --
      For security, the MD5 hash of this message and sig is 09f911029d74e35bd84156c5635688c0.
    214. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by hurfy · · Score: 1

      Sounds like Compusa, hehe.

      I love trying out the row of mice, but the one i pick is never in stock anyway....they just forgot the little part about profitting off me.

      Show me the best one
      Refuse to sell me one
      ??!!??
      profit..well someone else profits but close....

    215. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by Khashishi · · Score: 1

      How much do you think people would pay for something like that? Probably not much. But maybe your real customers would be the manufacturers, as a source of advertising.

    216. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't get me wrong, I'm not a "leftist" who complains about social inequalities

      Well I should hope not. We don't want people to complain, and certainly not to do anything about it; we just want everyone accept their lot, like you do.

      Good boy.
    217. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by bnenning · · Score: 1

      Well said. I would only add as a preemptive response to the doomsayers that yes, it's true that some people can do everything right and still end up in bad shape through no fault of their own. But we're talking odds here; you have a far better chance of success by working hard than by looking for handouts, even though some productive people get cancer and some deadbeats win the lottery.

      --
      How to solve most of our problems: 1.Lots of nuclear plants. 2.Cure aging.
    218. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by abb3w · · Score: 1

      the 50's era (a time that conservatives like yourself laud as being the American ideal)

      1950's or 1850's?

      (Yes, it's flamebait and a troll. Go ahead and mod it.)

      --
      //Information does not want to be free; it wants to breed.
    219. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by falconwolf · · Score: 1

      That's a great idea. Let unions milk another industry and run it into the ground like what happened to the automotive industry.

      If Japanese and European auto manfacturers can build factories and autos in the US profitably, it's not unions responsible for the decline in US car companies, it's there own fault. I don't know how old you are but I still recall Detroit calling for sanctions against the Japanese in the 1970s because Detroit was loosing to Mazda, Toyota, and others Japanese businesses because they were producing fuel efficient vehicles while Detroit was only producing gas goozlers. The unions had nothing to do with that. Detroit continues to fight raising CAFE standards while Japan delivers efficient models. And within a few years I fully expect Chinese businesses to setup manufacturing in the US as well, taking more business from Detroit.

      Falcon
    220. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by bnenning · · Score: 2, Insightful

      These actions would have been illegal were I come from

      I don't know where you're from, but I'd bet it has a higher unemployment rate than the US. If businesses can't fire employees, they're going to be very reluctant to hire anybody in the first place.

      Exactly how long should a company be obligated to provide charity to workers that are producing less value than they cost in wages and benefits?

      --
      How to solve most of our problems: 1.Lots of nuclear plants. 2.Cure aging.
    221. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by EastCoastSurfer · · Score: 1

      First off, I agree that US car manufactures are also poorly run. Second, it's been my understanding that the Japanese and Euro manufactures who have moved here have gone to right to work states in order to be union free. I know the local Honda plant here doesn't have unions.

    222. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by mfrank · · Score: 1

      And the reason they have all those ridiculous protections is because back when they didn't, every time someone new was voted into power they'd replace everybody to reward their supporters. Look up the word "patronage". Still happens at the higher levels (federal prosecuters).

      It's pretty much impossible for government to not be screwed up.

    223. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by boingo82 · · Score: 1
      You bet, but only because you asked. ;)

      Your Escalade, with a curb weight of 5333-5560 lbs (depending on what trim you bought) and a GVWR of 6800 - 7000 lbs (again depending on trim) and your Tahoe were both exempt from the following government-minimum safety standard:

      Standard No. 216: Roof Crush Resistance Scope and Purpose: This standard establishes strength requirements for the passenger compartment roof to reduce deaths and injuries due to the crushing of the roof into the occupant compartment in rollover crashes. Application: Passenger cars (except convertibles) and multipurpose passenger vehicles, trucks and buses (except school buses) with a GVWR of 2,722 kg (6,000 lb) or less

      And that roof crush standard, which neither of your vehicles even had to meet, is incredibly lax. Thanks in large part to Detroit's automakers, that roof crush standard hasn't been updated since 1971. And it only requires a vehicle to support 1.5 times its weight on the roof - trivial compared to the actual forces exerted in a rollover.

      I guess in some ways I've gotten off topic, but in another, this is just a really good example of why companies will *always* find a way to skirt government regs, or better yet, keep them outdated and ineffectual, even when it harms customers.

      --
      As a republican I feel it my responsibity to manufacture criminals. People need punished!
    224. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by mfrank · · Score: 1

      The reason the "American Dream" existed in the 50's was because the rest of the world was pretty much bombed-out rubble. Easy to compete with bombed-out rubble.

    225. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by lord_mike · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Congratulations, ChemGeek on your successful entrepeneurship... Don't forget that for every successful, entrepeneur, thousands others have failed.. also, do not forget that you are only a lawsuit or an illness (individual health insurance is very hard to get and afford) away from bankruptcy.

      Your success can vanish in an instant. Do not assume that you are any more secure than the rest of us, because you've done reasonably well for yourself. We are all in the same boat, and the tide is falling, not rising.

      Thanks,

      Mike

    226. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by falconwolf · · Score: 1

      First off, I agree that US car manufactures are also poorly run. Second, it's been my understanding that the Japanese and Euro manufactures who have moved here have gone to right to work states in order to be union free. I know the local Honda plant here doesn't have unions.

      But how does the wages paid and the cost of living compare to Detroit? I'd bet they compare favorably.

      Falcon
    227. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by Pharmboy · · Score: 1

      Corporate culture set the tone and will now have to live with the results.

      Which is why I say the only security you have is your abilities. You can hate the "nasty corporations" all you want, but layoffs will still happen. Having the best skill set is the best defense.

      --
      Tequila: It's not just for breakfast anymore!
    228. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by Pharmboy · · Score: 1

      I noticed that nowhere in your reply did you state that you are actually *good* at your job.

      --
      Tequila: It's not just for breakfast anymore!
    229. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by DerekLyons · · Score: 1

      There once was a time when people living in the richest country in the world had a reasonable expectation that they could share in that wealth as long as they worked hard and played by the rules. It's not an unfair "expectation". After all, the 50's era (a time that conservatives like yourself laud as being the American ideal) was a time where you could get a good job with great security and live well for the rest of your life. You would have health insurance, life inusrance, pension, the whole 9 yards. If someone brought that up today, they would be accused of being a communist, yet this era was considered the capitalist ideal--the idea of the American Dream came from this time period in history.

       
      You were quite right to start that off with "once upon a time" - because what you wrote is a fantasy that bears little relation to reality. Health insurance in the 50's? Forget about it, especially if you didn't have a union job. Life insurance? Pension? Ditto. (And if you had a union job - those benefits weren't always what could be considered 'great' or even 'decent' today.) But only a fraction of Americans had union jobs.
       
       

      Even crappy retail jobs that are being derided on this site had these kind of benefits. A retail person COULD own a house, believe it or not... almost impossible today.

      Sure a retail person could have a house - but it was not a given (in fact it was pretty unusual), and fairly likely it would be a small and crappy one. It certainly wouldn't been like a house in the suburbs today.
       
       

      It is no wonder that the United States of America is in such a bad state. It's time for America to rise up and demand the America Dream again. It is our birthright, but only if we stand up for it.

      The reality is the American Dream is as viable, and hard to reach, as it ever was. What has happened is an increasing number of people who think that a house in the burbs and a fancy new car are their birthright - rather than the product of hard work, dedication, thrift, etc... etc... You want to see what's strangling the American Dream? Check out how much the average American's debt (esp credit card debt) has gone up over the decades.
    230. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by sjames · · Score: 1

      Capitalism is the only system that deals with humans as they truly are. Greedy peons who worry for little more than themselves and those closest to them. I don't deny for a second what I am. The ideal of capitalism is that individual greed can be channelled into societal greed.

      Speak for yourself peon! Capitalism deals with the lowest common denominator of humanity. It demands that the rest of us live down to it's standard, suffer poverty, or find a way to opt out.

      I prefer to find a cull the herd approach to raising the standard. Mechanize the economy to the point that everyone CAN live without doing anything. The herd is culled when the lcd sits on the couch and dies of apathy. In reality, their fitness would fall through the floor, and depression would set in. Eventually their crappy health would cause them to die of the flu or other common illness, but really apathy would be the root cause).

      I suppose those who can't be happy unless they have more than their neighbors will end up killing themselves. The rest can then get on with improving the human race.

      It's at least as viable as a goal as catering to the worst that humanity has to offer.

    231. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by TopSpin · · Score: 1

      Speaking only for myself, if that really were the case then I'd want no part of it.

      The American Dream as I understand it... There aren't any philosophers making employment decisions at Circuit City; they're bean counters counting beans and I know they aren't anticipating the consequences of all this. They're trying to reduce costs and stumbled on a clever technique; mass purge of anyone making more than the minimum the market will bear and get new, cheaper floor drones. I'm betting others will quickly follow suit.

      WalMart has been doing this for years; sneeze at the wrong moment and you're gone. One at a time. The churn keeps the payroll cheap. It's the same thing but the lack of headline grabbing mass firings may be part of the reason Circuit City does $11G a year in revenue and WalMart is up around a quarter trillion.

      The service sector in the US has never managed to get organized. I suspect more than a few of the simultaneously unemployed Circuit City folks might decide they could do well to spend some of their free time at something productive, like have a meeting. Once Best Buy's stakeholders compel that business to follow Circuit City's example, those "expensive" former employees might discover they aren't alone.

      Working a sales floor in a Circuit City doesn't involve much talent, but you must have a reasonable grasp of English. These jobs can't just be outsourced to India or filled by fresh immigrants that can't expound on the life changing benefits of Blue Ray. The day the mob figures this out I believe we'll see the return of organized labor, in force. These things work in cycles and, outside of Government, unions have been waining for about three decades in the US. If this happens the Elois among us that take low service sector wages for granted will fund it through higher prices. Reality has a way of confounding wealthy philosophers.

      --
      Lurking at the bottom of the gravity well, getting old
    232. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by falconwolf · · Score: 1

      Despite the stock price going up, this is going to prove to be disastrous for them

      Actually while the stock price went up some it closed lower.

      Hopefully people will remember this so that if the mere idea ever creeps into another CEO's head he'll forget about it instantly or risk losing his company.

      Unlikely to ever happen, this wasn't the first tyme this happened and it won't be the last.

      Falcon
    233. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by UbuntuDupe · · Score: 1

      Oh, I definitely think people would pay a lot for something like this:

      -having a real human hold their hand through the process of understanding what they really need
      -no pressure to buy anything -- seriously
      -no guilt about "using" them to get information, since the "score is settled" in terms of paying for the service that you really need
      -having someone show them *how* to get the most use out of it, without buying a specific contract for that

      My parents, and people their age, are always telling me about how they increasingly feel lost amid new technology, and have to bug younger people they know (who don't always like guiding them through the process). I know that if I just gave my parents Kinetic and an EyeToy to play, they wouldn't have bothered, but since I patiently guided them through the process of turning the system on and playing, they're hooked. So, it's great to have someone who can show you how to really get the most of out your purchase.

      The question of whether they'd pay enough for this to be profitable is, of course, tougher. At least with the co-op method you can save a lot by making your labor mostly people who volunteer (at doing something they love!) in order to get a discount on an otherwise expensive membership fee. Say, $500 per month, OR ($50 + 16 hours) per month. You could also probably get manufacturers to let you use the stuff for free once the store becomes a "must have" for customers to consider your product.

    234. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by iamacat · · Score: 1

      Actually, it shows that (big companies != innovation). Big Box retail is profitable by following the formula.

      As TFA and closing of CompUSA stores indicate, not for electronic items.

    235. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by sjames · · Score: 1

      'm sorry that your version of the American Dream relies on such a sense of entitlement. Speaking as someone who is almost 30 and entered the job market right before the dotcom bust, I feel that it's my responsibility to point out that you're living in fantasyland.

      Simply no. What he stated is what was known for the greater part of the 20th century as "The American Dream". The fact that it now lies on the floor in a pool of it's own blood doesn't make it any less "The American Dream". The only sense of entitlement involved is believing one is owed a good living and loyalty in return for hard work and loyalty.

      It may never have been perfectly implemented, but it IS what society promised to all of it's members in the mid 20th century. At one time, it was a great deal more common to retire from the same job you had in your 20's.

    236. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by iamacat · · Score: 1

      Turning a retail store into a showroom would allow you to lower price to match Amazon after accounting for in-store return/service and impulse buying. You are eliminating overhead of shipping, overstocking, obsolesense and a whole lot of associated jobs. You are getting a powerful advertisement of having an actual working item that can be instantly purchased.

    237. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A. Except for that whole "election" thing
      B. makes up for slightly lower pay with huge benefits and retirement pensions
      C. advertising might be the "only" thing govt doesn't waste huge chunks of money on. govt gets rewarded for spending money. corps get rewarded for saving money
      D. stick around for so long that their institutional knowledge is _incredibly_ narrow

    238. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by treeves · · Score: 1
      The joke is a generalization of course. The Joint Chiefs of Staff (Colin Powell was the former chair) wear name tags for goodness sake, since they are military officers.

      I think he was trying to get you to think of gas station attendants, fast food workers, etc.

      --
      ...the future crusty old bastards are already drinking the Kool-Aid.
    239. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by f16c · · Score: 1

      This is Bullshit! The Unions didn't run the companies into the ground: The Companies did this to themselves. They had a chance to compete 30 years ago when they expected us to buy the same crap over and over again. The Big Three decided not to make small cars and when they did they made BAD small cars. Reliability was an option you got from the imports and not them. You can hardly blame the unions for building the wrong products at the wrong times. The executive class in all of the US has a lot to answer for. They flew our jobs over seas first class.

      I have worked in and outside of a Union. My current position is professional and not Union. Other than getting paid monthly and paying more for health insurance there isn't much difference from the inside - unless I do something stupid. The unions allow make sure that the employer does what they are supposed to if the worker breaks the rules. There has to be documentation rather than just pushing someone out the door. In some cases it keeps someone in-house long enough to save them from themselves. In other cases it is designed so that they do not get a chance to come back. This protects the company, the workers on the job and the worker with the problem.

      If I piss off someone where I work I get the boot.

      --
      bob@Osprey:~>
    240. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by toddestan · · Score: 1

      66k and 45k miles? How about see you in another 200k? Though if you take care of them, they'll last another 100k easy. Now if they were Chysler products, you would be doing pretty good at 66k and still running without problems.

    241. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by jkgamer · · Score: 1

      And what part of his statement leads you to believe that he doesn't EARN his 5 figures? Just because someone works for the government and enjoys the job security, doesn't mean they get a free ride. They are still required to perform the work they were hired to do, and failure to do so can, and most likely will, result in termination. They just have the added benefit of not getting screwed over or exploited because someone needed to justify their multi-million dollar salary and bonuses.

      The American dream is not to be a perpetual employee for Circuit City, but that being a hard, loyal, and responsible worker will result in you receiving just compensation for your efforts. What Circuit City did here was to terminate a class of employees based on how much they made, not how much they were worth. If Circuit City, and other corporations, are allowed to profit from this line of thought, then what hope is there for the common lay person (read: most of us) of ever succeeding in life, let alone surviving. Do we really want to send the message that of the 6.6 billion people on this planet, only the selfish, uncaring, and cold-hearted will survive? This act of cowardice on the part of Circuit City reveals that the TRUE incompetance lies within upper management. Instead of performing their responsibilities and weeding out those that were NOT pulling their weight, they chose a shotgun approach, hoping that this course of action would solve all of their corporate ills. It will not!

      So in hopes of protecting all of our current and future employment opportunities, I will play my very small part and not patronize Circuit City. I can only hope that others see the real dangers in this madness and take it upon themselves to do the same.

    242. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by sjames · · Score: 1

      I would advise those left to take stock of their situation. They would be wise to get those resumes out there now.

    243. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by cecom · · Score: 1

      Great post(s) ! Seriously, you are reading my mind. Your post might as well have been written by me (although I am not as eloquent).

    244. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm not implying it's a requirement, I'm saying that the American Dream is almost solely the domain of people whose parents already have it. That's a fact based on cold hard statistics. There *are* exceptions, but they are a small minority. If you factor in the ratio of middle and lower class people to those in the upper class, it suddenly becomes amazingly apparent how little opportunity it is for those not born with a golden spoon in their mouth.

      Moreover, your idea that children of the well-off are tremendously more likely to live the American Dream because of the example of their parents is a comically delusional. They are more likely to succeed because they are given the resources and the capital in order to succeed, regardless of whether they have a good idea or any talent or business sense.

      "There are thousands of examples that contradict that." And there are millions more examples that support it. I suppose it's your choice if you would rather take heart in the tiny fraction of cases that are successful, rather than in the overwhelming evidence to the contrary of your beliefs. That's the Lotto Mentality so common today in the U.S.A.

    245. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by falconwolf · · Score: 1

      You make an interesting point. On one hand, even the poorest of Americans have at least one of these: cable TV, cell phone, internet access.

      Not quiet. I've worked with some who didn't even have roof to sleep under, they most certainly didn't have tv, cell phones, or internet access. The last two, cell phones and net access could most certainly have helped them improve their socioeconomic circumstance though, net acces could help find a job and the phone would make it easier to be in contact with prospective employers. While tv may not be needed or is an extravagance, cellphones and net access can be put to good use.

      Falcon
    246. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by BalanceOfJudgement · · Score: 1

      Really I think the beef isn't so much with capitalism as it is with corporatism.
      Actually, you're completely correct. The only reason I didn't use the word 'corporatism' is because I long ago rejected that distinction, meaning, I essentially concluded that capitalism will always lead to corporatism.

      Whether that's an accurate conclusion, I am not 100% sure. I am certain enough, though, that I think it an acceptable assumption. It IS one I question, though.
      --

      We are the fire that lights our world.. and we are the fire that consumes it.
    247. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by BalanceOfJudgement · · Score: 1

      Dude, you talk like you think greed is something new. Grow up. It was greed that has driven the US to be the greatest nation in the world. It will one day drive this world to be the greatest in the universe.
      Ayn Rand would just love you to pieces. Yes, I've read all of her works; was quite enamored with it for quite a long time, actually.

      And then I actually spent some time taking those ideals to their logical conclusion (with some help from our own society, of course) and concluded that what those ideas lead to is not a world in which I want to leave, nor my children.

      Greed? No, greed had little to do with the rise of our nation; our sense of Manifest Destiny played a rather more important role. Greed itself was a byproduct of a people who, born from the ideals of laissez-faire Adam Smith capitalism, were lucky enough to find the last unexploited piece of the planet.

      As another poster replied in this thread, "Don't let Stars and Stripes inhibit your better judgement." Your statement smacks of nationalism.

      Capitalism is the only system that deals with humans as they truly are. Greedy peons who worry for little more than themselves and those closest to them. I don't deny for a second what I am. The ideal of capitalism is that individual greed can be channelled into societal greed.

      No, there are in fact dozens of other systems that deal with humans as they are, only in THOSE systems, "dealing with humans as they are" means that the outcome of such "dealing" is what's better for the culture, not what's better for the few at the top.

      The problem with holding greed as an ideal is that it doesn't always (and history has shown it VERY RARELY) translates into enlightened self interest (what you term "societal greed"). When everyone is busy trying to take their own piece of a limited pie (and ALL resources are limited) instead of agreeing on how to share it, the end result can only be that some suffer and the few who are strong (or rich), don't. When we consider it acceptable, ney, NECESSARY to only care about our own interests, it may serve us in the short term.. but in the long term, by making our fellow humans suffer, we only limit our own future, be it by outright revolt or complete social collapse.

      It has happened before. A society can only carry the weight of its most powerful members for so long until it becomes top heavy. Humans are social creatures because societies work for us; but they only work for us when we all work together.

      This is not a communist, socialist, or other "ist" idea - it is a fact of human nature that our civilization has sought to ignore, because it is inconvenient for building civilizations.

      "Your labor is a commodity," someone very smart told me 20yrs ago (damn, I'm getting old), "you need to go out and sell it to the highest bidder."

      Precisely my point. I am a human being, not a human resource. Accordingly:

      These Circuit City employees would quit immediately if they got an offer for a better job, and none of us would blame them.
      this total lack of loyalty is appropriate. So long as I am considered a 'thing' that earns you money, so I will treat you as a 'thing' that gives me a paycheck. Treat me as something more valuable and I'm likely to return the favor.

      You merely made my point for me.
      --

      We are the fire that lights our world.. and we are the fire that consumes it.
    248. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by BalanceOfJudgement · · Score: 1

      Good point. Rather than repeat myself, I point you to a similar reply, here

      --

      We are the fire that lights our world.. and we are the fire that consumes it.
    249. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by j-pimp · · Score: 1

      Actually, it shows that (big companies != innovation). Big Box retail is profitable by following the formula.

      As TFA and closing of CompUSA stores indicate, not for electronic items.

      Let me rephrase. Big box retail attempts to be profitable by following the formula. It tends to be most profitable when it does so. In recent years this has changed.

      --
      --- Justin Dearing http://www.justaprogrammer.net/ We're just programmers.
    250. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by db32 · · Score: 1

      Hey, I'm as pissed off as the next guy about corporate ethics these days, but you are right on the damned money on this. Do you think anyone here on slashdot would give a rats ass if the story WAS about how McDonald's fired its highest paid employees?

      Having come from a 'wonderful' day of shopping at CompUSA I just would like to quote a certain Simpson's character with "HA HA". Seriously I have NEVER been into a megachain computer store that didn't come with pushy and uninformed sales people. If they even had the slightest clue about what the hell they were selling they would probably have a better job elsewhere. I'm sorry but a trained monkey working for banana's can tell grandma that she needs the uber deluxe megafast hyperthreaded super flatscreen wireless whatnot to send email to her kids. In fact, any time I had to go into one of these pits as a kid to buy something (hey, megachains do tend to run really nice specials from time to time) I would make it a point to spend that extra time between sales pitch and the sales rep running off to grab paperwork to inform the customer of what was really going on and what they really needed. I can't go in there looking for a specific item without them trying to upsell me some bullshit, despite my insistance that item X is what I want because X, Y and Z don't freaking work, they do more than I need, or just cost too damned much, and frequently refusing to answer where the hell item X is without pressuring me into 20 questions about why I should buy something else.

      The only part of the "American Dream" this even remotely relates do is that part that drives people to buy lottery tickets, or to refinance homes for .25% better rates, or any number of other moronic free lunch chasing behaviors that are largely related to piss poor math skills. The sad truth is that the American Dream has been replaced by a bunch of bastards that just want to be lazy and get handouts while spending themselves into stupid debts on credit. Do some freaking work and quit spending on credit and the economy will be in MUCH better shape. Easy credit has destroyed our market becuase people are willing to pay insane prices for bullshit because they just swipe some plastic and they get what they want.

      --
      The only change I can believe in is what I find in my couch cushions.
    251. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "After all, the 50's era (a time that conservatives like yourself laud as being the American ideal) was a time where you could get a good job with great security and live well for the rest of your life. You would have health insurance, life inusrance, pension, the whole 9 yards."

      only if you were white....sorry, had to point that out.

      "But, it is irrelevant... at some point we became so jaded when these ideals were stripped from our society, that we now resent and try to bring down anyone who still has health insurance, union membership, or a pension plan. Instead of demanding more for ourselves, we are demanding less for everyone else--somehow it is better for everyone to be dragged down rather than lifting everyone up."

      great point. i see this when factory workers get laid off and they're upset. then there are people who work crappy jobs that say to those factory workers, "stop complaining. i have to work for $6 / hour."
      it's extremely upsetting because the people at the bottom do the most work and yet get paid the least. it used to be that you were (if you were male and white) compensated for your hard work, not just how low the market can push your wage while still having you come into work.

      the problem is throughout the top of the corporation. many of the management types have no conscience. everything is driven by numbers. and they have the balls to justify layoffs, outsourcing, and so on to the people their laying off by saying we have to stay competetive...from the deck of their yacht.

      to all the people at circuit city who are getting fired...just stop showing up for work. i wonder...if you added up the daily pay for all those workers, how would that compare to the ceo pay?

    252. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by nuttycom · · Score: 1

      That's quite an interesing idea, but it neglects a significant part of the business model of most stores: selling customers who are there to browse and to people who are likely to make impulse buys.

      While your model works great for someone who knows what they're looking for, my guess is that these people are probably in the minority except when it comes to major purchases. I think that this is a significant part of the reason why the WalMart and Target type stores are so effective - you can go in for one thing and come out with several. This would be much less likely under your model.

    253. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by falconwolf · · Score: 1

      Circuit City is, IMO, doing the only thing they can to try to compete with Amazon, NewEgg, etc

      There's one more thing they could of done, reduce the amount the CEO took home. If a business isn't doing well then everyone from the CEO on down should share in it. Afterall isn't the captian of the ship supposed to go down with the ship? But as with Enron it's probably the executives who will walk away with their pockets stuffed.

      There comes a time where you have to decide whether it's better to save $5 for yourself, or spend it so that somebody else has a job.

      Even though I'm on disability and don't work I am a member of two coops in my area. At first I joined because they have better selections of organic food than any other stores but I also like that they support local businesses as well, so I'm willing to pay a little more there than I would pay big box chain stores. Supporting locally owned and operated businesses keep more money circulating in the area which benefits everyone here.

      Falcon
    254. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by Coraon · · Score: 1

      Its not as easy as it sounds. For someone in retail moving from one job to another is tough, its not just sales and product you have to know, you have to be a master of manulipating your system to get what the customer needs. When you start over you dont have that skill set.

      --
      -Ours is the wisdom of Solomon, the magic of Merlyn, the fall of Icaris.
    255. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by UbuntuDupe · · Score: 1

      While your model works great for someone who knows what they're looking for, my guess is that these people are probably in the minority except when it comes to major purchases. I think that this is a significant part of the reason why the WalMart and Target type stores are so effective - you can go in for one thing and come out with several. This would be much less likely under your model.

      Huh? The entire point of the store I proposed is so that you can learn what it is you really want -- i.e., you don't know what you're looking for, or know only in vague terms, and then people can help you find what your looking for without pressuring you to buy too much.

    256. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by falconwolf · · Score: 1

      Also, small companies are not necessarily better at innovation. A one storefront company would probably go out of business in the face of outside disruptive innovations, E-Commerce in this case. Those that survive probably didn't need to adapt, e.g. boutique shops whose original formula stressed customer service, etc.

      But if they're innovative or think outside the box small one storefront businesses can increase their sales as well as survivability by using disruptive technologies. I knew someone who owned a small bookstore that did this. Actually two who owned two different bookstores. The first one started making more money from the net than the physical store made so she ended up selling it, the physical store. The other one also saw her sales increase when she went online. Whereas before they only sold locally, on the net they both were able to sale nationally. And the one who kept the physical store also saw more people coming into the store, some driving 100 miles or more to go there after finding the store online.

      Falcon
    257. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by nuttycom · · Score: 1

      Ah, I had interpreted your proposal as being most useful for someone who wants to buy a general class of product, like a computer, but doesn't know the specific configuration that's best for their particular use. This seems less well-tailored to an activity like browsing for random gadgets, or books, or whatever.

    258. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by falconwolf · · Score: 1

      Except that when you make money the motivating factor for why you do things, the things that SHOULD motivate you as a human being in a human culture - cease to function. The RIAA's recent behavior (suing a 10 year old girl.. come on) eloquently demonstrates this assertion.

      Though this is true with some businesses it's not true with all. Take Whole Foods Market, thier corporate philosophy is such that they support their employees and the communities they operate in. That was the idea when the business started, they kept it when they had their IPO, and they still have it. And it is one of the fastest growing grocery store chains in the USA.

      Falcon
    259. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by FrostedChaos · · Score: 1

      Well, nothing in life is free, especially information.

      I would have more sympathy for you if I didn't already know about your history with support forums.

      --
      "Any connection between your reality and mine is purely coincidental." -Slashdot
    260. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Complete sentences? No soundbite potential.

      Seriously, if a candidate can't express their entire platform within 30 seconds in words that the majority of people will interpret to mean whatever they want to hear, they have no chance of being elected. This is how you get all this guff about "compassionate conservatism" and the British Labour "Third Way".

    261. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by UbuntuDupe · · Score: 1

      I'd have more sympathy if you weren't so slow:

      1) I never predicated any suggestion on anything being free, including information. The idea is that you are paying directly for the assistance in finding what you want, not the good you finally decide on, thus removing the conflicts of interest and getting the "best of both worlds".

      2) I didn't ask for anyone's sympathy. I suggested an idea for a new kind of store and invited opinion on its merit.

      3) My history on other forums has nothing to do with the idea.

    262. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by UbuntuDupe · · Score: 1

      Well, it's probably most effective at that, but I don't see how the showroom's setup is any less suited for that kind of browsing. It just adds salespeople who aren't afraid to say, "yeah, you'll probably never use this ... "

    263. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The plural of anecdote is not "data".

    264. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by NateTech · · Score: 1
      Don't worry, the guys at the top of Circuit City still "get it"... the dream thing that is...

      But they have had to curtail their greed lately... the last serious stock sales by insiders was in 2006. Gosh, wonder if they knew something.

      "No CC insider has purchased company stock this year. The last buy occurred when WOO CAROLYN YAUYAN purchased 3 shares on July 20, 2006. In the last 5 years insiders have on average purchased 22,118 shares each year."

      June 1, 2006
      Mccollough Warren Alan Sale 50,000 29.95-30.34 490,629 $1,507,878
      May 1, 2006
      Mccollough Warren Alan Sale 50,000 28.10-28.75 490,629 $1,420,956
      Hardymon James F Sale 2,709 28.81-28.82 5,472 $78,054
      Salovaara Mikael Sale 2,709 28.84-28.84 46,406 $78,128
      April 20, 2006
      Clark George Daniel Jr Sale 19,736 28.04-28.11 154,300 $554,053
      Feigin Barbara S Sale 2,709 28.00-28.00 8,191 $75,852
      April 19, 2006
      Mccollough Warren Alan Sale 50,000 27.70-27.75 490,629 $1,386,371
      April 18, 2006
      Sieger Marc J Sale 9,759 27.50-27.50 39,740 $268,373
      April 3, 2006
      Mccollough Warren Alan Sale 44,100 24.00-24.36 496,529 $1,064,455
      Mccollough Warren Alan Sale 5,900 24.37-24.49 490,629 $144,094

      Mr. Mccollough made 5.52 million in half a year in 2006, just in stock options. Not including salary.

      Poor dear. He must be down to bread crumbs, water, and standing in the unemployment lines by now.

      The American dream today seems to include non-oversight of stock options grants vs. shareholder value. Know why? People don't invest anymore, they buy mutual funds and let the golf buddies of these people keep tabs on things.

      --
      +++OK ATH
    265. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by NateTech · · Score: 1

      The CEO didn't set his compensation level, the Board of Directors did. They're so far removed from reality they don't even know or care what a store looks like, let alone runs.

      I posted the CEO's stock trades since 2002 here under another post... feel free to hunt it down. He made more than 5.5 million dollars in 2006, in less than half a year.

      Greed is greed. Where are the shareholders saying, "STOP"? Nowhere. Why? They're all invested in MUTUAL FUNDS via their 401K's and couldn't care less that the Board are all golfing buddies with the analysts running the mutual funds. As long as the sheep get their 8% a year, they're happy... while the CEO takes 5.5 million in value out of the organization in less than 6 months, and no one bats an eye...

      --
      +++OK ATH
    266. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I just read the first sentence and said "about time someone said it"

      The worst job is working for someone else, the best job is working for yourself. Why do you think there are so many contractors out there? They technically work under someone else, but it's a mutual relationship with bigger money involved, you have a bargaining position. your services and professional trade in exchange for a price better than other contractors in the field.

      My friend's dad decided to go this route and business is looking good, they may actually be able to realize some of their hopes and dreams.

      That's the real american dream. and like dreams, not all become true. It's not luck, it's sheer willpower.

      What people need to start doing, who have experience in these places is to walk off and instead of re-applying, they need to actually start something new with their experience. Jobs like circuit city should be nothing more than college jobs. I'm honestly looking into getting hired to cover college, after college, I'm going to try to achieve the American dream, capitalize on an idea someone else hasn't, hell, maybe even before college is done if I play my cards right.

      However, some of the blame for the dead-end job mentality and lack of the American dream is the fact so many people have been outright BRAINWASHED into thinking they can only get money from an established company, that it's the best they can do. My generation, (18-25 atm) have been outright brainwashed into thinking that they have to work for someone else, that they cannot do better. That to get money they have to do it in a certain designated way. I remember various times in elementary school, junior high, and high school this mentality has been harped to me, media pushes conformity, companies mind-fuck people by capitalizing on every nonconformist movement out there. Do you think that hippies in the 1960's got their clothing from the gap? It may sound like conspiracy theory bullshit, but it does seem damned convenient for companies to stifle all acts of social rebellion by integrating it into a conformist wet-dream. Target the people who conform with non-comformist fashion and ideals, voila, originality has been destroyed, anything that may allow free though and for people to think differently has faded into obscurity. close call, they might eventually started thinking completely on their own and realized that the world is full of shit and opted for a change that may hurt the bottom line!

      It may sound like bullshit, but even something as simple as fashion, is an identity, you take away identity from a teenager and make them feel like the herd, it does mindfuck them later.

      Sad that lots of people I know in my generation work dead-end jobs, and get drunk and party, and not much else. They have no aspirations and if they do they dont think they're ALLOWED to act on them. Somehow, this got worked into peoples' minds that they need permission from a higher power to do something different. I dont know where this comes from, but it is pretty sad, if not somewhat scary. Hell when there were student protests, there were very few people who actually cried out against it. the rest rolled over with apathetic responses, or didnt because they though they NEEDED PERMISSION TO PROTEST. Of course so many people are on FAFSA that if they protest their aid may get taken away.
      I paid for my classes, so if I want to protest, I may lose the class and thus the money I paid, but I at least stood up for my rights, the fact I don't have to tolerate such bullshit.

      any case, in short, the problem lies within modern society.

    267. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      as opposed to companies that will fuck the worker over? Companies that are making money hand over fist, paying their executives six and seven figure wages, and bitching about paying for worker benefits like healthcare and retirement? Then firing all their American employees and moving to China so they can afford to pay management even more money?

      Of course unions, as all employees should, push for higher pay and benefits. You don't want a raise?

      I really see how you have invested much thought into the subject. Why are you wanting a race to the bottom for the average American worker? Not everyone is a rocket scientist. not everyone is smart enough to be a IT professional or a doctor. America needs jobs for all people and all educational levels. And we need those jobs to pay enough so you can live above poverty.

    268. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by ChemGeek4501 · · Score: 1

      Half-full or half-empty? You're absolutely right about one serious illness, lawsuit or whathave you away from bankruptcy, but what the hell? Everyone has the same opportunity....not everyone has the same motivation or drive. CG

    269. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by saintlupus · · Score: 1

      My employeer has both a "penison" and a 401K - I only have faith in the 401K.


      Penison, apply directly to the... ah, nevermind.

      --saint

    270. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      OOOOOH you GOT me!!!

      Funny, how you didn't deny being a stupid cunt though.

    271. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by jpbelang · · Score: 1

      > And to think that all these young people voted and demonstrated AGAINST the CPE...

      First I don't think there was a vote ( I may very well be wrong). They demonstrated. The government fell back.

      Secondly, plans that attack only a segment of the population are bound to fail. This was a classic "protect the baby boomers" approach to the problem, I don't think it would have solved much.

      That said, as much as the US has to move more toward protecting workers, France has to work the other way.

      --
      JP http://www.wearerite.com
    272. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by jofallon763 · · Score: 1

      Looks to me like Circuit City is being run into the ground, just looking at their sales patterns. You fire the people who can explain why a customer should buy an expensive HDTV, maybe you might expect it will be harder to sell them. You fire the best people in your stores and you remove any incentive for the lower paid ones to work harder. Circuit City and Tweeter etc don't need unions to get milked; management is doing it.

    273. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by HikingStick · · Score: 1

      My father was born penniless in Russia. He escaped the ravages of war with little more than his life. While most in the US would not call me wealthy, I am well-off. There just might be more American Dream going on than most people realize, but expectations are so high that people see anything less than billionaire status as some kind of failure.

      --
      I use irony whenever I can, but my shirts are still wrinkled...
    274. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by Harry+Coin · · Score: 1

      Of course, you're absolutely right about the process of leveraging debt to make money. I'm currently doing the same thing with my home. I was oversimplifying to make a point. But, at the end of your working life, I still feel that a home that you own free and clear is a vital part of real security. Thanks for your comment.

      --
      That's pre 7-11 thinking....
    275. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by HikingStick · · Score: 1

      That's the real american dream. and like dreams, not all become true. It's not luck, it's sheer willpower.
      I don't want to nit-pick, but I do want to temper one of your points. I agree with the first half of that statement abpit the real American Dream. As to the second half ("sheer willpower"), I do not believe it to be entirely true. While will power plays a very important role (perhaps the most important role), you cannot discount that some people simply were in the right place at the right time--they came to market at a time where an unrealized demand peaked, or some other socio-political event caused market demands to shift dramatically. Think of the first person to open a restaurant in a small town. It may not be the best restaurant, and it does not have to fight for customers. It has a high likelihood of success because the town (assuming it is large enough to support it) will frequent the restaurant. In such a case, there will be success unless the venture is horribly mismanaged (and I know, because I destroyed my first entrepreneurial venture--a pizza place--that way).
      --
      I use irony whenever I can, but my shirts are still wrinkled...
    276. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by n7ytd · · Score: 1

      One big difference: the government does not have to make a profit or answer to stock holders, and they have an endless account to write paychecks out of.

      A government position is not an endless paycheck, it is possible to be let go, even in the union. A Reduction in Force action, perhaps. It is very difficult, however, and in the small part of the system I've seen, it seemed that non-performers were just gradually excluded from interesting projects until they either quit of their own accord, or just become one of the Wallys roaming the halls and chatting, waiting to be eligible for retirement. It's probably cheaper for the government to just let that happen than to face the expense of trying to get rid of a union employee.

      With the new pay system being put in place for most civil servants, more likely the way to the door will be several "less than satisfactory" reviews with no pay increase.

    277. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Shhh! One word, H1b.

    278. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by mfrank · · Score: 1

      Have you tried going to a pawnshop?

    279. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by Shadow99_1 · · Score: 1

      Having worked for them at one point, I can give you something of an insiders perspective on why they have failed and continue to fail...

      Multiple stores in the same area, that couldn't support the excess.

      They choose to mimic Best Buy and Walmart (the two main companies they consider their rivals), rather than going their own path.

      They often refused to buy into new technologies until someone else made that area profitable...

      Complete and utter lack of coherent management... Policy changed from manager to manager... Even within the same store.

      Deciding to 'empower' sales associates to help customers and then deciding randomly who had actually been able to use their new 'power' to help customers... So to placate a customer in one case we would repair an item and they would tell us we had done well. A similiar case within the next few days would get us reamed for being dumb...

      Lastly a constant change of policy that was cyclical... Having worked for them over 5 years (while going to college) I saw policies go and then come back again... Some came back through 3 times within 5 years... It's awfully hard at a certain point to say that we did 'X' in response to 'Y', when in a week, a month, a quarter... Whatever, it would change back to how it was earlier...

      --
      we are all invisible unless we choose otherwise
    280. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by EastCoastSurfer · · Score: 1

      There has to be documentation rather than just pushing someone out the door.

      Why? Other than firing someone b/c of the nondiscriminatory types of things (race/gender/etc...) why can't I fire someone for any reason I please? I would argue that making it hard to fire people means less people have jobs. As an owner in a company I would be much more apt to give questionable people chances if I knew it would be easy to get rid of them if they didn't work out.

      Also, every state already has laws against the usual discriminatory things, we don't unions to enforce those rules.

    281. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by f16c · · Score: 1

      Documentation is part of the nondiscriminatory requirement. The laws you describe are very lax even here in MD. That you do not understand this belies your naiveté. I do not claim perfection for myself, but that is what you are doing. I don't live in a perfect world. It apparently isn't the world you live in.

      Crawl back under your rock, troll...

      --
      bob@Osprey:~>
    282. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by EricTheO · · Score: 1

      Welcome to the era of Corporate Facism, that is in effect what we in the USA are living under. A time when Corporate interests are too often put above the interests of Joe/Jane Citizen. The whole goal, seemingly, of the Current Executive Branch of Government, is to help the Corporations and there "Major" stockholders and Executives who in turn, having already put them in office, will make sure they have lucrative positions on leaving office. This has nothing to do with skill, but is has much to do with who you know and who's palm you greased. Unfortunately too may politicians of both parties succumb to the sway of the mighty dollar, but the current Republican party has taken this to new heights(lows?) On a side note: Companies often say that they need to make drastic changes not becuase they are losing money but because they aren't making a large enough profit. How long can a company's shareholders or board expect an increasing profit margin year in , year out? What amount of profit is "good enough"? Why should an Executive's be payed up to 9 figure salaries only to run the company into the ground. This only makes sense if there is collusion among The Board and Major stock holders to do so after all they approve the Exec's salary package, they must all be getting something out of this. Studies show that there has been a major shift of wealth away from the middle class and you wonder why? Where are inflationary pressures really coming from? Decent wages? Or this shift of wealth to the few?

      --
      -Eric
    283. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by DaVinciPC · · Score: 1

      Let me clarify. Aparently you have decided not to perform research on this subject (i.e. me, and hopefully you know what i.e. stands for). If you would you would know that I have a computer business that I have been running for 4 years on the side for cash with a loyal customer base. As for my qualifications I am a+, n+, mcp, and mcse certified as well as closing in on cisco certification. I you wish I can send references, but then again that would not matter since you obviously prejudge without wanting to know the full story. Unfortunately you are probably like most doctors in the field that make grave errors everyday. The reason I was still with Circuit City is my wife suffered from a brain anuerisym that ruptured when she was seven months pregnant with my daughter. Now let me inform you that Insurance companies in this day and age of corporate greed will not insure her untill she has reach 5 years from the date of release from her doctor. So yes, I could have left and gone to a much higher paid job where my wife would not be covered by insurance. I mean hey it's always fun to spend that entire bigger pay check on medicine, specialists, and therapists for my wife and child. Who needs a home, food, amd clothes on my childrens back. But then again you know me so well, I don't have the skills anyway right? Before you make an ass of yourself like so many close minded indiviuals out there why don't you ask questions first before you put your foot in your mouth.

    284. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by EastCoastSurfer · · Score: 1

      What are you talking about. I work in a company that has a lot of turnover b/c of the nature of the business. The amount of documentation we maintain on a per employee basis is huge. None one in this company is part of a union.

      And yeah, there is no perfect world. Sometimes people don't like you and sometimes you happen to be working for one of those people. If they happen to own the company, then they should be allowed to term you at anytime they feel like it. It's the same thing that you can leave at anytime if you don't like your boss. I'm not sure why this is so hard to understand.

    285. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by sesshomaru · · Score: 1

      I like you guy, you're all right. Hope your wife is doing better.

      --
      "MIT betrayed all of its basic principles."
    286. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by FrostedChaos · · Score: 1

      The idea is that you are paying directly for the assistance in finding what you want, not the good you finally decide on, thus removing the conflicts of interest and getting the "best of both worlds".
      This is the business model of Consumer Reports. They research products and then write about them. Usually they give them a rating. I have a subscription.

      My history on other forums has nothing to do with the idea.
      Basically what you are proposing is a support forum where people interested in a particular electronic appliance get together and help each other, to their mutual benefit. They have these all over the web. You can visit them without even getting in your automobile! And if you only knew enough to be a web admin, you could even host one for a very minimal cost, without having to rent floor space, hire security guards, or form a corporation.

      Basically, you acted like a jackass on a support forum. Now you are proposing a "great new idea"-- support forums.
      Ever hear about irony?

      --
      "Any connection between your reality and mine is purely coincidental." -Slashdot
    287. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by FrostedChaos · · Score: 1

      I'm sure there are many people that would love to research the topic in such depth but don't have the time--but do have the money to get advice from someone knowledgeable.
      Anyone giving you advice about which products to buy in exchange for money is a salesman. The only difference is "what's in it for them." Some salesmen get commission, and want you to buy more expensive items. Some are paid by the hour, and just want you to stop interrupting their afternoon nap. Some, like the Consumer Reports / Trade magazine people, are selling information. It's in their interest to at least appear to (and hopefully actually do) research about the products before giving a suggestion.

      People pay retail prices because they don't know any better, or because they are rich enough not to care about getting the optimal deal. Don't forget, for many rich people, expensive things are a status symbol, no matter how good or bad they are at their nominal function.

      Bottom line-- if you can't filter out the bullshit from what's real, you are going to get screwed. There are no "neutral third parties" in business-- except for those who really don't care about you and your situation, and those usually aren't of much use. Businesses exist to make money.

      --
      "Any connection between your reality and mine is purely coincidental." -Slashdot
    288. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by UbuntuDupe · · Score: 1

      *sigh* You really are slow.

      Of course internet support forums exist. And for people who are optimally satisfied with these and don't need anything else, that's great. But some people actually prefer having a human guide them through the process. If you aren't even aware of what forum you should look at, or what the term is for what you're looking for, for example, they're great. You'd also be able to see things in person and make sure you're using them correctly.

      The idea is that you can use such stores for things you can't do online, or when you don't have enough knowledge of the subject to competently search for it online.

      Once you realize not everyone is exactly like you, it will start to make sense.

    289. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. by UbuntuDupe · · Score: 1

      Some, like the Consumer Reports / Trade magazine people, are selling information. It's in their interest to at least appear to (and hopefully actually do) research about the products before giving a suggestion.

      Yes, and this is an in-person Consumer Reports/ Trade magazine that is selling information that appears to and hopefully actually does research before making a suggestion. Why is this so hard for you to see?

      You are unbelievably slow.

  2. So take your business to Best Buy by wiredog · · Score: 3, Funny

    Boycott Circuit City!

    1. Re:So take your business to Best Buy by voice_of_all_reason · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Turd sandwich... giant douche?

    2. Re:So take your business to Best Buy by Rosco+P.+Coltrane · · Score: 4, Funny

      Surely you mean Short-Circuit City...

      --
      "A door is what a dog is perpetually on the wrong side of" - Ogden Nash
    3. Re:So take your business to Best Buy by MindStalker · · Score: 1

      HAAH. Yea sure. Best Buy pays crap. They also buy out companies then pay them crap wages driving people to leave. For example, did you know Geek Squad used to actually employee good techs till best buy bought them out. They dropped the wages and drove out all but the worse employees.

    4. Re:So take your business to Best Buy by Archangel+Michael · · Score: 1

      Circus City

      --
      Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
    5. Re:So take your business to Best Buy by cyfer2000 · · Score: 1

      Do they fire their best performers from cannons?

      --
      There is a spark in every single flame bait point.
    6. Re:So take your business to Best Buy by the_wishbone · · Score: 1

      I personally like "Circuit Shitty."

    7. Re:So take your business to Best Buy by Billosaur · · Score: 1

      That makes sense... take your business that treats its employees like so much low-grade offal and transfer it to a company that thinks nothing of trying to swindle you... I'll pass.

      --
      GetOuttaMySpace - The Anti-Social Network
    8. Re:So take your business to Best Buy by Bastardchyld · · Score: 1


      No, I actually thought that Best Buy just had a great idea one day to buy VW Beetles and put a geek in them...
      </sarcasm>

      --
      $diff terrorists hippies
      $
      $rm -rf *terrorists *hippies
    9. Re:So take your business to Best Buy by Javi0084 · · Score: 0

      I would but I hate their return policy. I'll stick with http://www.newegg.com/ and http://www.amazon.com/

    10. Re:So take your business to Best Buy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I would but I hate their return policy.

      BB has a fuckign awesome return policy, better then most. WHere else do you get 30 days, no questions asked. Shit. I bought a TV there, watched it for 27 days and then brought the thing back. I was asked what was wrong, I said nothing, think I want a LCD. So I traded in for an LCD, returned again after about 20 days and said, no I think I want a WEGA, after 25 more days I realized WEGA was not for me and finally got a plasma.

      The whole time BB never blinked.

    11. Re:So take your business to Best Buy by Cornflake917 · · Score: 1

      The parents post isn't offtopic. This is a reference to a South Park episode which was parody of the 2004 elections, in which the SP residents had to choose to elect a turd sandwhich or a giant douche. A lot of people felt like they were just choosing the lesser of two evils, and I think the poster was trying to say that choosing between Best Buy and Circuit City isn't much different.

    12. Re:So take your business to Best Buy by MindStalker · · Score: 1

      Generally a high paid sales guy doesn't necesarily know more about the technology. They are just better at selling crap. This is probably a bad move on their part, unless those people generally are bringing in less money than they are worth... Hey. Your a technology company.. Heres a novel idea.. Use technology to track employee cost versus sales and decide who to keep.

    13. Re:So take your business to Best Buy by Archangel+Michael · · Score: 1

      Yes, you are right. My bad

      --
      Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
    14. Re:So take your business to Best Buy by TheGratefulNet · · Score: 1

      time for a mass-action on the part of the people.

      I would wonder what a mass-return 'strike' (return recently bought goods back to CC stores) operation would do to CC's bottom line?

      suppose everyone reading this were to go out and buy something that is returnable (not the restocking-fee items like cameras, but stereo gear that is usually returnable with no restocking). and then keep it a day and return it the next day.

      in fact, if it happened in a co-ordinated way it would, perhaps, send a message to CC that this behavior is NOT acceptable.

      I just wonder if such a think would work...

      (grass-roots things sometimes do work, though)

      --

      --
      "It is now safe to switch off your computer."
    15. Re:So take your business to Best Buy by StrongAxe · · Score: 1

      Personally, I don't see why they need "higher paid" sales guys at circuit city anyways. Most high school kids know enough about technology to answer grandma's questions

      One of my biggest laments about trying to buy things retail (and this applies to most things, not just electronics) is that, when I go to a store, I NEED the sales personnel to be more knowledgeable about their stock than I am. Otherwise, they are totally useless to me. When I ask "Where can I find X, I can't find it on the shelf", I need a knowledgeable salesman who can tell me "It's over there next to Y" or "We usually carry it, but we're out, and won't get any more in until next Tuesday", or "What is your configuration? Maybe you should be using Y instead". What I usually get is a minimum wage high school dropout who walks over to the same shelf I just looked at for 10 minutes, does the same search I just did, then says "Uh, I guess we're sold out" or "Uh, I guess we don't carry it" or "Uh, I can't help you", without so much as looking at an inventory control screen.

      When you have seasoned sales staff who have been working somewhere for years, and care about the products, they can give quality service. When you have someone who has never been at any job for longer than 6 months, it's likely that the customer (who has likely been shopping at that store longer than the employee has been employed ther) has a better knowledge of the merchandise than the employee does. Of course, on paper, firing the highest people looks good (most financial gain for least impact), but the quality of service you get will suffer. I have gotten shafted by that twice (gotten laid off because I had much more experience than everyone else, and was hence being paid more than everyone else) so perhaps I'm a little biased :)

    16. Re:So take your business to Best Buy by Javi0084 · · Score: 0

      I bought a harness for my car stereo at BB with BB Bucks from McDonald's. The sales guy gave me the wrong one so I took it back to exchange it for the correct one. They told me they can't take anything back that was bought with BB Bucks. I didn't want my money back, I just wanted the right harness. On another occasion, a while back, I bought the Madagascar DVD for my girlfriend when it first came out. It would skip and freeze a lot on my DVD player (it was not a dirty laser on the player), so I tried it on my PC and got the same results. I took it back and said that the DVD was defective, the girl there told me that not all DVDs play on all DVD players and they can't take it back (this was before HD-DVD and Bluray). After a few minutes of trying to explain that the DVD is obviously defective, she finally caved in. The replacement DVD works perfect and never again will I shop there.

    17. Re:So take your business to Best Buy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't take your business anywhere. Quit buying "stuff" until the "stuff merchants" begin acting like civilized beings.

    18. Re:So take your business to Best Buy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      or Circuit Shitty?

    19. Re:So take your business to Best Buy by Kelbear · · Score: 1

      I am not very comfortable with this idea.

      I have little doubt that this could damage CC's bottom line if it was successfully executed on a large enough scale.

      The article has just demonstrated what happens when CC's profits are threatened. The ones who you're trying to get at are not the ones who will bear the brunt of this retaliation. The working employees will be collateral damage from such an attack, not the management.

      Also, I believe here are legal problems regarding salary manipulation that can make this a tricky process. Why fire people and offer them the chance to be rehired at a lower wage 10-weeks later like in the article summary? Why not just offer them the choice between the lower wage and being fired right off the bat? I think it was done this way because it dodges these laws. But I have no examples or sources to back up this speculation. Perhaps someone who has worked in HR can clarify.

    20. Re:So take your business to Best Buy by RMB2 · · Score: 1

      Sounds like legitimate stock advice to me. I'm gonna call my broker right now

      --
      [/sarcasm]
    21. Re:So take your business to Best Buy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Boycott Circuit City!

      I can't really boycott them as I'm way to smart to ever shop there again.

  3. Wrong place to cry ... we all just got out sourced by guysmilee · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Wrong place to cry ... we all just got out sourced!

  4. Will Circuit City get by Recovering+Hater · · Score: 5, Insightful

    what they want or what they deserve? I know if I worked there, I would hope I could find a better job before they could fire me and would be praying that hundreds of other employees would be doing the same. The next time you visit Circuit City just remember how they value their employees. If they can't be bothered to spend the money on quality help what does that imply about their attitude towards their cutomers.

    --
    My humor is probably your flamebait
    1. Re:Will Circuit City get by ryturner · · Score: 1

      If they can't be bothered to spend the money on quality help what does that imply about their attitude towards their cutomers. Nothing.
    2. Re:Will Circuit City get by MoneyT · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Let's assume that they validly need to cut costs. Doesn't it make sense to cut the highest paid people? Isn't this what we demand that companies do (i.e. stop paying the CEOs and managers so much more than the peons? Furthermore, remember that in order to equal the amount of money saved by cutting our highest paid, you would have to cut many more of your lowest paid. Is it better to fire 100 of your highest paid or 200 of your lowest paid? Circuit city seems to think the former, and I'm not sure they're wrong (i'm not sure they're right either).

      --
      T Money
      World Domination with a plastic spoon since 1984
    3. Re:Will Circuit City get by sesshomaru · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Have you never heard the glorious story of Divx, concieved in Hell by executives of Circuit City (not to be confused with the piracy friendly codec)?

      Here's an article: DIVX Bites The Dust!

      "Just think, everytime some kid wants to watch The Little Mermaid, it'll be a payday for us," they chortled...

      --
      "MIT betrayed all of its basic principles."
    4. Re:Will Circuit City get by LunaticTippy · · Score: 1

      Um, the CEOs and VPs and whatnot are not getting less. They're probably getting a nice bonus and raise for cutting costs. That's the way it generally happens. As usual, the highest-paid people far away from HQ get the shaft.

      CEOs are making record multiples of peon wages, and the gap is growing. This move will further widen the gap.

      In any case, I think CC would be better off staffing a store with 10 good people making $20/hour than 20 losers making $10. You'll get faster, more pleasant, and professional service.

      --
      Man, you really need that seminar!
    5. Re:Will Circuit City get by Cpt_Kirks · · Score: 1

      The next time you visit Circuit City

      That's a laugh. The "next time" will be the first time in a LONG time. Place sucks donkey balls and has for a while.

      I would go into my rant about a CC salesdrone trying to steal my already paid for iPaq right in front of me, but that would probably be in bad taste.

    6. Re:Will Circuit City get by MoneyT · · Score: 1

      In any case, I think CC would be better off staffing a store with 10 good people making $20/hour than 20 losers making $10. You'll get faster, more pleasant, and professional service.

      You've clearly never worked a retail job for any length of time. If you need 20 people, you need 20 people, not 10 good people making twice as much. And what a humanitarian you are, to let 10 people go without jobs so that 10 others can have more money. Isn't that the same problem you're having with the CEOs and the VPs? They get more while others are sent away?

      --
      T Money
      World Domination with a plastic spoon since 1984
    7. Re:Will Circuit City get by AndersOSU · · Score: 1

      There's a pretty massive difference between cutting the salary of wildly overpaid top execs, and cutting the highest paid low level employees.

      But hey somebody is probably going to get a giant bonus for this idea...

    8. Re:Will Circuit City get by Recovering+Hater · · Score: 1

      Do tell, do tell. This is slashdot, since when did taste come into favor? hahah.

      --
      My humor is probably your flamebait
    9. Re:Will Circuit City get by rollingcalf · · Score: 1

      "Let's assume that they validly need to cut costs. Doesn't it make sense to cut the highest paid people?"

      It doesn't make sense if the higher paid people are providing more additional value than their wage differential. It's not a stretch to think that an experienced employee with years of good performance who is earning $25K/year is going to bring in more than an extra $7K compared to a minimally competent newbie earning $18K. After all, that's why people get raises and promotions in the first place, if they're not in a union with a seniority-based pay scale.

      Now not only have they gotten rid of many of the better performers, they have also discouraged the remaining employees from performing well enough to get a raise or promotion.

      --
      ---------
      There is inferior bacteria on the interior of your posterior.
    10. Re:Will Circuit City get by Princeofcups · · Score: 1

      > Doesn't it make sense to cut the highest paid people?

      For the health of the company, absolutely. 1 executive salary equals 100 to 1000 employees. But this has nothing to do with the health of the company, and everything to do with said executives' salaries and bonuses, and that only in the short term.

      jfs

      --
      The only thing worse than a Democrat is a Republican.
    11. Re:Will Circuit City get by raehl · · Score: 1

      I'd rather they staffed 10 losers making $10. Then nobody would harass me when I went in there to shop AND my stuff would cost less.

    12. Re:Will Circuit City get by Isaac-1 · · Score: 1

      It is because of their employees that I try to avoid Circuit City, its much like the reason I try to avoid going new car shopping at car lots. None is this with Circuit City is new, I have been shopping at Circuit City stores for almost 20 years, and in that time they have reinvented themselves time and time again. When I first saw one of their stores in the late 1980's it was layed out in a Hub fasion with with check out at the center and high dollar items behind the counter, they were basicly an appliance/home/car electronics store ( I bought a small chest freezer there, it is still running 18 years later). Later (at least in the stores I have seen) they moved away from the household appliance business and towards distributed check out counters and then became heavily involved in computers and computer components, and added front check out. Most recently at least in the local store most of the computer stuff is gone and is replaced with more games, videos and music.

    13. Re:Will Circuit City get by multiOSfreak · · Score: 1

      Doesn't it make sense to cut the highest paid people? Isn't this what we demand that companies do (i.e. stop paying the CEOs and managers so much more than the peons?

      Wouldn't it make more sense to cut a few executive bonuses by a few percent instead of firing a couple thousand hard-working "peons", as you call them? If you want to talk about cutting pay at the top, then start at the *actual* top, not near the bottom.
    14. Re:Will Circuit City get by LunaticTippy · · Score: 1

      I've worked retail. I'd much rather have a small team of capable long-term employees with good rapport than double the crew with untrained incompetents. Actually that goes for any job. For coders would you rather have 10 newbies fresh from devry or 3 adept 10-year veterans who know what they're doing?

      I've seen it so many times. What good are 5 checkout clerks who don't know how to do their jobs? They process 20 customers an hour. 2 skilled clerks can process 40 an hour.

      The only time needing 20 people doesn't matter on their skill is for film extras, or placeholders in a line.

      Your CEO point is completely wrong. We need to bring UP the wages of the lower rungs, not depress them. The unskilled people should build up their skills at a lower wage until they are worth $20/hour.

      I've wracked my brain to figure it out. There is no valid reason for it except sadism. When I was in high school, working at Taco Shack, I could tell how the night would go by the people on the roster. If it was the 3 long-term kickass employees we would never have much of a line. If it was the 5 newbies lines out the door, angry yelling customers, and constant mistakes. I don't know why they didn't pay more to keep the good people. It would have saved them money and made the customers lives happier. Many low-wage jobs have several hundred percent turnover. Why not up your wages a bit and get it down to a nice 50% or less? The reason customer support sucks is most of the time you're speaking with someone fresh out of training paid the absolute minimum the company can get away with. A competent person making double the money could handle problems ten times as fast. Haven't you had that experience? Or do you not care who you get on the phone when your bank statement is fucked up?

      --
      Man, you really need that seminar!
    15. Re:Will Circuit City get by Fulcrum+of+Evil · · Score: 1

      Doesn't it make sense to cut the highest paid people?

      No. It makes sense to cut the poorest performing people. Otherwise, you lose far more revenue than you save on cost.

      --
      "We returned the General to El Salvador, or maybe Guatemala, it's difficult to tell from 10,000 feet"
    16. Re:Will Circuit City get by LunaticTippy · · Score: 1

      I shop online. They pay 1 computer programmer $100/hour and I don't have to deal with anyone.

      On the rare times I am reduced to shopping at an actual store, I wish they had competent employees. I can't tell you how many times they've messed up, been wrong about store policy, been unable to find what I want, etc. It's so maddening to see all the checkout lines stalled because nobody knows what they're doing.

      My point was why not pay the same or less money for better service by paying fewer good people more? If 10 losers can make the store more or less run, 5 good employees that know what they're doing can make it run well.

      My biggest complaint is the big box hardware stores. They have dozens of employees making $8/hour. None of them know anything. I wonder how the place gets stocked since nobody knows where anything is. They would save money by having 8 people making $15/hour, people would get in and out faster, everybody wins. Usually I go to the small hardware store where they pay more and people stay for many years. I die inside a little every time I have to go to Home Depot or some other hellhole because the small store doesn't have what I need. The most insulting thing is that the big stores don't really have better prices.

      --
      Man, you really need that seminar!
    17. Re:Will Circuit City get by MoneyT · · Score: 1

      I don't know why they didn't pay more to keep the good people. It would have saved them money and made the customers lives happier. Many low-wage jobs have several hundred percent turnover. Why not up your wages a bit and get it down to a nice 50% or less?

      Multiple reasons:

      Better paid long term employees don't bring in a significant amount of extra money in a high competition, low margin business like fast food or circuit city. Long gone are the days when "would you like fries with that" was a sales pitch, people would actualy listen to the sales person describe the service plans and people bought the extra accessories. The only people that still fall for those are the people who don't know any better and you'll get those people wether you have expert sales people or shitty ones. I would bet that if you looked at overall traffic and revenue on the nights when you had the veterans and the nights you had the new people, it didn't vary much.

      As far as turnover and wages, most turnover in support, retail and sales has to do with low wages in relation to the abuse you take from the public, but few to no retail businesses can afford to pay anyone enough money to make dealing with the public enticing. For that matter, the public won't pay the prices it would cost to pay employees enough money to deal with the public happily. People want the lowest cost and have little to no brand loyalty, and neither to the employees. It's a race to the bottom and everyone along the way is getting screwed.

      --
      T Money
      World Domination with a plastic spoon since 1984
    18. Re:Will Circuit City get by MoneyT · · Score: 1

      Sales folks are easy to replace. Competent management, not so much. Furthermore, lets say we cut one VP from the company, and let's say that circuit city has 250 retail stores (numbers entirely from my ass).

      VP salary of $100,000 / year

      over 250 retail stores is an extra $400 / year / store.

      Now instead lets fire your top earning sales person from each store. If your top earner makes $25,000 / year all of that money (and then some, remember stores pay taxes on you) for each store.

      --
      T Money
      World Domination with a plastic spoon since 1984
    19. Re:Will Circuit City get by LunaticTippy · · Score: 0

      You've utterly missed my point.

      It is cheaper in many cases to pay fewer people more money.

      Imagine this scenario. You have a call center full of retards making $10/hour. Average wait time is 10 minutes, it takes 5 calls to get your problem fixed, and half of the customers going through this end up wanting to cancel their service. Compare to the same call center 2/3 full of good experienced people making $15/hour. Same price, no wait, happy customers, "same call" resolution.

      I worked in a call center. I saw anyone with any skill leave for more money. Turnover was over 1,000%. It made no sense. They were paying more to train people than they were saving by having low pay.

      I'm convinced that for customer service higher pay usually will equal lower cost. (assuming that higher pay means you keep better people and they stay longer)

      Besides, the whole cost equation is strange. It's not as if Chase lowered their banking fees when they outsourced their call centers. Their customers weren't saying "I will go to megabank if you don't raise my fees and outsource my support" It just made some CEO rich.

      Oh well. It's sad that people have so much trouble understanding that quality and quantity are different but interrelated. 10 bad employees are worse than 5 good employees, 5 good employees cost less than 10 bad employees. It's so simple.

      --
      Man, you really need that seminar!
    20. Re:Will Circuit City get by AndersOSU · · Score: 1

      So what happens when you decrease 50% of the VPs salaries from $300,000 (more realistic) to $150,000.

    21. Re:Will Circuit City get by MoneyT · · Score: 1

      My point is, your assertation doesn't always hold true, and I certainly think it doesn't hold true for Circuit City. Where once circuit city might have been a place to get real answers and real support it's now just another electronic retailer. The people who want answers and support won't listen to the people who can provide it, so it doesn't matter if the circuit city employee can provide it and the folks that would listen, don't need the answers or support because they already have them. Honestly circuit city is just another retail store, the ammount of "service" most employees there will ever be required to provide is correctly ringing up products. It's sad and sucks for the employees but true.

      Furthermore, you are completely ignoring that sometimes retail stores just need more people, not smarter people. You're also assuming that higher paid means better employee. I've worked with plenty of people that were better paid and worse employees than the people under them. While it can, pay does not always correspond to skill or value. Lastly, you are ignoring the possibility that most of the people circuit city employs are the ones they need, and by firing the highest paid, they can fire less people for the same cost savings, therefore allowing them to retain more good employees.

      --
      T Money
      World Domination with a plastic spoon since 1984
    22. Re:Will Circuit City get by MoneyT · · Score: 1

      Let's find out shall we? Lets say that circuit city has 6 VPs. We cut all their salaries in half, thus saving $900,000. Over the same 250 stores, thats $3600 per store, or roughly the savings of cutting one high paid sales person per store and rehiring them at a lower salary. And in the end, if you're looking at things from the company's point of view, who is easier to replace? The sales guy or the VP? Who's more likely to walk if you cut their salary?

      --
      T Money
      World Domination with a plastic spoon since 1984
    23. Re:Will Circuit City get by MoneyT · · Score: 1

      You're assuming higher pay = better employee. In your experience, with what frequency does this ring true?

      --
      T Money
      World Domination with a plastic spoon since 1984
    24. Re:Will Circuit City get by MoneyT · · Score: 1

      Only if said bonus is paid in actual cash AND said bonus is significant enough to equal a reasonable ammount per store. One employee per store is $25000 per store. $300000 of an executive bonus is only a couple thousand per store.

      --
      T Money
      World Domination with a plastic spoon since 1984
    25. Re:Will Circuit City get by MoneyT · · Score: 1

      You are assuming that higher pay is directly corelated with better performance.

      --
      T Money
      World Domination with a plastic spoon since 1984
    26. Re:Will Circuit City get by Fulcrum+of+Evil · · Score: 1

      There's a good chance. It's certainly often true in Tech - with more experience and competence, I can demand more money.

      --
      "We returned the General to El Salvador, or maybe Guatemala, it's difficult to tell from 10,000 feet"
    27. Re:Will Circuit City get by DerekLyons · · Score: 1

      Let's assume that they validly need to cut costs. Doesn't it make sense to cut the highest paid people?

      Nope.
       
      For example - at the business where my wife works as Comptroller, she is now in the top 10% of salaries paid, second only to the bosses and the sales manager. Sure, they could hire a bunch of salespeople if they fired her and promoted her assistant... But can ______ run the department as smoothly and efficiently? (Not to mention that ______ doesn't have the years of experience, or the extensive contacts with vendors, etc... etc... that my wife has.)
       
      Or take the small public utility where a friend works as one of the department heads - the same holds true. Or another friend of mine who is production manager at a small factory (making around one and a half what a line worker makes)...
       
      Now in the natural course of things, people will leave, die, etc... and create the same disruptions. But that's no reason to shoot yourself in the foot.
       
       

      Is it better to fire 100 of your highest paid or 200 of your lowest paid? Circuit city seems to think the former, and I'm not sure they're wrong (i'm not sure they're right either).

      At most places of employment the lowest paid people are the most expendable, with the least training and the least amount invested in them by the company. By and large they are easily replaceable - if they weren't, odds are they wouldn't be the least paid. Sure, you can save money - in the short run - by firing a C_O, but the reality is you'd have to pay an equally qualified replacement the same amount of money. You won't save any money in the long term, and you will suffer potential disruptions in your business.
    28. Re:Will Circuit City get by AndersOSU · · Score: 1

      Ok, I'll concede the point that circuit city would be able to save more money by cutting the salaries of the top execs.

      However, I'd still suggest that it would be easier to replace a single digit number of senior VPs from within the company (promote middle management with a small pay raise) than 3400 sales reps. Even if they don't have a problem hiring they are going to have a serious retention problem after they show their willingness to insert a knife into the back of their low-level employees. Turnover ain't cheep - in fact I wouldn't be surprised if it significantly effected the savings from this move.

      If they really need the savings there are less distasteful ways of getting it.

    29. Re:Will Circuit City get by MoneyT · · Score: 1

      RIght, but we're not talking a comptroller department or even department heads, we're talking top paid sales people at circuit city. Baring a very very small number of highly effective sales folks that haven't moved up or out, eliminating your top paid sales folks isn't going to affect the performance of your store all that much relative to the expenses it will save.

      --
      T Money
      World Domination with a plastic spoon since 1984
    30. Re:Will Circuit City get by MoneyT · · Score: 1

      Circuit City sales is not "Tech" no matter how much Circuit City tells it's employees otherwise, no matter how much they believe otherwise. Circuit City just isn't a place where people go for solutions and specialist help, they go there for an electronic, and usualy just because circuit city has the best rebate. Circuit City may have started better, but over the years it has sadly (and in some ways inevitably) fallen from those lofty goals.

      --
      T Money
      World Domination with a plastic spoon since 1984
  5. Don't care--won't shop there by n0w0rries · · Score: 1

    Terrible customer service. They don't honor their own coupons. They charge more in their store then they do on their website. Lay them all off and close the doors--I could care less. I won't shop there ever again.

    1. Re:Don't care--won't shop there by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So you COULDN'T care less?

    2. Re:Don't care--won't shop there by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I could care less...but it'd take more effort than I'm willing to expend.

  6. Jumping the logical gap. by ivan256 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    work hard, become the best in your field, and get fired so they can offer you a new job 10 weeks later at a lower salary


    There is a huge logical gap between "We're not getting rid of these people for performance reasons" and "These people are the best in their field". I don't think you can read any of this and come away even with the idea that these people were any better than the other, lower paid employees in their same stores. If they think they can employ the *exact same people* for less money in 10 weeks, then clearly these salespeople were paid beyond what the market can bear.

    Why do we need to make up negative stuff about this when we could simply point to the fact that the salary savings look pathetic in comparison to what they continue to pay their executives?
    1. Re:Jumping the logical gap. by setrops · · Score: 1

      I know it's sales at circuit city, but come on everybody deserves a raise at somepoint.

      Basically "Well John your are a good employee we have a raise for you and by the way you're fired!"

    2. Re:Jumping the logical gap. by TheGratefulNet · · Score: 1

      very valid point!

      ceo's in the US make something like 400x of what the typical 'worker' makes.

      nowhere else in the world are things THAT unbalanced. (ok, maybe in saudi arabia or some other hellhole like that)

      while (1) {
        ceo_salary++;
        for (emp=0; emp<3400; emp++) {
            salary[emp] = 0;
        }
        sleep(n);
      }

      sigh...

      --

      --
      "It is now safe to switch off your computer."
    3. Re:Jumping the logical gap. by ivan256 · · Score: 1

      Have you ever worked in sales? Generally the response to a comment like that is "If you want more money, sell more high commission items."

    4. Re:Jumping the logical gap. by Hoi+Polloi · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Come on! Everyone knows that CEOs are equal in talent and skill to 400 regular employees. They are irreplaceable geniuses. No one could do their jobs for even a fraction of that. Even when they fail they deserve tens of millions of $. It has nothing to do with boards made up of CEOs from other companies who vote for the compensation packages and scratch each other's backs. Nothing.

      --
      It is by the juice of the coffee bean that thoughts acquire speed, the teeth acquire stains. The stains become a warning
    5. Re:Jumping the logical gap. by dafz1 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Having been a manager of sales people, the response to "If you want more money, sell more high commission items" is:

      "I quit".

      I've seen it done, and, unfortunately, did it myself, once. And my best salesman quit.

      People determine their value on what they get paid. If they are valuable to your company(high dollar sale people), pay them more to keep them. Don't force them to make it up in more sales. Someone else will pay them the base they're looking for, in addition to the commission. I'd rather pay one person who has great sales 10% more each year, than two people who are little more than warm bodies taking up space.

    6. Re:Jumping the logical gap. by TheGratefulNet · · Score: 1

      really?

      I hadn't heard that they went as far NORTH as their back...

      (your point is taken. its a closed club and OF COURSE they protect each other. the class divide continues to grow. until there are only bill gates level moguls and the rest will be borderline homeless people. it seems that's what the US wants?)

      --

      --
      "It is now safe to switch off your computer."
    7. Re:Jumping the logical gap. by ivan256 · · Score: 1

      That's as it should be.

      If these people were paid a fair wage, they're all going to go out and get new jobs somewhere else and Circuit City isn't going to be able to hire good people for less money.

      I wasn't saying it was a good response. It's just the only response I ever got when I was in sales.

    8. Re:Jumping the logical gap. by tkrotchko · · Score: 1

      It reminds me of years ago when GM was closing a few plants and putting a few thousand workers on the street to save about $300M dollars. At the same time Ross Perot was on the board of directors (GM had purchased EDS) and was making a lot of noise about how GM's executives were running the company poorly, basically badmouthing GM.

      So... GM turned around and paid him $700M to buy his shares out and shut him up (http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m3165/i s_v23/ai_4660761).

      And then we sit around and wonder how these companies are so screwed up.

      --
      You were mistaken. Which is odd, since memory shouldn't be a problem for you
    9. Re:Jumping the logical gap. by MightyMartian · · Score: 1

      Come on! Everyone knows that CEOs are equal in talent and skill to 400 regular employees. They are irreplaceable geniuses. No one could do their jobs for even a fraction of that. Even when they fail they deserve tens of millions of $. It has nothing to do with boards made up of CEOs from other companies who vote for the compensation packages and scratch each other's backs. Nothing.
      CEOs deserve it if for no other reason that they are so important in that most fundemental of modern capitalist enterprises; stealing money from shareholders and stuffing their's and their croneys' wallets full of ill-gotten cash. Employees are worthless little minions that can be abused and fired whenever the shareholders get all uppety about upper level management completely fucking profits up. As to shareholders, they're simply piles of money to be dipped into.

      All that stealing and bullshitting is hard work, and I doubt your average employee could really do all those sorts of things without having some sort of nervous breakdown and jumping off the top floor. No, CEOs deserve the cash they get.
      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
    10. Re:Jumping the logical gap. by DannyO152 · · Score: 1

      I would assume that retail employees enter a company at a standard pay level and their pay rate is increased both with seniority and accomplishment. So they may not be at the top of their field, but they should be the better, more experienced Circuit City employees. (I'm also assuming that employees who perform below average are encouraged to leave via non-promotion and minimal pay raises.) So, to cut out your top paid people suggests to me that you've cut out the people with the most experience. (I'm not really sure about the upside about hiring back at lower pay rates the ones you just laid off. I would think the good people wouldn't tolerate going back to work for ingrates.) Given that one knock on stores like Best Buy, Circuit City, that the employees are not really able to help.... seems like a really, really bad idea.

      But the really wack part IMHO is that Circuit City's stock went up yesterday! Yes, it's cutting costs, but it begs the question whether every employee is just as valuable as any other employee.

    11. Re:Jumping the logical gap. by muellerr1 · · Score: 1

      According to your logic those executives are getting paid exactly what the market will bear.

    12. Re:Jumping the logical gap. by jsellens · · Score: 1

      "The salary of the chief executive of a large corporation is not a market award for achievement. It is frequently in the nature of a warm personal gesture by the individual to himself."
      -- John Kenneth Galbraith

    13. Re:Jumping the logical gap. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      After having watched positions at various levels from peon to CEO, I can assure you that those that become CEO are very unique individuals - and not for the cynical reasons typically posted on Slashdot.

      Answer these questions:

      a) Are you a leader?
      b) Do you have long-term vision?
      c) Are you charismatic?
      d) Can you read a financial statement and understand it?
      e) Do you know how to delegate?

      If you answered any of (a) - (e) as "no", then you truly aren't a CEO. And I'm willing to bet that most Slashdotters will answer no to questions (a), (c), and (e). (If you're curious, I answer "no" to (c) and (d) - and while I can rectify (d), I'm not very interested in changing the answer to (c)).

    14. Re:Jumping the logical gap. by z4ce · · Score: 1

      As I've known a number of people near the CEO level, it becomes VERY obvious why they are paid what they are. These people are very skilled at management, motivation, and setting corporate vision. Think about this.. your VP of Operations for a Fortune 500.. making $500,000 a year and the CEO spot opens up (normally because of problems), you take it you have a good chance of failure. Thus you have to offer them vast sums of money to get them move. The worse shape your company is in, the more you have to pay to get anyone. This is why you often see the highest paid CEOs are running the most unprofitable companies. They are being paid a lot to not leave and turn the company around.

      These people are also more than capable of starting their own companies and making a lot of money. Ifthey weren't paid appropiately, they would leave. CEOs are really unfairly maligned. Their skills and more than that experience really does make them quite valuable to a company.

    15. Re:Jumping the logical gap. by DrFalkyn · · Score: 1

      Having been a manager of sales people, the response to "If you want more money, sell more high commission items" is: "I quit".

      You must not have worked in the mortage origination industry or at car dealership then, where unless you have supervisory functions, 100% of your take-home pay is commissions on sales.

    16. Re:Jumping the logical gap. by ivan256 · · Score: 1

      Very funny. Nobody is forcing Circuit City to pay them, regardless of what the market will bear.

    17. Re:Jumping the logical gap. by drsquare · · Score: 1

      I know it's sales at circuit city, but come on everybody deserves a raise at somepoint.
      Why? They should only get a raise if they're valuable to the company and rare enough that you couldn't hire someone similar for less.

      Let's face it if these people were any good they wouldn't be working for circuit city.
  7. It's there own fault by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Global Libertarianism will set you free. You have to be dynamic or die. You can't just pretend to suspend the rules of Darwinism. It doesn't work that way.

    1. Re:It's there own fault by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Global Libertarianism will set you free. You have to be dynamic or die. You can't just pretend to suspend the rules of Darwinism. It doesn't work that way.
      Sorry, I don't subscribe to social darwinism, a doctrine that caused the greatest crimes, murder and war in the 20th century.
  8. just printed up my resume to apply for... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And, I just printed up my resume to apply for a job at The Source by Circuit City.

  9. Didn't they do this years ago? by VeriTea · · Score: 4, Insightful
    I read an article several years back about how Circuit City fired all their highest-grossing commissioned salespeople to replace them with hourly workers. It must have been so successful they decided to try again.

    Either that or they need the stock boost that comes from indiscriminately firing workers - Wall Street loves that.

    --
    --- There are two kinds of people, those who accept dogmas and know it, and those who accept dogmas and don't know it
    1. Re:Didn't they do this years ago? by fred+fleenblat · · Score: 2, Informative

      >> or they need the stock boost that comes from
      >> indiscriminately firing workers - Wall Street loves that.

      CC is down 71c so far today.
      wall street knows a dumb move when it sees one.

    2. Re:Didn't they do this years ago? by rsmoody · · Score: 1

      This is true. I had a friend that was cut during that. Never understood the logic. He was the best seller in the district in his department. "Hi Jason, look you are doing great, just look at your check and see. We really are making a lot of money due to your sales work. Oh, by the way, we are changing to no commission, and well, since you are doing so well, here's a severance check and we will see you around. Bubie now."

      --
      45 5F E1 04 22 CA 29 C4 93 3F 95 05 2B 79 2A B2
    3. Re:Didn't they do this years ago? by D-Fens · · Score: 1

      Well, it's not technically indiscriminate, but yeah, I knew what you meant.

    4. Re:Didn't they do this years ago? by Lord+Ender · · Score: 1

      indiscriminately firing workers - Wall Street loves that

      Wall Street doesn't love firing workers. Wall Street loves lowering expense levels while maintaining revenue levels. Think "P/E." If E goes up, P should go up, regardless of the reason.

      Don't be hate'n just 'cause financial analysts be evaluate'n.
      --
      A slashdotter who didn't build his own computer is like a Jedi who didn't build his own lightsaber.
    5. Re:Didn't they do this years ago? by maxume · · Score: 1

      People increasingly know what they want before they get to the store. I actually kind of don't like having some dufus steer me in the high ticket direction. I wonder if maybe the average 'high performance' seller was just less profitable than an hourly drooler...

      --
      Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
    6. Re:Didn't they do this years ago? by rsmoody · · Score: 1

      Good point, definitely a possibility.

      --
      45 5F E1 04 22 CA 29 C4 93 3F 95 05 2B 79 2A B2
    7. Re:Didn't they do this years ago? by NateTech · · Score: 1

      Not for long. The institutions will wait until the sell-offs finish, pronounce the stock a "value" stock at it's collapsed price, and pump it up again, soon. Then the CEO can continue his sales of his options, which grossed him 5.5 million in less than six months in 2006.

      --
      +++OK ATH
  10. The lowest of the low by Jeffrey+Baker · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The truth of the matter is that a Circuit City salesman performs a service to the public which is about on par with picking strawberries or washing cars. People who pick strawberries and wash cars make the minimum wage. These types of jobs are not intended to be long careers, they are supposed to put kids and part-timers to work. The stark truth of economics is that if you want a higher wage you have to do something more valuable. Try machining or engine repair.

    1. Re:The lowest of the low by jbrandv · · Score: 1

      Hummm, let see, I have no skills so I can make minimum wage at Circuit City or I can make $10000 per month selling crack. What will I do? Can you say no-brainer?

    2. Re:The lowest of the low by BigFoot48 · · Score: 1

      Uh, people don't destroy customers lives or get arrested for working at CC, so it's a brainer after all.

    3. Re:The lowest of the low by Mprx · · Score: 1

      Sadly, the economics of crack dealing mirrors the economics of legitimate corporations: one very highly paid leader and a shitload of workers getting screwed. You'll probably make less than minimum wage.

    4. Re:The lowest of the low by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The stark truth of economics is that all the poor people get screwed by the richest 2% who own 90% of everything (statistics made up on the spot but you get the idea). Thats why all the poor people join together and create a democratic government. "We the people" and all that. So that the People have the power to tell the rich people "if you want to make more money, you have to play by the rules". Rules such as fair wages, not killing the planet, etc. The problem we have run into in America is that the government has been owned by the corporations since Reagan. Or before. So you can talk all you want about the stark truth of economics. Not everyone can work in the "good" jobs, the most desired jobs. Otherwise Id be a rock star. Or at least a porn star. Unless you are a millionaire, there is no reason to think 3400 people getting screwed by a corporation is a good thing. Something ironic I just noticed... that is almost the same number of Americans that have died in Iraq. All the reasons Bush sold us for starting that war have been proven to be false. Anyone want to start blaming it on the military industrial complex yet?

    5. Re:The lowest of the low by heinousjay · · Score: 1

      Oh my god, that is sad. Quickly, let's band together for the rights of the low-level crack salesmen.

      --
      Slashdot - where whining about luck is the new way to make the world you want.
    6. Re:The lowest of the low by advid · · Score: 1

      Uh, people don't destroy customers lives or get arrested for working at CC, so it's a no-brainer after all. You've never been to a Circuit City, have you?
      --
      - "I'll probably get modded down for this."
    7. Re:The lowest of the low by NDPTAL85 · · Score: 1

      Not only is it a no-brainer, its also a no-straighter! Because after you get locked up for selling crack and are issued your own personal boyfriend you won't be straight no more!

      --
      Mac OS X and Windows XP working side by side to fight back the night.
    8. Re:The lowest of the low by AndersOSU · · Score: 1

      Psst, selling crack pays less than working at McDonald's. I'd recommend the "Why drug dealers live with their parents" chapter of Freakenomics

    9. Re:The lowest of the low by zakezuke · · Score: 1

      Hummm, let see, I have no skills so I can make minimum wage at Circuit City or I can make $10000 per month selling crack. What will I do? Can you say no-brainer?

      Try 10,000/year. I lack direct experence... but from what i've observed and read... drug dealers don't really make that much in the way of money, probally onpar with a part time job. The only difference is this is undisclosed income, so someone can be on disability, wellfare, or be a student and suppliment their income with dealing of drugs.

      According to this site crack's value is pretty low, between 3.50 and 10.00 per 1/10th gram in 1998 depending on city and other factors. Given this street price includes profit... one would have to sell to 5.5 people every day @ $5.00 per 1/10th gram to gross about $10,000. To quote StrongBad, "This isn't a good prize".

      I could be naive in such matters. I couldn't find 5.5 people to sell crack to, hell, I don't know anyone who smokes crack. Nor would I want to. It's rather illegal, adictive, distructive, and the sort of thing that puts you into prison.

      You would be better off selling macrame coathangers.

      --
      There is no sanctuary. There is no sanctuary. SHUT UP! There is no shut up. There is no shut up.
    10. Re:The lowest of the low by maxume · · Score: 1

      It's not really sad, but it does offer some insight into the choices that they at very least perceive themselves to be facing. I wouldn't be rushing to sign up for minimum wage and risk of death just for a 100 to 1 shot at making it.

      --
      Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
    11. Re: The lowest of the low by bjourne · · Score: 3, Interesting

      No, that is not the truth. That is the bullshit propaganda the Capitalists want you to believe. Without any salesmen, the company can not sell anything and the whole Circuit City collapses. Same thing with the strawberry pickers, without them the strawberry sellers can't sell any strawberries and so goes out of business. Therefore, these people are, for their respective employers, invaluable. The only reasons companies can treat the like shit is.... because they can!

      I'm a developer at my company and I make quite a lot of money. Without me, they wouldn't be able to sell any products, so I'm valuable. There are also janitors at my company. They clean stuff and pick up the trash that we, the developers, leave behind. They make much less money. Why? It can't be because we work harder (each of us spends at least one hour/day surfing), it can't be because what we do is more valuable (without the janitors this place would be so disgusting no one would be able to work). The only reason they get paid less is because the company can get away with it. And if the US is any example, they will try to force down the developers wages too.

      There is really nothing immoral with that. All companies want to lower their costs to stay "competitive" (read: more money to the owners). But what is despicable is that the employees just lays downs and takes it. The solution is so simple. Just strike dammit. Unionize. If just a few thousand of Circuit City's employees decided to strike for a week or two, they would lose so much profit from lost business that it wouldn't be economical to fire them.

    12. Re: The lowest of the low by Jeffrey+Baker · · Score: 1

      Strikes only work for skilled labor. Circuit City sales staff are not skilled labor. If they went on strike it would be trivial to replace them. Just look at their existing turnover rates for proof that you can train a new sales staff member in less than a day. Anyway striking doesn't work when you are being fired. Why would the company care that a bunch of ex-employees were picketing? You seem to have a strange idea about economics. Anyone can empty the trash, so emptying the trash is a low-paying job. If I drive down to the day laborer's pickup spot there will be 20 guys standing there every morning. If I only need 2 people to rake leaves behind my house, and there are 20 guys standing around looking for work, obviously I'd be a fool to offer anything other than the minimum wage. On the other hand, few people can repair jet engines, so jet engine repair is a high paying job. If I drive down to the day laborer camp there will be zero jet engine mechanics. I would have to advertise for one, or hire and train one at great expense. Pay has nothing to do with working hard and everything to do with specialization and ease of replacement.

    13. Re: The lowest of the low by WrongMonkey · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The value of an employee in not about how critical their job is to the running of the company, but how easy it is hire and train a replacement. Just about anyone has the skills to pick strawberries or mop floors or run a register, therefore these jobs don't get paid much. Fewer people have the skills to be a developer, as you know it takes time and effort to aquire those skills, therefore you get paid more than the janitor.

    14. Re: The lowest of the low by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You are the one spewing the real bs. Companies do not set the price for labor. People set the price for labor. The amount you are payed to do a job directly correlates to the amount of money that people qualified to do the job are willing to work for. The reason the janitor is not payed a lot of money is because the number of people willing to work as a janitor is greater then the demand for janitorial services. The pay of a janitor will naturally go down until the people who are willing to work for that pay equals the need for janitors. If people are unwilling to work for a given wage the wage will naturally go up. This holds true even for unskilled labor. The average pay for an janitor on a offshore oil rig is going to be higher then the average janitor because people are unwilling to work on an oil rig. The company needs to raise the wage in order to attract people who are willing to work.

    15. Re:The lowest of the low by Dun+Malg · · Score: 2, Interesting

      ...or I can make $10000 per month selling crack. No you can't. A low wage CC jackass is going to have to start at the bottom of the drug trade, and that means standing on the corner hawking $5 rocks. $10,000 per month is about 66 five dollar rocks a day, Even working 12 hours a day, there's no way you're gonna move 5-6 rocks an hour without a) attracting the attention of the police, or (more likely) b) attracting the attention of the guy who USED TO sell to the crackheads in your area. Either way, you're fucked.

      Seriously, anyone who thinks the drug trade is a good place to make money is an idiot. There's room for a few score "distributors" who'll pull in $10K a month, but I guarantee you former salesmen from CC don't have the connections necessary to make that kind of money.
      --
      If a job's not worth doing, it's not worth doing right.
    16. Re: The lowest of the low by FirstTimeCaller · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The only reason they get paid less is because the company can get away with it.

      Now, now. That's not the only reason. If they decide to replace the janitor, they can train his replacement in a very short time. If they replace a developer, it will take (hopefully) much longer.

      It boils down to supply and demand. If there is a line of equally-skilled people willing to take the job, then the value of that job will be less. Simple as that.

      --
      Wanted: witty unique signature. Must be willing to relocate.
    17. Re:The lowest of the low by FrostedChaos · · Score: 1

      The stark truth of slashdot is that 100% of the people who "make up statistics" on the spot are jackasses, whether they realize it or not.

      Kindly find a study that seems to show what you want, and cherry-pick some factoids out of context, like the rest of the politicos.

      --
      "Any connection between your reality and mine is purely coincidental." -Slashdot
    18. Re: The lowest of the low by Headw1nd · · Score: 2, Funny

      If just a few thousand of Circuit City's employees decided to strike for a week or two, they would lose so much profit from lost business that it wouldn't be economical to fire them.
      Hell yeah! Think if 3,400 of their best salespeople just walked out the door, then they'd have to...

      Oh wait. Nevermind.

    19. Re: The lowest of the low by drsquare · · Score: 1

      Same thing with the strawberry pickers, without them the strawberry sellers can't sell any strawberries and so goes out of business. Therefore, these people are, for their respective employers, invaluable. The only reasons companies can treat the like shit is.... because they can!
      That's because anyone can pick strawberries. And similarly, anyone can be trained up to be a circuit city salesman. It's not exactly rocket science.
  11. Parody by HomelessInLaJolla · · Score: 5, Funny

    Circuit City and the American Dream

    Business savvy decision allows new employees a chance at sales fame.

    Top business analysts have determined that a growing number of people have become "too wealthy for their own good", according to one high-ranking Wall Street spokesperson. "It is in the interest of the common good that we allow other, less priveleged folks, to have the opportunity to buy their own food and afford both rent and car payments."

    The dismissed workers, having reached their allowed quota of wealth, were given peanut butter and jelly sandwiches on their way out the door and told that they could reapply after their savings had been reduced to zero. While the average lifespan of a salesman's savings is about ten weeks, according to financial analysts, it was widely agreed that dismissed employees would not truly be eligible for reassignment until they had accumulated enough debt to prevent them from ever owning a house or car again.

    "These people were beginning to factor into systems that have long been the exclusive playgrounds of the rich and powerful. We simply could not allow them to tip the scales and upset the balance," said Circuit City spokesman Bill Cimino.

    --
    the NPG electrode was replaced with carbon blac
    1. Re:Parody by Hoi+Polloi · · Score: 1

      Oh, and please continue to buy $1000+ big screen tvs and overpriced homes. The economy (economic elite) depend on your debt driven consumption!

      --
      It is by the juice of the coffee bean that thoughts acquire speed, the teeth acquire stains. The stains become a warning
    2. Re:Parody by xzvf · · Score: 1

      I've never met anyone in retail that had savings that could last 10 weeks. What's the average length of unemployment?

    3. Re:Parody by HomelessInLaJolla · · Score: 1

      Create debt, maintain debt, keep people in debt, work them until they die of debt.

      The federal government creates debt (8.8 trillion at the moment), the investment industry maintains it (insider trading), the banks keep track of it (home, car, and tuition loans), and their employers cut their wages (insurance) until they die from it.

      --
      the NPG electrode was replaced with carbon blac
    4. Re:Parody by HomelessInLaJolla · · Score: 1

      I've met several salesmen who were from wealthy backgrounds who had unlimited savings (though they often maintained the appearance of being just as poor as their fellow coworkers--often to the extent of still living in their parents' house). Those are usually the ones who didn't get pink slips or, if they did, it was only because they had assured their family that they had another nepotic position lined up elsewhere.

      --
      the NPG electrode was replaced with carbon blac
    5. Re:Parody by Bodhammer · · Score: 1

      In related news:

        WASHINGTON, DC - Congress is considering sweeping legislation, which provides new benefits for many Americans. The Americans With No Abilities Act (AWNAA) is being hailed as a major legislation by advocates of the millions of Americans who lack any real skills or ambition.

        "Roughly 50 percent of Americans do not possess the competence and drive necessary to carve out a meaningful role for themselves in society," said Senator Barbara Boxer. "We can no longer stand by and allow these non-abled people to be ridiculed and passed over. With this legislation, employers will no longer be able to grant special favors to a small group of workers simply because they do a better job, or have some idea of what they are doing".

        Boxer pointed to the success of the US Postal Service, which has a long- standing policy of providing opportunity without regard to performance.
        Approximately 74 percent of postal employees lack job skills, making this agency the single largest US employer of non-abled persons.

        Private sector industries with good records of nondiscrimination against the non-abled include retail sales (72%), the airline industry (68%), and home improvement "warehouse" stores (65%). Boxer noted that the DMV of her home state of California also has a great record of hiring Persons of Inability (63%).

        Under the Americans With No Abilities Act, more than 25 million "middle man" positions will be created, with important-sounding titles but little real responsibility, thus providing an illusory sense of purpose and performance for the Non-abled.

        Mandatory non-performance-based raises and promotions will be given, to guarantee upward mobility for even the most unremarkable employees. The legislation provides substantial tax breaks to corporations which maintain a significant level of non-abled persons in middle positions, and gives a tax credit to small and medium businesses that agree to hire at least one clueless worker for every two talented hires.

        Finally, the AWNA ACT contains tough new measures to make it more difficult to discriminate against the non-abled, banning discriminatory interview questions such as "Do you have any goals for the future?" or "Do you have any skills or experience which relate to this job?"

        "As a non-abled person, I can't be expected to keep up with people who have something going for them," said Mary Lou Gertz, who lost her position (as a lug-nut twister at the GM plant in Flint, MI) due to her lack of notable job skills. "This new law should really help people like me." With the passage of this bill, Gertz and millions of other untalented citizens can finally see a light at the end of the tunnel.

        Added Senator Ted Kennedy, "It is our duty as lawmakers to provide each and every American citizen, regardless of his or her adequacy, with some sort of space to take up in this great nation."

      --
      "I say we take off, nuke the site from orbit. It's the only way to be sure."
    6. Re:Parody by Miguelito · · Score: 1

      I would laugh at that... unfortunately it actually sounds far too plausible.

      Regarding the Post office.. my grandfather worked there for close to 20 years after 20+ years in the Navy, back then they apparently that much larger routes then today (or so he says anyway) and much stricter requirements. There's one mailman I see in my neighborhood that looks like a complete idiot.. he wears the uniform, but it's untucked, oversized pants, untied high-tops, just pathetic looking really.

      --
      - My favorite error message: xscreensaver, running on an old Sparc 5 w/ 8bit color: bsod: Couldn't allocate color Blue
  12. It doesn't matter by dafz1 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Circuit City is on it's last legs.

    The CC stores I've been in have lots of empty shelves, especially in the home audio area. The center area is mostly CDs and DVDs. They had a decent selection of TVs, which, supposedly, are low margin items, so they're not going to be much help in keeping CC profitable.

    1. Re:It doesn't matter by IKnwThePiecesFt · · Score: 1

      As a full time student working part time at Best Buy, TVs are pretty large margin (a $2500 TV is ~500 margin)

    2. Re:It doesn't matter by wiredlogic · · Score: 1

      TVs used to be low margin until the recent switch to push hard on flat panels with an attendant jump in sticker price.

      --
      I am becoming gerund, destroyer of verbs.
  13. Expen$ive Cables by Spazmania · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    I wonder if NOT charging $300 for a 50 foot HDMI cable would help them be competitive enough that they could have avoided a morale-crushing layoff?

    --
    Moderating "-1, Disagree" is simple censorship. Have the guts to post your opinion.
    1. Re:Expen$ive Cables by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      why do you need a 50ft cable? I agree $300 is excessive, but you need to expect to pay quite a bit when you want that long of a cable in the latest format

    2. Re:Expen$ive Cables by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, you do not.

    3. Re:Expen$ive Cables by stratjakt · · Score: 1

      Ever see a ceiling mounted projector? HDMI is perfect for such an application.

      Cables are cheap, and the overpriced monster cables and extended warrantees are the cash cows circuit city and best buy keep on milkin'.

      --
      I don't need no instructions to know how to rock!!!!
    4. Re:Expen$ive Cables by Damvan · · Score: 1

      Last time I was at CC, I was curious about these "expensive cables" I always hear about.

      So I checked it out. The CHEAPEST HDMI cable they had in the store was $85. I couldn't fraking believe it.

    5. Re:Expen$ive Cables by Spazmania · · Score: 1

      My DVD player is on the end table next to me where I can change discs without getting up. My TV is on the other side of the room. I have to route the cable around the baseboard at the side of the room where its not too visible. 25' might have been enough but 50 plays it safe.

      I started doing that when my Playstation was my DVD player and having it within arms' reach was convenient for the games. It turns out to be convenient period.

      $70 on ebay for a 50' HDMI cable. Still atrocious but not Circuit City atrocious.

      --
      Moderating "-1, Disagree" is simple censorship. Have the guts to post your opinion.
    6. Re:Expen$ive Cables by bnenning · · Score: 1

      So I checked it out. The CHEAPEST HDMI cable they had in the store was $85. I couldn't fraking believe it.

      Impressive. On a related note, I was in Fry's the other day actually to buy an HDMI cable. The ones in the computer cable aisle were $40 to $80, and in the TV section they were $60 to $125. Then in the *checkout* aisle they have them for $20. I can understand using price discrimination to get more money from clueless videophiles, but wouldn't you want to put the cheap ones in a less visible place?

      --
      How to solve most of our problems: 1.Lots of nuclear plants. 2.Cure aging.
  14. UNIONIZE by dukerobinson · · Score: 4, Insightful

    This sort of nonsense will continue in retail jobs (and everywhere else) until workers UNITE. There is no sense in taking this sort of abuse. Circuit City employees: your company does not care about you, if you want to receive something like fair compensation for your labor then you have to unite with your fellow employees.

    1. Re:UNIONIZE by Chicken04GTO · · Score: 0

      fuck unions. No one is *entitled* to a job. If you don't like it where you work, quit and move on. A companies job is to make money, not support the populace.

    2. Re:UNIONIZE by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A union just gives us the ability to say "if you fuck with one of us, you fuck with all of us". Do you have a problem with workers doing that? A worker's job is to support his community, not the company.

    3. Re:UNIONIZE by ScentCone · · Score: 1

      This sort of nonsense will continue in retail jobs (and everywhere else) until workers UNITE.

      Amen, comrade! Sing it!

      In fact, the Fat Cat managers should be lined up and shot! We should nationalize electronics retailing, now that it doesn't really require the sort of expertise that it used to, and everyone can learn what they need to online anyway. Yes, a sort of People's Army Of Monster Cable Sales Reps would be ideal, and no one will get their feelings hurt if it dawns on them that their business model simply isn't viable any more. And even if they DO figure that out, it's OK, because your union will have some sort of legal stranglehold on the business and would rather wreck the business that's providing them income than see the business survive to keep anyone employed. Yes, yes, that's worked so well in the past. It's why GM and Ford are now basically swirling the toilet, but if it makes you feel good, march in the streets, brother! I'm sure you can get some Union Break Time, as long as you're protesting in line with their wishes. Probably on some other guy's dues, too. You know, the guy who may not agree with you, but has no control over where his union dues go as they feed political movements, candidates, and wealthy union bosses. *sigh*

      --
      Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
    4. Re:UNIONIZE by dcollins · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Fuck companies. No one is *entitled* to slave labor. If you don't like it where you do business, close shop and leave the country. Employees have the right to organize and bargain with the company as equal partners, period.

      --
      We know where leadership by an anti-intellectual "strongman" who scapegoats minorities and likes boisterous rallies goes
    5. Re:UNIONIZE by jaguar5150 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      You are correct. No one is entitled to a job. Though, if you are a hard worker and a top performer, you should be recognized and compensated accordingly. Not fired because you *make too much*. Whose fault is it that they were making that much to begin with?

      You are also correct in saying that a company's job is to make money. However, a company will not fare very well if it's employees aren't happy employees. Turn around is much higher, therefore raising training costs.

      When a company treats its employees like dirt, expect the employees to treat the customers like dirt.

      There is a delicate balance between employer and employee. One can't survive without the other. Sooner everyone realizes this, the better off society as a whole will be.

    6. Re:UNIONIZE by Doctor+Faustus · · Score: 1

      Do you have a problem with workers doing that?
      Yes. When companies do it it's called a trust, and illegal.

    7. Re:UNIONIZE by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, that's the idea!!! Join a UNION; the refuge of dead-end job seekers everywhere!!!

    8. Re:UNIONIZE by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I used to be totally anti-union.

      Now, with the corporate BS and executive bonuses.. Pension plan might be nice, y'know?

      Programmers should have guild-ed or unionized their asses years ago. Don't see H1-B's for auto workers, do you?

    9. Re:UNIONIZE by vux984 · · Score: 1

      fuck employees. No one is *entitled* to be treated with respect.

      If I don't like the shirt you wore today I'll just take it and burn it. Don't like it? quit and move on.
      If I tell you to shave your head, you better shave it. Don't want to? quit and move on!
      If the forklift battery dies, I expect you to push it around. Don't want to? quit and move on!
      If I feel like whipping you, suck it up buttercup!
      If I think I'm paying you too much, I'll just fire you. Don't like it? What are you gonna do about it?
      Next week you're all working 20 hour shifts with no breaks. Don't like it? Watch me not care!
      Week after that your all working 20 hour shifts with no breaks, and I'm paying your wages with 2 for 1 McDonald's coupons.

      Unions have a legitimate purpose. They exist thanks to an era of capitalism run amok, where management literally abused their employees with impunity. Where employees only recourse was to band together and deal with management collectively. There was no 'quit and move on', because it was just as bad elsewhere.

      Unions and Management are yin and yang. Yeah, these days a lot of unions are out of balance and have more power than they should, but before they existed the balance was FAR worse, as management had nothing keeping them in check and employees were treated as there are in 3rd world sweatshops. Why don't THEY just quit and move on?

      CC's move is abusive. Where I live its illegal to reduce someones wages or to fire them without cause. And I were to be 'laid off' the theory is that they no longer need someone in my position, if they try to fill the position by hiring someone new, they have to instead give me the position back, at my old pay scale.

      If CC tried this here, I expect there'd be lawsuits. And probably a call to unionize too.

    10. Re:UNIONIZE by Chicken04GTO · · Score: 1

      But a company shouldn't *have* to recognize anything. If they don't take care of their employees, they go out of business. let economic darwinism takes its course, not over legislated protectionism or mafia I mean union rackets.

      All your points can be answered with competition in the marketplace.

      If a company is crappy, they go out of business.
      If they treat their employess crappy, the customers suffer, and they go out of business.
      Im not arguing your concerns, only the proper solution.
      Unions and laws are not the way...the market place and the consumers spending habits are.

      Companies have the right to make stupid decisions, and employees have the right to work somewhere else.

    11. Re:UNIONIZE by Cornflake917 · · Score: 1

      All dyslexic workers in the world...UNTIE!

    12. Re:UNIONIZE by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      That's just it, the employees at CC were getting MORE THAN fair compensation for their work - or at least they were in the eyes of their employer. If they unionized, the effects would be the following.
      1) All employees would end up with less net pay because of union dues, resulting in
      2) the top performers (who were just fired) would not come back, instead seeking other jobs
      3) Employee satisfaction will split, with the slackers happy that they're getting paid the same as the top performers, and the top performers unhappy for getting paid the same as the slackers. This will consequently result in
      4) Top performing employees will leave, and
      5) Left with primarily slackers, who will only perform as much as required to not get fired (and no incentive to do better), customer service will fall.

      CC, however, has a one step process they can take to avoid this.
      1) Refuse to negotiate with those who wish to form a union

      Worst case, they can always pull a Walmart at close down locations where workers want to unionize.

    13. Re:UNIONIZE by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, sure, that is exactly what some of them are actually doing.

      But then, my guess is that you complain when they do.

      Win-Win situation for you...

    14. Re:UNIONIZE by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >No one is *entitled* to a job.

      The parent post did not say that at all. You are simply demonstrating your bias.

      >If you don't like it where you work, quit and move on. A companies job is to make money, not support the populace.
      No one said it was.

      You don't know a lot about unions. Collective bargaining is part of the market process as is negotiating prices with your suppliers.

    15. Re:UNIONIZE by Lord+Ender · · Score: 1

      if you want to receive something like fair compensation for your labor then you have to...
      ...allow the market to determine what a "fair" wage is.

      People like you are the reason countries such as France have 2 to 3 times the unemployment rate of the US. Quit trying to fuck up our economy, you ignorant jackass.
      --
      A slashdotter who didn't build his own computer is like a Jedi who didn't build his own lightsaber.
    16. Re:UNIONIZE by maxume · · Score: 1

      Remember to get everyone else who would be willing to work at Circuit City instead of you to join also. Unions would probably do a lot better these days if that hadn't been so successful in getting all sorts of worker protections codified into law.

      --
      Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
    17. Re:UNIONIZE by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      All dyslexic workers in the world...UNTIE!
      All employees of a secretive British military group that works with the Doctor to deal with extraterrestrial encounters... UNIT!

    18. Re:UNIONIZE by TheGratefulNet · · Score: 1

      [i]After about 5 years, unions become "We, the fat and lazy, ...[/i]

      NO system works for very long. ALL things must change. the sine wave theory. even the universe has to wink out and re-invent itself, on and on and on, forever.

      so you start a union and when it gets bad, you change it into something better. nothing SHOULD just keep going (not even systems of government). the universe really 'wants' things to come and go. the whole idea of permanence is against nature (it seems).

      but this is NOT an argument NOT to unionize. it simply means that unions can't just rest on their laurels and become the greedy bastards they were trying to fight in the first place.

      --

      --
      "It is now safe to switch off your computer."
    19. Re:UNIONIZE by OutSourcingIsTreason · · Score: 0

      It's too late for the Circuit City employees to unionize. Time to break out the flaming torches. Burn baby burn!

      --
      "Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the merger of state and corporate power." -- Mussolini
    20. Re:UNIONIZE by grumpyman · · Score: 1

      Heard about he Walmart story in Quebec? They fought and won the union war, then they close the store.

    21. Re:UNIONIZE by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      And where exactly do you live? Is it someplace with a strong economy, or someplace like Mississippi?

      Unions came about exactly for the reasons you stated; capitalism was running amok, and there were no worker protections on the lawbooks. The government wasn't doing its job. These days, things like child labor, forcing employees to do dangerous things and other abusive practices are simply illegal, and often result in devastating civil lawsuits, so there's much less of a reason for unions to exist.

      Where I live (Arizona), it's a right-to-work state, which means the employer can lay you off without cause any time they want. (Of course, this is still subject to civil lawsuits, in case the firing was motivated by something totally improper, like refusing to perform a sex act for your boss or something like that.) Coincidentally, the economy is doing quite well.

      If CC employees don't like this new policy (which sucks, I'll admit), they should find a job somewhere else. Or better yet, develop some real skills and get a real job. There's a reason retail sales doesn't pay well: any monkey can do it.

      I recently was laid off too, so I know how it feels. However, as an educated and skilled professional I guess I'm a little more valued than a salesmonkey, because I got a severance package worth 4 months of pay. Then I quickly found a new job at a different company for 40% more. I didn't need a union to accomplish any of this.

    22. Re:UNIONIZE by Mix+Master+Nixon · · Score: 1

      Far better to pull a Circuit City... keep the lazy idiots, and fire the experienced, presumably (relatively) competent people. Of course at Suckit Shitty, competence is very much a relative term.

      Never forget, this is the brain trust who gave us Divx, the DVD player that required a telephone connection with the movies you had to pay for every time you watched them. Can't imagine why that never caught on...

      --
      Oppressing an entire population is never cheap.
      --Jeckler (/. Beta IS GARBAGE!)
    23. Re:UNIONIZE by vux984 · · Score: 1

      If CC employees don't like this new policy (which sucks, I'll admit), they should find a job somewhere else. Or better yet, develop some real skills and get a real job. There's a reason retail sales doesn't pay well: any monkey can do it.

      Or unionize, and let management know that you won't stand for a policy like this. You may have low respect for retail sales, but it employs a LOT of people, and they deserve to be treated better than this. There simply isn't room in the 'professional' world to absorb everyone in retail, retail and service jobs are at the bottom of the pyramid after all.

      Personally, I don't like unions either, or the sense of entitlement they often have, but when a management crosses into unethical terroritory, whether its CC firing everyone who makes more than $X, or Walmart locking employees in without any way to leave, even just the threat of unionization is enough to re-balance the system.

      Then I quickly found a new job at a different company for 40% more. I didn't need a union to accomplish any of this.

      I'm happy for you, but then you didn't need to get laid off first either. You could have found that new job regardless. What if you'd found a new job a different company for 40% LESS would you still be this upbeat about it? Of course not.

      Additionally, since it appears you were being woefully underpaid before you got laid off perhaps if you'd had a decent union you'd have been making 40% more at your old job too. ;)

    24. Re:UNIONIZE by RubberDuckie · · Score: 1

      If I only had mod points ... It seems that once you're in power, be it a union or management, you no longer seem to fight for 'what's right', but you fight to stay in power.

    25. Re:UNIONIZE by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      Or unionize, and let management know that you won't stand for a policy like this. You may have low respect for retail sales, but it employs a LOT of people, and they deserve to be treated better than this. There simply isn't room in the 'professional' world to absorb everyone in retail, retail and service jobs are at the bottom of the pyramid after all.

      But do they really deserve better treatment than this? After all, you acknowledge they're at the bottom of the pyramid, and this is probably because the job they're doing just isn't that valuable or difficult. Moreover, there's no lack of retail stores to work in: a CC employee can easily go to work at BB, Fry's, or even the Apple store, Gap, Sears, Target, or Wal-Mart. It would be rather difficult to stay unemployed in the retail sector.

      Finally, there's probably a good reason why these people are getting sacked. From what I hear, CC isn't exactly doing too well. Do you even know anyone who shops there? I sure don't; their prices suck and their service sucks. I just buy my stuff at Newegg. Face it: CC's business model is obsolete; they're a dinosaur about to become extinct. BB is beating them at their own game by using flashy marketing and selling overpriced extended warrantees to suckers. CC might be able to survive a while by cutting costs like this, but if they had to deal with a union, and higher pay for employees, they'd probably just fold.

      For a good example of how well unionized companies perform, check out Ford and GM. They're both circling the drain while the Japanese (who have lots of plants right here in the US) are doing great.

    26. Re:UNIONIZE by VernoWhitney · · Score: 1

      While I whole-heartedly support the right and inclination of workers to stand up for their rights (being a union member myself), but have you considered the fact that not all injustice is of the negative variety? If the workers they canned were being unduly overpaid (perhaps even grossly so, as others have mentioned) to begin with, then, in fact, Circuit City would be promoting fair compensation for their employees by firing the highest paid workers and hiring the new ones at more equitable wages.

  15. The will become K-Mart by ehaggis · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Poor employee morale and low pay create the a social petri dish for employee malaise and discontent. Customer service suffers. People stop shopping there. The company continues to lower prices and pay. A vicious cycle ensues. Soon they declare bankruptcy and blame on it everything except poor management decisions driven by short term bottom line numbers.

    --
    One ring to bind them - should probably have more fiber and less rings in their diet.
    1. Re:The will become K-Mart by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      instead, they should keep losing money but don't worry, they'll make it up in volume!
      you don't know much about this retail biz do you?

    2. Re:The will become K-Mart by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is probably a *great* opportunity to get stuff fom CC at the best price of all. FREE! Just go talk to a salesguy who is about to be laid off and ask him the best way to get that TV you want for FREE! Given what the company is doing to him, he'll probably be HAPPY to help you out.

    3. Re:The will become K-Mart by DerekLyons · · Score: 1

      Poor employee morale and low pay create the a social petri dish for employee malaise and discontent. Customer service suffers. People stop shopping there. The company continues to lower prices and pay. A vicious cycle ensues. Soon they declare bankruptcy and blame on it everything except poor management decisions driven by short term bottom line numbers.

      That's a wonderful theory - care to name an actual company that has happened to?
       
      And no, K-mart isn't it. K-marts was killed by Walmart and Target splitting K-Mart's traditional demographic between them.
  16. Sounds about right. by C_Kode · · Score: 1

    I avoid Circuit City like the plague and always have. To me, an establishment like that shouldn't have commission based sales staff. Every time I went in to their store I always felt as if the staff was attempting to bamboozle me. On top of that, they never have the best price!

  17. I hope this fails miserably by Sciros · · Score: 1

    It would be ridiculous if other enterprises started considering a strategy like this... what incentive would there be to excel and command a higher salary if you're going to be booted on a whim if the company has some financial trouble?

    The point used to be to become valuable to a company so you would STAY ON when layoffs had to happen. Now how would one go about being valuable to Circuit City, for instance?

    Granted it IS Circuit City, which isn't exactly some important IT firm and more like something for college students to work at so they can pay for tuition, but even so this is business strategy that really confuses me.

    --
    I like basketball!!1!
    1. Re:I hope this fails miserably by MightyMartian · · Score: 2, Interesting

      If there is a strategy to guarantee that Circuit City finally craps out and disappears, this appears to be it. Sending the message to sales staff that excelling will cost you your job at worst, or mean 10 weeks of unemployment and being rehired at a lower salaray is (and I hesitate to use the term) at best is simply a recipe for not selling anything. The whole concept behind sales is to well... sell, and higher renumeration for more experienced and better salespersons is pretty much the only carrot a company has got.

      If I were a Circuit City shareholder, I'd be seriously considering dumping it now and not waiting a year for the full consequences of this moronic move to take effect. Actually, anyone with any common sense would have dumped Circuit City's stock a long time ago.

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
  18. Wouldn't it have been easier... by Critical+Facilities · · Score: 1

    to just put them on straight commission-only? Then everyone wins. If they're not performing (and thus not generating any revenue for the company), the company doesn't have to pay them. If they're selling a lot, they get a piece of it and are thus motivated to continue to sell well and often.

    It's like any other type of sales, the product is irrelevant. Just follow the money!

  19. First boycott Best Buy, now Circuit City? by Anonymous+Freak · · Score: 5, Interesting

    What other large electronics chains are left that I can buy at? I don't want to support businesses who either cheat their customers (Best Buy) or who mistreat their employees (Wal-Mart, Circuit City.) I'm going to be running out of vendors, soon.

    Anyway, this reminds me of a friend of mine. He graduated from college with a degree in History. Yes, a rather un-saleable degree. So he lived on my couch for a few months after he graduated while he tried to find a job. The only job he could find was telephone credit card sales. Yes, he was *THAT* guy. Every day, he came home from his job, the first words out of his mouth were "I hate my job." What made it even worse is that he was *GOOD* at it. His second month there, he set a sales record. His third month, he broke that record. Then he got fired. Because he wasn't following the script to the letter.

    Now, if someone comes in, and, by *NOT* following the script to the letter (he did say all the parts that the law requires creditors to say,) sets sales records two months in a row (he got a plastic slinky with the company name on it in thanks,) shouldn't you have the OTHER people follow his lead, rather than fire him?

    --
    Another non-functioning site was "uncertainty.microsoft.com."
    The purpose of that site was not known.
    1. Re:First boycott Best Buy, now Circuit City? by aztec+rain+god · · Score: 1

      Costco. They pay their employees well and have a good return policy.

      --
      Sig cannot be found.
    2. Re:First boycott Best Buy, now Circuit City? by Archangel+Michael · · Score: 1

      These companies want Borg Drones. They want the equivalent of script kiddies, no thinking outside the box, no clever solutions, no dynamics that have the potential of lawsuits. They want "Go to the freezer, get the box" pizza makers.

      This is what I call the McDonalding of America. McDonald's hamburgers are, if anything, consistent. What you get at one McD's is the same just about any other McD's. I wouldn't call them good by any standard, but they are consistent, albeit consistently bad.

      Additionally, there is an old axiom that you can pick two of any of the following three items: Quality, Service, Price. However many places are trying to compete on Price Only and consumers often chase "Price Only". Yet I see the very same people complaining about "higher prices" and price shopping places that provide better Quality or Service.

      When I was in Retail Sales, I saw this all the time. People would drive 90 miles to save $5 on a $450 printer. It was insane!

      So, when I see Circus Shitty (tm) and others trying to compete on price only, I laugh, as all the places that end up doing so, end up being McDonald's, consistently crappy. And people are not happy eating their crap.

      It doesn't take a genius to run a company on Price Only, so why not fire all the brilliant people at the top, and replace them with cheaper alternatives?

      --
      Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
    3. Re:First boycott Best Buy, now Circuit City? by kabocox · · Score: 3, Interesting

      What other large electronics chains are left that I can buy at? I don't want to support businesses who either cheat their customers (Best Buy) or who mistreat their employees (Wal-Mart, Circuit City.) I'm going to be running out of vendors, soon.

      Simple truth? The highest paid slashdotter isn't magically worth more than that Wal-mart store greeter. We all should be making min. wage and min. wage should be enough to buy a house, car, food, pay monthly electric, cable, internet, cell phone bills, raise offspring on and then donate more money for boyscouts, girlscouts, schoolfund raisers, or other various charities, and let's not forget about Christmas were you are expected to buy tons of gifts for family and little gifts for special friends and family. (Pity you if you have a large family.) Oh, afford various insurances life, health, auto, home, and anything else that folks need.

      You need to do all that on min. wage. Now, tell me what "min. wage" needs to be. It's been funny reading this. This article assumes that a college educated person can find a job that'll pay 4x5 times min. wage. Um, we aren't worth that much more than a highschool drop out though we'd like to think we deserve a lot more money than them because we made it through college.

    4. Re:First boycott Best Buy, now Circuit City? by Shambly · · Score: 1

      How is this different then switching manufacturer when your original one becomes to expensive for you to keep competing. It makes only business sense to remove the fat from the company. If Circuit City believes it can get the same quality employees at a cheaper price it can and should do so.

      This doesn't mean that the behavior is not acceptable but with the lower prices does come lower loyalty which is a risk that is acceptable to take in a job that takes very little skill or training. They have the suply (employement) for the demand if people don't want to risk that kind of behavior they can not work there. People who do not want to work at circuit city do not have to work there. Nothing is binding them to the company. If they believe they can get better pay elsewhere (whether that pay be money or special benefits) then they are welcome to do so. If a company does not want you to work for them then it is their perogative to do the same.

    5. Re:First boycott Best Buy, now Circuit City? by guspasho · · Score: 1

      "What other large electronics chains are left that I can buy at?"

      The answer is hidden within your own question. Find an alternative to the large electronics chain.

      These guys all tailor their policies to lower prices, and that means treating their employees and their customers like crap. That means failing to provide employees with living wages, insurance or benefits of any kind, or even full-time employment. It means dehumanizing their employees and treating them instead like an expendable resource, it means regular, callous firings such as this in favor of lowering the wages they have to pay. There is no loyalty but to the bottom line.

      And now it means an employee has no hope of advancement. Don't count on being an efficient money-maker for the company; you are a dime a dozen. As soon as you demand more than the minimum wage you are out the door.

      There is no career to be found in rising up the food chain from the lowest cog at these companies, and that is the injustice that so offends us and the American Dream - hense the /. article title.

      But I digress. If, as a customer, if there is a point at which you are willing to be more concerned with how your vendor treats their employees whether than whether they can provide you the lowest price, then the alternative has been staring you in the face all the time. It is the local small business. There are far more to choose from, they may be harder to find and some may also treat their employees like crap, but you can choose to endorse good employment policies by spending your money at those companies that treat their employees well, provide them benefits, a career, and allow them to not only bear the risks but also share in the rewards.

      So go reward them. As the consumer you have the final say, go vote your values.

    6. Re:First boycott Best Buy, now Circuit City? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Fry's if you have one near you. If not, try opening your eyes and looking for the local electronics stores that you can be 90% sure are there. Odds are, wherever you find one of the chain stores you will find a locally owned store in the same local area, and maybe might even find one closer than the chains.

    7. Re:First boycott Best Buy, now Circuit City? by khallow · · Score: 1

      I guess if you completely ignore the value of a person's work, then of course, they should all be paid the same. Yes, it's something of a tautology, but if the store greeter were actually doing work as valuable as someone earning six or even seven figures a year, then they'd be paid more.

    8. Re:First boycott Best Buy, now Circuit City? by russotto · · Score: 1

      Simple truth? The highest paid slashdotter isn't magically worth more than that Wal-mart store greeter.
      You're partly right: there's no magic involved.
    9. Re:First boycott Best Buy, now Circuit City? by djSpinMonkey · · Score: 4, Funny

      ...shouldn't you have the OTHER people follow his lead, rather than fire him?

      Assuming that "you" are the guy in charge of a credit card telemarketing company? No, that isn't what you should do. You should, in fact, find the nearest wood chipper and jump in.

    10. Re:First boycott Best Buy, now Circuit City? by maxume · · Score: 1

      The spit tends to vary. I say if you find one you like, stick with it.

      (And really, Walmart sucked up pretty much all the price competition there possibly could be; this is evident in the fact that Target is beating them by selling merchandise of marginally better quality(basically, people feel like it is better). The good news is that you will be able to get better crap at Wally world.)

      --
      Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
    11. Re:First boycott Best Buy, now Circuit City? by maxume · · Score: 1

      Are you kidding? Someone who can weld, or someone who can swing a hammer, or someone who can write decent software, are all worth more than that greeter at Walmart. If they aren't worth more than the greeter at Walmart, how can you argue that they are worth more than the artist that spends his time molding unsightly sculptures from his own shit?

      --
      Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
    12. Re:First boycott Best Buy, now Circuit City? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Are you kidding? Someone who can weld, or someone who can swing a hammer, or someone who can write decent software, are all worth more than that greeter at Walmart"

      maybe thats a really really good greeter

    13. Re:First boycott Best Buy, now Circuit City? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      It is tempting to believe that a high-paid slashdotter and a walmart greeter are equal. Certainly, in a sense, this is true: in the justice system, they are equal; there is no preference for programmers over greeters. They both receive habeas corpus rights; they both will be read their Miranda rights if arrested. This is also true in terms of political rights: a vote by a programmer is worth as much as a vote from a greeter. I could go on.

      However, in an economic sense, individuals are not equal. There are individuals of varying ability that operate in varying fields. Now, suppose that we paid the slashdotter equally to the greeter; what incentive does the slashdotter have to do any more than stand at the door of the company and greet people? What incentive do we provide to the programmer to make him use his domain-specific skills? Could we take the greeter and have him do the programmer's job? Clearly not. So why pay them the same?

      As for having a minimum wage that pays enough to do all the things you suggest, the fact is that raising minimum wage raises the price of goods. If you have to pay the greeter $10/hr, then obviously you can't charge the same price as before and make the same profit. The only way that you can have the price of goods stay the same is to fire some of the greeters. So, either we have inflation or we have more unemployment. Inflation would quickly insure that the minimum wage that bought all the things you suggested would no longer do so. Unemployment widens the disparity between those who have jobs and those who don't.

      If a college educated person does not make more than a high school dropout, then either the college has not done its job or the student has not done his job. I worked as a bagger in a grocery store four years ago at minimum wage ($5.15/hr, I believe), now I'm walking into a high-paying job ($30+/hr) when I graduate.

    14. Re:First boycott Best Buy, now Circuit City? by MBraynard · · Score: 1
      Sounds like your friend was either on the border line of or was close to committing fraud. The person monitoring those for following the script were probably not lawyers and neither were their bosses. But your friends bosses bosses bosses were probably lawyers.

      The Federal government is very strict on what must be said and not said on telemarketing calls, doubly so for financially-related calls.

      By playing fast and loose with a really stupid script (I know how stupid they can be), he was exposing the company to lawsuits that you would then read about on slashdot and then make a +5 'insightful' post about how corporations can't be trusted, etc. - all because your jackass friend who never really wanted to work for a living in the first place (history major??) - didn't follow the rules and because he was doing gangbusters, they let him slide.

    15. Re:First boycott Best Buy, now Circuit City? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There's really no way for you to say what somebody is worth.

      Value is subjective. It's what ANYBODY is willing to pay you. That's what you're worth to him. In practice, most people go for the highest bidder (i.e. employer with the highest pay), but you can also be self-employed, if you find people will buy your shit sculptures ;-)

    16. Re:First boycott Best Buy, now Circuit City? by jamesmrankinjr · · Score: 1

      What other large electronics chains are left that I can buy at?

      The Apple Store?

      Insanely great service. Low key sales pitch. Genius bars. Free training sessions for lots of their products.

      Of course, if you're shopping for something other than a Mac or an iPod you're out of luck. But I've yet to read of an Apple Store employee claiming to be egregiously underpaid or abused.

      -jimbo

    17. Re:First boycott Best Buy, now Circuit City? by Joe+The+Dragon · · Score: 1

      http://www.tigerdirect.com/ has Retail Outlet Stores and the people working there know what they are talking about.

    18. Re:First boycott Best Buy, now Circuit City? by Dun+Malg · · Score: 1

      Costco. They ...have a good return policy. Not any more. Too many assholes were "buying" big screen TVs for the [Superbowl/playoffs/world cup/etc] and then return them afterwards, before the Amex bill came due. It's what always happens. A handfull of shit eating NASCAR fucktards crap in the punchbowl and the party's over.
      --
      If a job's not worth doing, it's not worth doing right.
    19. Re:First boycott Best Buy, now Circuit City? by massysett · · Score: 2

      Newegg.com. Huge selection. Useful reviews. Exhaustive specifications. You can shop at your own home at your leisure.

      Downsides of course are 1) you have to wait for shipping and 2) you have to receive the package. Waiting is not a big deal for me, and Newegg ships fast. You can always upgrade the shipping. Receiving the packages can be a big deal for some, but I live in a building with a desk that takes packages (and that's a big reason I'm not eager to move into a house!)

      If you want a retail experience for computers and you've got a Micro Center nearby, they're pretty good. Nice selection and decent staff.

      Best Buy and Circuit City are both awful, with meager selection and worthless staff. Avoid both.

    20. Re:First boycott Best Buy, now Circuit City? by feepness · · Score: 1

      Now, if someone comes in, and, by *NOT* following the script to the letter (he did say all the parts that the law requires creditors to say,) sets sales records two months in a row (he got a plastic slinky with the company name on it in thanks,) shouldn't you have the OTHER people follow his lead, rather than fire him?

      No. What if he was lying? I'm not saying he was, but they have the scripts because they have been vetted for all sorts of different situations.

      His job was not a salesman... his job was a human interface to a pre-recorded message.

    21. Re:First boycott Best Buy, now Circuit City? by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      That's too bad. It still seems to be a good place to buy those big-screen TVs, however, based on selection and price. I just got one from there and I'm very happy with it (and with the price I paid, compared to what they cost from Newegg.com after shipping).

      Surely they don't have a problem exchanging them if they're defective? I have little interest in buying a ~$1000 piece of merchandise and returning it for a full refund without good cause.

    22. Re:First boycott Best Buy, now Circuit City? by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      I don't know about all locations, but around here, the Targets are generally much cleaner and nicer inside than the Wal-Marts, and the customers seem to be higher-class. The Wal-Mart customers look like they live in ghettos and have tons of out-of-control children running around.

    23. Re:First boycott Best Buy, now Circuit City? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Buy it online.

    24. Re:First boycott Best Buy, now Circuit City? by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      Maybe, but there's a "point of diminishing returns" with retail. After all, what kind of better quality and service can you offer in retail? Better quality products? No, they're the exact same products sold at the cheap places, made by the same manufacturers in the same Chinese factories. Better service? Perhaps, but this is pretty limited too; the store's return policy is the most important part of its service, and Wal-Mart has the best return policy in the business. Or do you mean knowledgeable employees? I've never seen many of those in any retail electronics store, only people who thought they knew everything. (Other sectors of retail are different; I'm just focusing on electronics here since we're talking about Circuit Shitty.)

      Honestly, the only reasons to buy electronics locally now are 1) if shipping charges are too high, after you account for the savings in sales tax by buying online, or 2) you need something right away. Otherwise, just go to Newegg.com. The only stuff I buy locally any more I get either from Target, if it's small and cheap (for instance, an alarm clock), or from Costco if it's something big and expensive (big LCD TV). For everything else, I go to Newegg. It wouldn't bother me at all if my local Circuit Shitty and Worst Buy shut down. The only problem would be all the pimple-faced, spiky-haired, body-pierced teenagers that would be unemployed.

    25. Re:First boycott Best Buy, now Circuit City? by maxume · · Score: 1

      Right. I can say what somebody is worth though, I just can't control it(i.e., nobody else has to pay any attention to my value judgments).

      --
      Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
    26. Re:First boycott Best Buy, now Circuit City? by Maxo-Texas · · Score: 1

      Walmart takes a lot longer to checkout form than Target about half the time because they staff their checkouts too lean and won't allocate staff if a huge line forms.

      --
      She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
    27. Re:First boycott Best Buy, now Circuit City? by Fujisawa+Sensei · · Score: 1

      Your labor worth exactly what you can convince somebody else to paying for it.

      --
      If someone is passing you on the right, you are an asshole for driving in the wrong lane.
    28. Re:First boycott Best Buy, now Circuit City? by CodeBuster · · Score: 2, Informative

      shouldn't you have the OTHER people follow his lead, rather than fire him?

      The incentives of the middle manager can be perverse sometimes. The too-smart-for-his-own-good salesman may attract the attention of higher-ups and become a potential threat to the middle manager. The middle manager reacts by eliminating a perceived threat (i.e someone who performs better and is more productive than they are) before it is too late for them to act. The middle manager typically wants to improve overall performance by raising the productivity of each worker an equally incremental amount not by having rising stars in sales steal his thunder when it comes time for promotions.

    29. Re:First boycott Best Buy, now Circuit City? by GWBasic · · Score: 1

      Now, if someone comes in, and, by *NOT* following the script to the letter (he did say all the parts that the law requires creditors to say,) sets sales records two months in a row (he got a plastic slinky with the company name on it in thanks,) shouldn't you have the OTHER people follow his lead, rather than fire him?

      There are far too many superiors in the work force who are more concerned about having their underlings follow thier orders to the letter. Perhaps your friend's manager felt threatened that your friend would take his job? It happens.

    30. Re:First boycott Best Buy, now Circuit City? by daigu · · Score: 1

      High school drop outs might be worth more; they don't have student debt. Can you include that in minimum wage too?

    31. Re:First boycott Best Buy, now Circuit City? by Anonymous+Freak · · Score: 1

      His biggest improvement over the script was to actually TALK to the people he was calling. The script had specific questions the customer might ask, and what the reply was to be. If they asked a question that wasn't on the list, he was supposed to reply with some canned response like "that's not why I'm calling" or something equally asinine. Instead, he would actually talk as a human. For example, if someone asked him about the weather, he would actually answer.

      His calls were right on the mandated average (no shorter, no longer, because both would be considered bad,) and for the product details, he did stick to the script, to maintain all legalities. (His biggest complaint was that when someone unceremoniously hung up, he STILL had to read a 45 second long legal disclaimer, to dead air.

      Oh, and he's currently a security manager at a fab of a large chip maker. He decided he likes security. (His history degree came in humorously handy when the company was bought out by an international conglomerate that requires employees to wear a black armband with three red dots on it. Aside from the Nazi-esque aspects, the fact that three red dots on a black field was the symbol for the Plague really had him laughing.)

      --
      Another non-functioning site was "uncertainty.microsoft.com."
      The purpose of that site was not known.
    32. Re:First boycott Best Buy, now Circuit City? by feepness · · Score: 1

      It is irrelevant what his improvement to the script was.

      Customer: What's the weather like there? Your friend: Cold... but everything is layered in a beautiful blanket of white. Customer: What!?!?! You racist! I'm suing! Company loses 100 times any sales increase your friend ever made settling racism charges.

      Is it rational? No. Believable? Unfortunately, yes.

  20. It's happening everwhere! by bnavarro · · Score: 2, Funny

    I think The ONN (Onion News Network) summs up the sad situation in our country quite nicely with this little "expose": CEO fired, replaced by illegal immigrant

    1. Re:It's happening everwhere! by imikem · · Score: 1

      If only it truly was CEOs getting replaced that way. After a few of those, I suspect immigration reform might suddenly be a priority in this country.

      --
      Perscriptio in manibus tabellariorum est.
  21. Meh by stratjakt · · Score: 1

    I know CC salespeople were higher paid, not too long ago they were on comission. I know the idea was to have better trained employees to help you make selections, etc.

    But you have two factors:

    1) Doubling someons hourly rate doesn't make them smart. CC employees are the same as Best Buy, trying to sell me monster power cables and extended warrantees, and unable to answer any of my tech questions.

    2) The public is more and more aware of electronics, and has less and less need for someone to talk them through buying a DVD player.

    Sucks to be those guys, and it's a shit way to treat employees, but seriously, if that was your career, get used to failure in life.

    Paying them more simply wasn't producing a better service, at least not in Annapolis, MD.

    Nearly everything is cheaper at BB too, so that can't help.

    --
    I don't need no instructions to know how to rock!!!!
    1. Re:Meh by LunaticTippy · · Score: 1

      Paying people more doesn't make them smart, but it can help keep them from leaving. A new employee is a shitty employee. I can't believe how many times it's taken my incompetent employee talking to his incompetent new boss, talking to the new incompetent manager to figure something stupid out. Seems cheaper to pay the people more and have them stay than have a cluster of useless but cheap drones.

      --
      Man, you really need that seminar!
  22. fuck'n Goobacks! by maynard · · Score: 2, Funny

    "They took my jaorb!!!"

  23. what do they mean by best by b17bmbr · · Score: 1

    last couple of times I was in CC (one to buy a sirius radio, the other car GPS), I knew exactly what I watned, and was more concerned whether they carried it or had it in stock. I did the research on my own, got all the advice I sought, and needed the sales staff to ring it up. how much do they need to nkow to do that?

    I feel for the guys that are getting laid-off, but the truth is if it added $$$ to the price, I'd have bought it elsewhere. the real question is do they really help CC sell more? I wonder.

    --
    My problem? I was perfectly gruntled, until some numbnuts came by and dissed me.
  24. The American Dream is dead! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    When clueless sales floor personnel cannot expect to work years for one company and retire with a pension.

  25. Why do I shop retail over the internet? by DragonPup · · Score: 1

    Better service from actual people, which is why I expect to pay more in an actual store. If Circuit City is firing all of their best people, why am I going to pay more there than from, say, newegg?

    Answer: I'm not.

    --
    "Useless organic meatbag" -HK-47
    1. Re:Why do I shop retail over the internet? by cdrguru · · Score: 1

      And you were going to pay them more if they were friendly and knowledgable? Ha.

      You were always going to shop by price. Any good will that might be generated by one particular person would be instantly erased when you got to the checkout person that treated you like a stray cow on the way to being slaughtered. No, no, no sir, you must walk over here, through this longer line.

      If Circuit City has higher prices than Best Buy, it isn't because they can do a better job. It is because Best Buy employs cheaper idiots to staff their store. Service doesn't count for much when you can go online and find the cheapest prices either via net-delivery or store-pickup. Low prices count.

  26. Whoop de doo by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Circuit has been terrible for a number of years for a number of reasons. This is no surprise.

  27. Whiskey Tango Foxtrot! by gblues · · Score: 1

    OK, so you're a struggling business and you're trying to control costs, so you... fire the people who bring in revenue? Circuit City, say goodbye to your institutional memory, loyalty, and say hello to higher turnover; your "savings" are going to be eaten by increased hiring costs and less competent sales staff.

    If you got fired, consider yourself lucky and get yourself a decent sales job.

    1. Re:Whiskey Tango Foxtrot! by realmolo · · Score: 1

      Yeah, but this is a RETAIL SALES business.

      The only people that TRULY bring in money are the marketing people, who don't work at the individual stores, anyway.

      "Good salespeople" are kind of an un-necessary evil these days at the retail level. Most consumer products are cheap, and most of them are approximately the same. What can a salesperson do besides try an "upsell" you on stuff you don't need? Which really only works on electronics, and only works on people that don't know better, and most of those people DO eventually learn how to not get ripped-off.

      If you want to make money as a salesperson, you need to get a job selling expensive stuff to *other businesses*.

    2. Re:Whiskey Tango Foxtrot! by geekoid · · Score: 1

      ""Good salespeople" are kind of an un-necessary evil these days at the retail level. Most consumer products are cheap, and most of them are approximately the same."

      If your sales person is good, they are selling the higher end stuff. Stuff people didn't come in for, or getting them to buying a better product. Generally exlpaining why it's better."

      Hint:
      saying "You get what you pay for" isn't a good enough reason.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
  28. Have we learned NOTHING from Star Trek? by onkelonkel · · Score: 5, Funny

    You DO NOT want to be wearing the red shirt. Especially if you are on the away team.

    --
    None of them can see the clouds; The polished wings don't care.
    1. Re:Have we learned NOTHING from Star Trek? by Gr8Apes · · Score: 1

      That reminds me:

      Once before a big naval battle, the captain told his aide "Get me my red shirt and brown pants".
      The aide says "But sir! The bright red shirt will make you easy to target. Why would you want that shirt?"
      The captain says "it's so my men won't see me bleed if I get injured."
      The aide then asks "But why the brown pants?"
      The captain replies "So they won't see me crap my pants."

      --
      The cesspool just got a check and balance.
    2. Re:Have we learned NOTHING from Star Trek? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You need to change your name to ScrewedUpThePunchline.

      The joke goes that before every battle the captain tells his aide to get his red shirt. The aide asks why.
      "So if I am injured, my men will not see me bleed and thus lose confidence".

      An enemy ship is sighted. The captain tells the aide to get his red shirt. Later, it is seen that it's not one ship. It's the entire enemy fleet. THEN the captain tells the aide to get his _brown_ pants.

    3. Re:Have we learned NOTHING from Star Trek? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      YOU screwed it up. It's supposed to go like this:

      An enemy ship is sighted. The captain tells the aide to get his brown pants, because _he_ has crapped _his_ pants.

    4. Re:Have we learned NOTHING from Star Trek? by axiome · · Score: 0

      And you do realize in TNG, the red shirt signifies "captain." Thats the Federation^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H American dream right there, isn't it?!

    5. Re:Have we learned NOTHING from Star Trek? by Papi99 · · Score: 1

      "You DO NOT want to be wearing the red shirt. Especially if you are on the away team."

      Or if you're running with the Bulls.

    6. Re:Have we learned NOTHING from Star Trek? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A TNG-era red shirt signifies anyone with a post in the command hierarchy (aka management); even an ensign can have one, although I'm not quite sure myself what it signifies at that level. Gold (security/engineering) and blue (medical/scientific) are quite a bit clearer.

  29. Who's next? by JD-1027 · · Score: 1

    So I've been done with Best Buy for a while. Now there is no way I'm going to Circuit City. Hmmm, who's left? Online shops, I guess.

  30. Interesting by LinuxInDallas · · Score: 1

    It's interesting that the workers were not offered to simply have a salary cut but were instead fired and then forced to reapply for lower paying jobs. This is obviously an attempt to eliminate any benefits the employees may have had from being long-time employees.

    1. Re:Interesting by cdrguru · · Score: 1

      Except it is hardly likely that sales floor staff get retirement benefits, longer vacations or anything of the sort.

    2. Re:Interesting by toddestan · · Score: 1

      Except it is hardly likely that sales floor staff get retirement benefits, longer vacations or anything of the sort.

      What are you talking about? I just heard that Circuit City gave the top 8% of their employees each a 10 week vacaction!

  31. Well... by retro128 · · Score: 1

    What did you expect from the company that foisted DIVX upon us?

    --
    -R
  32. Just goes to show ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    that it's a proven fact that wearing a red shirt is detrimental to your livelihood ...

  33. They should have seen this coming by Jtheletter · · Score: 1

    I mean come on, even a fresh-out-of-Starfleet ensign knows that wearing a red shirt is a mark of doom. It was inevitable, they should just be happy their sacrifices were for the greater good, and not just an arbitrary display of power by some alie^B^B^B^B contractor.

    --
    -- I'm not a pessimist, I'm a realist. It's not my fault that life sucks so much. --
  34. Legal? by whisper_jeff · · Score: 1

    Is it even legal to fire someone without reason? Wouldn't this open them up to a massive class-action wrongful termination lawsuit? These aren't layoffs (since the positions are being immediately refilled with lower-paid personnel) and they aren't being terminated for performance-related reasons. I can't imagine this is legal but I don't know the US labour laws...

    1. Re:Legal? by Bastardchyld · · Score: 1

      The US has what is called "At-Will" employment, meaning that basically either you or the employer can terminate the arrangement at any time without consequence. Then of course we have protected classes which prevent termination based on the protected class. For example, you cannot fire a woman because she is a woman, however if she performs poorly or you can no longer afford to keep her then she can be terminated for those reasons.

      --
      $diff terrorists hippies
      $
      $rm -rf *terrorists *hippies
    2. Re:Legal? by cdrguru · · Score: 1

      In the EU it almost certainly would be illegal to do this. In the USA just about everywhere is a "right to work" state where you can be terminated at any time for no reason.

      My understanding is that in the EU hiring someone is a long process where there is a real committment on the part of the employer. If there is a chance that the position might not exist in a few years, you better not hire someone because you will have an employee whether or not there is a position to fill. Makes for a lot higher unemployment which is then taken care of by the government.

    3. Re:Legal? by thebigmacd · · Score: 1

      I don't know about in the US, but in Canada (Ontario at least) it is perfectly legal to fire someone without a reason given. However, it requires a compensation payment of one week's wages per year employed, up to a maximum of 8 weeks. If compensation is not received and no valid reason is given, THEN it becomes a wrongful-termination case at the Ministry of Labour/courts.

    4. Re:Legal? by cayenne8 · · Score: 1
      "Is it even legal to fire someone without reason? Wouldn't this open them up to a massive class-action wrongful termination lawsuit?"

      In most states, yes, perfectly legal. You are employed as and 'at will' employee. This means that you can quit at any time for any reason, without notice, and that your employer can also fire you anytime for any reason....barring the few exceptions race, sex or religion.

      But, most places in the US I believe, are 'at will' employment.

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    5. Re:Legal? by ohearn · · Score: 1

      A lot of states have what's called "at will employment". Basically this means other than discrimination on age, sex, raec, etc. a company can fire anyone it wants without needing a reason just like you can quit anytime you feel like it without reason. Not retail, but when I used to do tech support for a living (or at least the several years I did call center support) I saw this happen a lot to people who had been around too long. As long as you made at least certain numbers you were gauranteed a raise every 3 months (and then reduced to once per 6 months and then to once a year). Basically once you started making above a certain point they would not give you ANY over-time no matter how many calls were coming in, and then after a while if you had not moved into management they would fire you and tell you that they would gladly rehire you in 6 months once company policy said they could bring you back at starting pay (which kept getting lower and lower to compete with people outsourcing to India). So yes it is legal, but it still sucks.

    6. Re:Legal? by joto · · Score: 1
      Which brings us to the temporary staffing firms. I predict that within a decade (or two), half of Europe will be employed by them. Meaning that
      • everyone is replaceable, both as employees, and as temporary staff
      • everyone will be paid the same low salary
      • you will only be paid if a customer wants you at a given time, no more Mon-Fri 0800-1600, and only part-time, unless you are available 24/7, and every weekend
      • worker rights (e.g. safety rules) are ignored as customer and staffing firm argue who should pay for it, and then the temporary assignment is over
    7. Re:Legal? by Maxo-Texas · · Score: 1

      It is legal in many states in the US.

      Unless
      You are union
      You are a civil servant
      You have an employment contract that negates that right.

      And it's risky if you are
      A woman
      A minority (and there are lots of slices of minorities these days)

      For some reason, it is illegal to do it if you are old, but that law basically isn't enforced unless the company is stupid. I suspect it is going to become increasingly hard to fire old people as the baby boomer cohort FINALLY gets to be old itself and uses it's numbers to stop that shit. (I've eaten baby boomer leavings my entire damn life. But I do get some benefits like cures for disease and legal protections from that huge bump of asses just ahead of me).

      However
      If the company fires you without cause it will have to pay you a large percentage of your salary for 6 to 12 months. (technically they pay the government unemployment premiums and then that money goes to you).

      --
      She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
    8. Re:Legal? by Lord+Kano · · Score: 1

      Is it even legal to fire someone without reason?

      In most states, yes. You can fire a person for almost any reason or for no reason at all. You just can't fire someone for being black/white/asian/latino/male/female/too old.

      LK

      --
      "Hi. This is my friend, Jack Shit, and you don't know him." - Lord Kano
  35. Circuit Who? by Shivetya · · Score: 1

    thats my view.

    Got an item I want, I'll go to Best Buy or even Wal-Mart first now.

    --
    * Winners compare their achievements to their goals, losers compare theirs to that of others.
    1. Re:Circuit Who? by oedneil · · Score: 0

      Yeah, because Wal-Mart is a shining example of how to treat employees.

  36. This is unfortunate, however... by ProppaT · · Score: 1

    This happens everyday, just not all at once. I will never take a job based upon the company having retirement benefits after 20 years of performance. In the defense industry, for example, it's common practice for an entire department to get laid off just to be rehired to perform the same job for the same company. Why? They didn't want to have to pay out retirement. This is the same shady practice, yet on at a larger scale (which means it gets more publicity).

    The sad state of affairs is that companies have to please stock holders and, to please stock holders profits have to go up. Even if your company is making money hand over fist, it gets to a point where you have to find a way to cut margins to please stock holders. It's unfortuante that so many companies take the easy way out instead of finding ways to inovate and manage budgets....

    --
    Wise men say, "Forgiveness is divine, but never pay full price for late pizza."
    1. Re:This is unfortunate, however... by maxume · · Score: 1

      It's also why people want 401k compensation instead of a pension. The whole taking it with you when you go work somewhere else thing is pretty nice, and there is finally low cost management starting to appear.

      --
      Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
  37. surely this is crazy by jaymz2k4 · · Score: 1

    words fail to describe how mental this stragegy sounds, and the fact they're letting people apply for their job back at a lower rate of pay, if thats not a slap in the face for working for these guys i dont know what is. im all for 'you work for the company, the company doesnt work for you', but shit like this just annoys me. im sure someone on their board will make a good bonus this year, maybe someone will figure they dont need them anymore...

    god help anyone aiming to make a good wage at cc :/

    --
    jaymz
  38. if they want to pay the lowest wages, go to Haiti by swschrad · · Score: 1

    because all of their nervous US potential customers are now going to shun circus city in droves. I have bought a good amount of stuff at CC, but never again.

    --
    if this is supposed to be a new economy, how come they still want my old fashioned money?
  39. Re:Wrong place to cry ... we all just got out sour by Magnusite · · Score: 1

    Wrong place to cry ... we all just got out sourced!

    Bah! I defy anyone at Circuit City to show me source code that is better than mine!

  40. Only meatheads need apply by Billosaur · · Score: 1

    Only the mentally stunted or tech un-savvy amongst them would go back to work for the company that fired them only to hire them back at a lower rate. Anyone with more than just a little brains is going to be offended.

    --
    GetOuttaMySpace - The Anti-Social Network
  41. Never Again by ThurstonMoore · · Score: 1

    No more Circuit City for me.

  42. erm... by cosmocain · · Score: 0

    ...just how motivated would YOU be if you got fired one day and - in lack of alternatives - apply for the same job again, but for a lower salary. this just must result in an extensive drop of service quality.

    err, wait.. Circuit City? Never mind.

    1. Re:erm... by Lord+Kano · · Score: 1

      How about the morale of the rest of the company?

      I know that most people view it as "just a job" but the people who think about making a future and working their way up to management are the ones who really drive retail businesses. People who think about the sales metrics that are being tracked are the ones who upsell customers to items with higher profit margins.

      If people now think that performing too well will lead to raises and eventual dismissal, they won't try as hard to sell. They'll come in to work and coast through each day. They will do just enough to not get fired. Sure, CC will now have lower payroll to pay but they'll also have lower revenue to meet that lower payroll.

      LK

      --
      "Hi. This is my friend, Jack Shit, and you don't know him." - Lord Kano
  43. Short Circuit City by Jeremiah+Cornelius · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "In the 1980s capitalism triumphed over communism. In the 1990s it triumphed over democracy."
    --David Korten

    --
    "Flyin' in just a sweet place,
    Never been known to fail..."
    1. Re:Short Circuit City by MBraynard · · Score: 1

      Awesome.

    2. Re:Short Circuit City by shadowspar · · Score: 1

      Looks like the market's already moving on that. TFA says that their shares rose 35 cents yesterday to close at $19.23, but today they are already down to $18.31.

      --

      There is a spellbook here; eat it? [ynq]

    3. Re:Short Circuit City by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Oh no. I gotta fart, but I don't know which way to lean."
      --Peter Griffin

      Hell, if your quote is (inexplicably) modded +5 Insightful this one ought to win me a Pulitzer or something.

    4. Re:Short Circuit City by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Reminds me of that old Soviet joke: "Under capitalism, man exploits his fellow man. Under communism, the situation is reversed."

    5. Re:Short Circuit City by KudyardRipling · · Score: 1

      In the 2000s it is triumphing over the dignity of the underclass. In the 2010s it will triumph over the right of the underclass to exist. Here come the Black Crown Vics; I must have been right!

      --
      Submission as evidence constitutes plaintiff and/or prosecutorial misconduct.
  44. Circuit City slogan: "We're evil" by russotto · · Score: 2, Insightful

    It's not so unusual for companies to lay off at the top and hire at the bottom. It IS unusual for them to do it all at once and to come right out and say that's what they're doing. I'm not sure if their honesty is a good thing or a bad thing.

    It seems that Circuit City has decided that a more experienced and thus higher-paid salesperson doesn't sell much (if anything) more than a high-school dropout hired right off the street. If that's the case, raises and higher pay simply don't make sense and a switch to a model where they hire people who can't get anything better, never give raises, and accept the resulting high turnover makes business sense. Even if it is pretty much evil.

  45. better solution by kurtis25 · · Score: 1

    Maybe Circuit City could cut costs by firing all the employees that stand around and do nothing. The past 4 times I've been there I've seen multiple employees standing in a circle talking or playing catch with a promotional stress ball. It took 3 employees to replace the ink in a printer. So part of me agrees that laying off their high paid employees is fine, why pay employees a good amount if they are going to do nothing. If you need people to baby sit your store higher lower wage workers. If you want good employees higher good employees and pay them well. In 4 trips to CC I bought nothing because I felt I was being charged so they could have employees do nothing; fire a few and lower your prices. Then higher back the good ones.Don't fire good or deserving employees just to save money have a good reason. Fire employees who are a waste for you and the customers then re-evaluate.

  46. Shooting oneself in the foot. by Radon360 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Yet another corporate management that views the bottom-end labor as a pure commodity. Can they get more warm bodies in to replace those displaced? You sure bet. Can the displaced find sales work elsewhere? Most likely so as well. Apparently, someone missed the day in class when they discussed intrinsic value. If you have someone that's experienced and good at what they do, they are very likely worth more because they know how to be more productive at what they do. They likely know how to sell and market a product, in addition to helping customers find the product that best suits their needs and desires.

    Having a knowledgeable and competent sales staff is usually considered a cornerstone of having a good store. Get rid of that, and you're probably competing strictly on price and not on value. Hey, if that's their new business model, then they probably made a good move towards achieving that model. But generally, taking the service out of a service industry usually is a risky plan.

    If I were Circuit City's direct competition, I'd seriously consider finding a way to talk to these displaced salepeople. It could be a windfall of people that I wouldn't have to spend too much effort in training myself, and still have an opportunity to weed out any undesirables.

    1. Re:Shooting oneself in the foot. by cdrguru · · Score: 1

      The Internet has pretty much eliminated "value" from the equation. If you're not cheaper on Froogle, you aren't going to get as many sales. Period. You can have the most knowledgable and friendly sales staff in the world but if your prices aren't lower than the store down the street, people aren't coming in to meet your friendly sales staff.

      There isn't a way to sort Froogle results by "knowledge" or "value", just price. Same thing with Pricewatch, PriceGrabber, MySimon and all the other pricing tools on the Internet. Value is pretty much dead for consumer sales.

    2. Re:Shooting oneself in the foot. by Hoi+Polloi · · Score: 1

      This is one difference between a privately held company driven by people at the top who have a personal investment in the company vs a company that is owned by some investment group. They have no background or commitment to the company beyond the bottom line. My experience with privately held companies is they generally take a greater interest in their employees' personal qualities and don't see them as swappable commodities.

      --
      It is by the juice of the coffee bean that thoughts acquire speed, the teeth acquire stains. The stains become a warning
    3. Re:Shooting oneself in the foot. by Radon360 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I agree with you that online sales have definitely strengthened the aspect of competition on bottom line price alone. However, I do think that there's still a market niche for excellent customer service. This is something that "brick and mortar" stores normally would have a leg-up on their internet competition. The problem is making sure that your stores just don't become the quazi-showroom for your competition. (i.e. "Thanks for the info, I'm going home now to buy it online at the lowest price I can find.")

      I think that it would go without saying that virtually everyone on this forum is at least above average when it comes to technical knowledge. That being the case, we rarely need a salesperson to assist us with our tech purchases, thus online buying is a natural fit. There are, however, still a large number of consumers that need the visual, aural and tactile experience first before committing to buy. The trick is to close the sale then and there and not let them walk out empty-handed, yet loaded with knowledge so they can now shop on price alone. That said, a salesperson experienced and adept in making sales becomes all that much more important of an asset to a store.

    4. Re:Shooting oneself in the foot. by maxume · · Score: 1

      I place a pretty high value on the fact that pretty much every time I have done business with Amazon, it has gone smoothly. At this point, I check Amazon and Newegg and go with Newegg if it is still quite a bit cheaper after shipping. I would rather deal with Amazon, but not for $15 bucks more. For something higher ticket, like a laptop or whatever, I will probably go to Froogle or whatever, but that's to save $50 or $100, which is even worth it taking a couple of extra hours of my time.

      --
      Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
    5. Re:Shooting oneself in the foot. by feepness · · Score: 1

      Yet another corporate management that views the bottom-end labor as a pure commodity.

      I fail to see how the highest paid employees are the bottom-end labor?

    6. Re:Shooting oneself in the foot. by Radon360 · · Score: 1

      They are at the bottom of the organizational structure (i.e. they have little/no one beneath them reporting to them), not necessarily at the bottom of the payscale.

    7. Re:Shooting oneself in the foot. by AeroIllini · · Score: 1

      Apparently, someone missed the day in class when they discussed intrinsic value. If you have someone that's experienced and good at what they do, they are very likely worth more because they know how to be more productive at what they do. That's right, and I know Circuit City said in TFA that it was "not based on job performance", but let's look at this from the workers' perspective.

      Circuit City is a dying company. Their stock has been in decline for years, and they seem to be at a loss on how to compete properly with online retailers and even other brick & mortar retailers. Any employee of Circuit City that didn't know this has had their head stuck in the sand, so this kind of drastic measure should not be a surprise.

      Now, even though Circuit City is taking drastic measures, and have effectively shot themselves in the foot, this isn't all bad. Let's say hypothetically, that of the people fired, 20% are "valuable" to Circuit City: by valuable, I mean that the money they earn for the store outweighs the extra money they are being paid. These people are clearly very good salespeople, and will very quickly go on to find other jobs in other sales positions (perhaps not retail, maybe as direct sales vendors or something) because they can easily show a mastery of the material and methods. The other hypothetical 80%, however, were losing money for the company, and were being paid more than they were worth. They can either come back to the same company for less money (thus "correcting" the salary imbalance that existed) or they can get another lower-paying job elsewhere. Yes, it sucks when you take a cut in pay, but how can you possibly blame the company when you were being overpaid? Be worth your salary, and you will have no trouble maintaining or increasing it.

      I'm pretty sure the company looked at the sales figures of the people they were firing. If a signifiant percentage of those people were valuable to the company, they would not have made this kind of decision. All the talk about having nothing to do with job performance is likely PR fluff. No company ever tells laid off employees that they were laid off because they sucked at what they do.

      I'm not defending Circuit City's decison here; I think it's a desparate move made by desparate managers. But I don't think that it's an "evil" decision, nor was it made without considering the reprecussions.

      I'm sure the truth is, most of these salespeople were overpaid. But no one wants the truth. They just want to continue to be overpaid. Wouldn't you?
      --
      For security, the MD5 hash of this message and sig is 09f911029d74e35bd84156c5635688c0.
  47. Circuit City as Jobs program? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So Circuit City is some kind of keep-kids-from-selling-crack public-assistance program?

    I had no idea. It all makes sense now.

  48. Unions... by skintigh2 · · Score: 1

    Of course, if they were unionized there is no way this could happen, and CC would have a fraction of a less percent profit to give to execs in 8 or 9 figure bonuses and the workers would be feeding their kids instead of looking for work...

    Also, of course, I will be attacked for being anti-free-market, lazy, mobbed-up, or whatever other thought-preventing cliche can be churned up.

    1. Re:Unions... by ProteusQ · · Score: 1

      I'm center-right on most issues, including labor and free markets, but I agree with you. In this case, forming a union would be worth looking into. Management can't ethically 'cut the fat' and leave their own salaries/perks/retirement untouched. It's just wrong.

  49. Circuit City's CEO by jwbrown77 · · Score: 2, Informative

    Made $8.52M in fiscal 2006.

    Maybe it's time to find a cheaper replacement.

    --

    -----
    How can you have any pudding if you don't eat your meat?
    1. Re:Circuit City's CEO by maxume · · Score: 1

      3400*$30,000 == $102,000,000. That's not quite fair, since they are replacing them, but assume that they end up saving $5 an hour and you still end up with $34 million. Basically, if you assume that the average guy that they let go worked a 40 hour week, they are reducing the costs on 6.8 million employee hours per year, which adds up pretty quick.

      --
      Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
    2. Re:Circuit City's CEO by drsquare · · Score: 1

      Decent CEOs won't work for failing companies without being paid a lot of money. With a cheaper CEO they'd be doing even worse. Anyway he's just saved them $30M, so he's already paid back his salary and then some.

  50. This seems standard behavior for corps these days. by NeutronCowboy · · Score: 1

    Slash costs by firing the highest-paid (and generally best) people. Rehire low-paid scrubs to do the same job. Then be shocked - shocked! - when morale goes down, department performance goes down, and you can't hit your uptime/sales/response time/no screw-up quotas for the month.

    Here's a newsflash, people: saving money by firing the expensive people is a prime example of penny-wise, pound-foolish. Most departments are too dysfunctional to allow them to just pluck someone off the street and plug them into the system - they need the old hands because they make things go.

    This seems to be a disease most common among MBAs who have seen a lot of theory and not much practice, or who have never seen the inside of the department they are supposed to administrate.

    --
    Those who can, do. Those who can't, sue.
  51. Response to customer demands. by ErichTheRed · · Score: 1

    First off, what Circuit City is doing is stupid. Firing someone just because they do too well in a system you set up is wrong.

    But, when you think about it, CC is just responding to customers. In a lot of places, Best Buy has taken out a lot of smaller electronics retailers. It's not because they necessarily have the best selection or good help, but they offer cheap middle-of-the-road electronics for the masses. If you're technically savvy, you do all your research online before you go into a store and buy something. I don't think I've ever interacted with a salesperson beyond, "I want that. Is it available?"

    People have to understand the fact that customer service is dead. Nobody under the age of 50 cares about it anymore; they just want the lowest price. As the population that did care about customer service dies, there will be even less need for service-oriented salespeople. Think about it, when was the last time you paid more for a good or service just because people were nicer to you?

    1. Re:Response to customer demands. by geekoid · · Score: 1

      true, but when I walk in and here the salesperson giving completly wrong and inaccurate advise to a customer cheesy me off.

      Fry's electronics is the worst. You got people making 10 bucks an hour acting as though they are technology wizards. gah.

      Things I ahve heard:
      "CB radios can be heard around the world. Anybody in the world on channel 4 can hear annyone else on channel 4"

      "You can not zip to more then 1 floppy"

      "AMD chips are 2 times faster then Intel Chips"(heard this one last weekend)

      "No, you can't get your email or surf the web with a Mac."(also last weekend)

      "Network cables are on isle 7" (They weren't even close)

      and finally, the biggie. You won't believe this, but I got to tell this one:

      ready?

      "It is illegal to put linux on a PC."

      No shit.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    2. Re:Response to customer demands. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yesterday. And the day before. And the day before that.

  52. no shared pain, indeed by EllynGeek · · Score: 1

    Of course the CEO of Circuit City won't suffer. He's getting seven-figure compensation for driving the company into the ground. So this is really a plan in keeping with overall company strategy, which is to reward the failures.

    --

    we will end no whine before its time

  53. Do they think this news will make me shop there? by DuVader · · Score: 1

    So - maybe hospitals should adopt this strategy to keep medical costs down? Dentists? Car mechanics? This kind of behavior should be rallied against in a strong way. If the consumer continues to shop at Circuit City - and accept that a newbie who doesn't really know what he is talking about is selling you your new HDTV, then Circuit City management made a correct gamble. (And - knowing how much we Americans don't get involved in politics, I would assume that this is the way it's going to end up for Circuit City - I would bet most people just don't care - or would even know that the information they are getting is accurate or relevant to what they are asking for or needing.) If however, the retailer saw a drop in sales because their McDonald's worker turned HDTV specialist wasn't able to get people to part with a few thousand for a TV that fit their needs, then Circuit City looses. I would argue here that Circuit City gets it - they get the American public very very well. They know that in the end after a while when this story is long forgotten (what - a week maybe?) that people will go in with their wallets - buy stuff - think they got the right piece of electronics - and nobody is hurt. This is how in the end crap like this will continue to happen more and more - and joking aside - my statement about hospitals doing this might very well become a reality.

  54. Hate to say this, but this is capitalism by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It sucks, and I feel bad for these people, however, this is the consequences of a free market society. It's not all milk and honey, but frankly if not for this system, white collar nerds who can program computers like most of us wouldn't get the opportunity to make 6 figures.

    Lesson #1: Stay in school, kids.

  55. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  56. CC, BB, ect.... by drewsup · · Score: 0

    CC used to be the place I went if I needed advice when shopping for something new, BB lackies never could answer a technical question. But now, the retail service industry seems homogenized to the point where the staff is just glorified stock boys and cash register operators, what a shame. Radio shack is the same too, you used to able to find someone there with RADIO experience or component knowledge, but no more. I wish them luck in their new endevours.

  57. the workers weren't organized by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    places like circuit city are based on competition amongst the workers -
    and the american scum who go to work there care only about their paycheck
    they are too short sighted to realize they are all there for the same purpose ($, survival)
    if the workers were organized, this wouldn't have happened!

  58. Does this rule apply to managers, too? by david.emery · · Score: 1

    WIll they pay their entire management structure "market wages" and fire managers making more than the manager of McDonald's???

            dave

    1. Re:Does this rule apply to managers, too? by maxume · · Score: 1

      Market wages are whatever you can get a replacement for, not what someone else is paying(they are generally related, but they aren't the same thing).

      --
      Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
  59. Ah yes. by pclminion · · Score: 2, Funny

    Ah yes, the American Dream: to languish in pitiable work conditions hoping some rare enlightened higher-up will have mercy on you and, if not actually pay you more, at least fail to sack you.

    Wait. That's not the American Dream I know about. Oh yeah -- it's more about self-determination and a drive to succeed by the power of one's own capabilities. But hey, I can see how a person could get the two ideas confused...

    1. Re:Ah yes. by taustin · · Score: 1

      If you're trying to succeed by the power of your own capabilities, why are you working at circuit city?

  60. Get in line now, avoid the rush by Grashnak · · Score: 5, Funny

    The fired workers have a chance to apply for lower-paying positions after a 10-week wait, the company said. Wow, I'll bet there will be a lot of people taking them up on that generous offer... Oh wait, no there won't.

    Circuit City: You make too much money. You're fired.
    Dumbass Employee: What? Noooooooo! My PS3 comes in next week and I need the employee discount! I'll work for less!
    CC: Not good enough. First you must go without a paycheck for 10 weeks to prove you are worthy.
    DE: Aaaggghhhh! Okay, then what? I'll do anything.
    CC: Then you must crawl back here, and I do mean crawl, and beg for your job back at half your previous salary!
    DE: *sobbing* I'll do it!
    CC: Oh, and bring me a shrubbery.
    --
    Life needs more saving throws.
    1. Re:Get in line now, avoid the rush by TheGratefulNet · · Score: 1

      if I had points, I've mod you up just for the shrubbery line, alone!

      --

      --
      "It is now safe to switch off your computer."
  61. I do by SuperKendall · · Score: 3, Insightful

    A union just gives us the ability to say "if you fuck with one of us, you fuck with all of us". Do you have a problem with workers doing that?

    I do when you don't have a choice about joining the union or not, which is generally what happens with unions - and they turn that same attitude back on fellow workers they do not like.

    A workers union is a slippery slope to a whole other parallel layer of management above you, and that honestly does not do the company or you any good in the long run.

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
    1. Re:I do by geekoid · · Score: 1

      Slippery slope is a myth.

      Buying it to means you will never do anything.

      Unions have their place in industry, but not every union type fits into every type of business.

      Unions are just a way to unite, and use collective barganing. No more.

      Yes, I am in a Union and I am a developer. I work 40 hour weeks, get benefits and I am treated like a human being.
      Here is the great part, I am just as productive as when I was working 60+ hours. If push comes to shove, I will work more hours and get paid for it.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    2. Re:I do by tsalaroth · · Score: 1

      There's a developer's union?

      WTF? Where?

      Oh wait, you probably mean "housing" developer or something, right?

    3. Re:I do by bjourne · · Score: 1

      A union just gives us the ability to say "if you fuck with one of us, you fuck with all of us". Do you have a problem with workers doing that? I do when you don't have a choice about joining the union or not, which is generally what happens with unions - and they turn that same attitude back on fellow workers they do not like.

      Sorry, that is bull. There is no workplace neither in the US, nor in any other country where a union can force you to join. If you don't want to partake in collective bargaining, don't complain when your colleagues get a raise while you get nada.

      A workers union is a slippery slope to a whole other parallel layer of management above you, and that honestly does not do the company or you any good in the long run.

      ... And that is why wages and standards of living is higher and fewer people live below the poverty line in highly unionized countries? Hopefully soon, all you American union haters taunting France will realize, that maybe, just maybe they understand something you don't.

    4. Re:I do by R2.0 · · Score: 1

      "Sorry, that is bull. There is no workplace neither in the US, nor in any other country where a union can force you to join. If you don't want to partake in collective bargaining, don't complain when your colleagues get a raise while you get nada."

      Therby proving that you have no idea what you are talking about. In a majority of the States (26), you can most definitely be forced to join the union. *I* have been forced to join the Teamsters and the United Steel Workers for summer jobs. As in, "if you don't join, we can't employ you" (I asked). In addition, in many of the "right to work" states, even if one doesn't joing the union, one is still forced to PAY the union for their collective bargaining services.

      Open your eyes a little - collective bargaining can be fine, and Unions can organize all they want - just don't pretend it's some panacea.

      --
      "As God is my witness, I thought turkeys could fly." A. Carlson
    5. Re:I do by dcam · · Score: 1

      I do when you don't have a choice about joining the union or not, which is generally what happens with unions - and they turn that same attitude back on fellow workers they do not like.

      I agree, however having a workforce that is partially unionised can created problems. Eg the union uses its collective bargaining power to get a wage rise. Result: all workers, union or not, get a pa rise.

      --
      meh
  62. Stupid management never suffers, only employees. by Futurepower(R) · · Score: 4, Insightful

    "Not that crappy old Circuit City..."

    This is just another chapter in an old story. The top management of Circuit City doesn't know what they are doing, so the company has trouble making money, but it is only the employees who suffer.

    --
    Is U.S. government violence a good in the world, or does violence just cause more violence?

  63. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  64. But the REAL question is... by moosehooey · · Score: 1

    Will the CEO, President, and the other executive officers take a pay cut, in order to help out the company?

  65. fire the TOP 8% or bottom 8%? by 192939495969798999 · · Score: 1

    Generally, one wants to fire the BOTTOM 8%, not the top performers! I would lay off the bottom 8% and not hire anyone. If you've ever been to circuit city, there's at least 8% of the workforce there that could really just stay home, and it would honestly make shopping there easier (re: family guy parody episode).

    --
    stuff |
  66. these 3400 people that need by geekoid · · Score: 1

    to go start there own electronic store....

    With blackjack, and hookers..ahhh forget the electronic store.

    with repects to Bender.

    --
    The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
  67. I got laid off by JanCold · · Score: 1

    Well not in that company but in another one thou got one beter right after that. Anyway in here that would be higly illegal. We have actually laws that makes peoples lives much easier and protected. Unlike in US where they can do almost anything to you if they want.

    1. Re:I got laid off by maxume · · Score: 1

      Yes, the US is a tragedy of wealth and opportunity.

      --
      Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
  68. new tricks for old dogs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    . . . it had fired 3,400 of its highest-paid sales staff [CC] [MD] [GC] -- 8% of its employees -- and will replace them with lower-paid workers.

    It's a good thing that higher pay doesn't correlate to higher age. Otherwise, some one might file a class action lawsuit for age discrimination.

  69. Thats what I want to hear (Phil Ochs) by gorehog · · Score: 1

    So you tell me that your last good dollar is gone
    and you say that your pockets are bare.
    And you tell me that your clothes are tattered and torn
    and nobody seems to care.

    Now don't tell me your troubles,
    no I don't have the time to spare.
    But if you want to get together and fight
    good buddy that's what I want to hear.

    And you tell me that your job was taken away
    by a big ol' greasy machine.
    And you tell me that you don't collect no more pay
    and your belly is growing lean.

    Now if I had the jobs to give
    you know I'd give them all away.
    But don't waste your breath calling out my name
    if you don't have nothing to say.

    And you tell me that you don't have nothing to do
    and you keep on wasting your time.
    And you say when you want to get your family some food
    you gotta stand in a relief line.

    Now it's a sin and a bloody shame
    'bout the way they're pushing you 'round.
    But when you decide not to take no more
    you know I'll put my money down.

    'Cause I've seen your kind many times before
    And I'll see 'em many times again.
    Oh but every bad thing that's happened to you
    has happened to better men.

    So don't explain that you've lost your way
    that you've got no place to go.
    You've got a hand and a voice and you're not alone
    Brother that's all you need to know.

    And if you're still wondering what I'm trying to say
    let me tell you what it's all about.
    Now nobody listens to a single man
    when he's walkin' 'round down and out.

    So if you're looking for an answer
    he's standing there by your side.
    And you'll never really know how far you'll go
    'til you join together and try.

  70. This isn't the first time they've done this. by Associate · · Score: 1

    They did this about six years ago. It didn't kill them then. But with all the contributing factors in their downward spiral, it probably wasn't any extra load on that camel. This time though... I give them 12 more months before they start closing more stores.

    --
    Someone hates these cans.
  71. thats just business! by freg · · Score: 2, Insightful
    Am I the only person who thinks this action isn't all that horrendous? The executives that make these hard decisions are accountable to their stockholders. If the executives don't make hard decisions to turn problems around fast, they get canned themselves. If stockholders don't get results, they lose money, but that's there right, because they're in control, they put up the money and took the risk to begin with.

    If you don't own your own business you are at the mercy of your employer.

    I'm a freelance programmer but also work a 40 hour job that could easily kick me out on the street with little or no reasoning (tho I do trust they won't because of their friendly track record). I might would disagree with their decision to can me, but I wouldn't even go as far as to think it immoral or unkind, unless it really were.. ie. based on race or age. I don't think this case with CC is either one of these. That said, I would like to see Circuit City get a brain and try to revamp their sales approach and store layouts so they could actually compete with best buy. Bad PR decisions like this don't always sort out the underlying issues and can make turning around even harder in the long run.

    1. Re:thats just business! by fred+fleenblat · · Score: 1

      Or one could take it as an indication that circuit city's management allowed the situation to go on for so long that it became a cost crisis and PR nightmare.

      Frankly, I think their management is as overpaid and under-performing as they accuse their sales staff of being. The layoffs didn't go far enough, and they started at the wrong end.

    2. Re:thats just business! by rollingcalf · · Score: 1

      "Am I the only person who thinks this action isn't all that horrendous? The executives that make these hard decisions are accountable to their stockholders."

      If I was a CC shareholder, I'd be pissed. This action shows that management screwed up, either because:

      (1) the higher pay of the terminated employees was in line with performance, and they just cut the best-performing employees at that level while giving the remaining employees a deterrent to performing well
      or
      (2) there generally was no difference in performance between the highest and lowest paid, which means for years you were overpaying several of them for no good reason.

      Either way, it means management is incompetent, and as a shareholder I'd start with getting rid of the highest paid employee -- the CEO.

      --
      ---------
      There is inferior bacteria on the interior of your posterior.
  72. That's Slimy... by Greyfox · · Score: 1
    I'd say I won't shop there again but I can't honestly say that I've ever bought anything from Circuit City in the first place.

    If that tends to be their policy, I'd be willing to be the CEO of the company for a quarter to half of what their current guy makes...

    --

    I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?

  73. Good luck with that strategy by dbmasters · · Score: 1

    It hasn't panned out too well for Northwest Airlines yet...I am guessing it won't work much better for CC...at least customers lives aren't at risk with CC though...

    --
    dB Masters
  74. Annualized Salaries by Glacial+Wanderer · · Score: 1

    The moves are expected to reduce Circuit City's expenses by $110 million next year and $140 million in 2009.

    Circuit City pays about $10 to $11 an hour on average, Rick Weinhart, an analyst with BMO Capital Markets in New York, told Bloomberg News.
    So they will be replacing 3400 jobs averaging $62K with jobs averaging $21K.

    I'm holding back my rant on livable wages and what I think about moves like this by corporations.
  75. *You* have got to be kidding me. by C10H14N2 · · Score: 1

    No, what's scary is not the notion that the red shirts were referred to as "best in their field" but that people can with a straight face say they think $11/hour is highly paid. If they reduced all those people to minimum-wage, they'd only save $40M. That works out to a per-store savings of a whopping $167/day. How much do you think the profit margin is on a $7500 TV? These "overpaid" (now non-commissioned) salespeople could make up that "savings" in revenue by selling a single damned stereo per day

  76. Glad I Work In IT by 63N1U5 · · Score: 1

    I should never have to worry about something like that. Oh wait......

    --
    There are alot of people who would like to be me. I just haven't met them yet.
  77. they should be so lucky... by CaptainNerdCave · · Score: 1
    how often does any company find someone that outperforms the records for several months in a row? breaking records for one day is one thing, but to consistently be the best is another matter altogether.

    i had a similar experience working for a telephone based fundraising business (not incredibly similar), where i was payed partially on commission for raising money for republican interest groups and the nra. it was a great job... just not something that i would want to do for xx hours per week. the requirement for this position is 20hrs/wk, which was more than i could spare. my first day, i managed 25% of the income for the campaign i worked. ultimately, the hour requirements weren't my cup of coffee, so i left.

    maybe it's just me, but wouldn't it make sense to bend over backwards to [i]keep[/i] your best staff? why not dispose of some of the obscenely overpaid suits?

    1. Re:they should be so lucky... by dr_dank · · Score: 1

      but wouldn't it make sense to bend over backwards to [i]keep[/i] your best staff? why not dispose of some of the obscenely overpaid suits?

      The obscenely overpaid suits are the ones that call the shots. None of them are willing to can themselves for the greater good. You might as well expect a cop to write himself a speeding ticket.

      --
      Where does the school board find them and why do they keep sending them to ME?
  78. What's the Problem? by BigFoot48 · · Score: 1

    There are plenty of jobs at CompUSA! They should just move on over to th... oh, wait.

  79. And people wonder... by danpsmith · · Score: 2, Insightful

    ...why you can't get any help that's of any use from retail clerks. The corporate model isn't geared toward customer service and nobody seems to be understanding this. I don't know what the alternative is, but I'll tell you when someone has earned multiple raises to become the highest paid in a store, most of the time (if not always), especially in a place like Circuit City, it's because they are good at what they do. They are probably the knowledgeable staff that actually help you with issues versus the weekend/school workers that are just there to collect enough to pay for the keg of beer. Nowadays you have to spend all day researching most purchases just to insure you aren't getting screwed because the staff at the store know nothing, the people that stock the shelves know nothing and sometimes even the people at the electronics companies know nothing about what they are making or selling. You get what you pay for I suppose.

    This country is out of production and manufacturing and is now relying upon sales, research and services for job growth. The simple fact of the matter is that the children of the largest section of the population that lied on factory jobs is waking up to find themselves forced into retail after high school. Certainly there are colleges, education, etc but like it or not some people don't always have these options. When you are forced to get a job out of high school nowadays it's usually at a circuit city or a walmart. Maybe this is why I agree with the Green Party in saying that they should make $10 an hour minimum wage. The simple fact is that it would force companies to pay a decent living wage for these workers they take for granted, play around with, throw everything on top of and then throw out the door once they start advancing their supposed "career." I for one will never shop at Circuit City again.

    --
    Judges and senates have been bought for gold; Esteem and love were never to be sold.
  80. What, Nobody Has Tagged This "haha" Yet? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Ha ha!

  81. Carl Sandburg on jobs and property by dpbsmith · · Score: 1

    Stocks are property, yes.

    Bonds are property, yes.

    Machines, land, buildings are property, yes.

    A job is property,

    no, nix, nah, nah.

    --Carl Sandburg, "The People, Yes"

  82. Re:Stupid management never suffers, only employees by devilspgd · · Score: 2, Interesting

    The top management of Circuit City doesn't know what they are doing, so the company has trouble making money, but it is only the employees who suffer.

    The modern version of the good 'ol fashioned American Dream...
    --
    Give a man a fish, he'll eat for a day, but teach a man to phish...
  83. Democracy? by Infonaut · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "In the 1980s capitalism triumphed over communism. In the 1990s it triumphed over democracy."

    What do employee/employer relationships at Best Buy have to do with democracy? Nobody has subverted representative government here. One particular corporate entity has made a business decision to cut labor costs by getting rid of some of its more highly-paid employees. There's no violation of contract, no usurpation of rights. There is no right to employment in the United States, and never has been.

    --
    Read the EFF's Fair Use FAQ
    1. Re:Democracy? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      One particular corporate entity has made a business decision to cut labor costs by getting rid of some of its more highly-paid employees. There's no violation of contract, no usurpation of rights. There is no right to employment in the United States, and never has been.

      Do you know what usually gets me about hearing stuff like this? Let's say that they save $30 million from doing this. My gut tells me that $29 million of that is going to go to the CEO and bonuses to some of his higher minions.

    2. Re:Democracy? by utopianfiat · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I assume you're somewhat into Computer Science, can you tell me why the UpHeap algorithm is average constant complexity?
      Because generally 50% of the smaller nodes are on the bottom of the tree.
      How many sales associates work under each manager? How many managers work under each store manager? How many store managers work under the regional coordinator? They're pruning the bottom of the tree- rather than take a chunk out of the executive money-sink, they'd kill off FIVE THOUSAND TWO HUNDRED EMPLOYEES. They're not offering them a PAY CUT even! They're not changing to a commission system to try to increase competition! They are DOWNSIZING FIVE THOUSAND EMPLOYEES.
      The fact of the matter is, taking care of workers is better for the economy because workers CONSUME. Need I remind you that the American economy is held up chiefly by international corporations and massive consumption? In terms of economic health, executive salary fluctuation is nothing, because all executive salaries go to is corporate investment. To actually pull a return on that investment, it would be wiser to put money into the hands of the people who can drive your profits upwards...

      --
      +5, Truth
    3. Re:Democracy? by theshowmecanuck · · Score: 3, Insightful

      But there is a right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. The last two are pretty hard when you get fired because some CEO wants to make another $10,000,000 bonus. Liberty: you are only truly free in a capitalist society if you have money. Tough without a job. Happiness: money doesn't buy happiness, but living in a box because you have no job actively contributes to unhappiness.

      --
      -- I ignore anonymous replies to my comments and postings.
    4. Re:Democracy? by K'Lyre · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Pursuit of Happiness. Not the Receipt of Happiness. Getting fired does not impinge on your so-called "right" to the "pursuit of happiness" (which is a line from the Declaration of Independence, not the Constitution, and therefore is not binding in any way). It means you're free to pursue your happiness elsewhere.

    5. Re:Democracy? by cyber-vandal · · Score: 3, Funny

      But luckily in Libertarianworld you can just start a business and live happily ever after.

    6. Re:Democracy? by mdozturk · · Score: 1
      I don't think any company wants to downsize. They would rather continuously grow. However a point comes where the company says to its employee(s): "look I can't use you efficiently, I'm paying you and getting enough out of it. You should work somewhere else, where you earn what you make".

      Or you can think of it this way: they shouldn't of hired you in the first place.

    7. Re:Democracy? by inviolet · · Score: 1

      They're not offering them a PAY CUT even!

      Pay cuts don't work. They trim 20% of the cost but crash morale. This is the same reason why they imposed a 10-week waiting period. (And they well know that most of the victims will have found new work during that time.)

      How many sales associates work under each manager? How many managers work under each store manager? How many store managers work under the regional coordinator? They're pruning the bottom of the tree- rather than take a chunk out of the executive money-sink, they'd kill off FIVE THOUSAND TWO HUNDRED EMPLOYEES.

      Your approach would work if the problem was a top-heavy organization. We don't know that this is the case at Circuit City.

      Furthermore, they aren't downsizing at all. From TFA I infer they intend to replace the casualties with new hires.

      Are you willing to believe that perhaps they really are just trying to reduce the salaries of sales staff? And why shouldn't they, considering that it's a low-skill low-responsibility job?

      --
      FATMOUSE + YOU = FATMOUSE
    8. Re:Democracy? by Lord_Ultimate · · Score: 1

      From the article:

      Circuit City CEO Schoonover received $1.4 million in salary and bonuses in fiscal 2006, plus 340,000 stock option shares and $96,929 in other compensation mostly related to use of a company jet, according to a filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission.

      Also:

      "This is no reflection on job performance,"

      Maybe it should be. Only in America can stupid/lazy employees get rewarded. At my last job, 2 of the 3 programmers left because they hired a moron to be the new IT director. The guy who remained was too lazy to look for a new job and was the worst of the three of us, but he got a raise anyway just so they didn't lose him as well.

      --
      -- I might be stupid, but you have to be good at something.
    9. Re:Democracy? by dgatwood · · Score: 1

      Furthermore, they aren't downsizing at all. From TFA I infer they intend to replace the casualties with new hires.

      Yup. And I'm just waiting for the next story. The title will be something like "Laid Off Circuit City Employees Sue for Age Discrimination." That's what they're doing here. They're laying off the people who have been there the longest and are at the highest pay grade. That would be... yup, you guessed it... the oldest workers. I would not at all be surprised if in some boardroom, somebody calculated that the older workers were costing more in terms of health insurance costs and decided to come up with this clever workaround to give them the axe without it being too obvious. Sadly, this happens all too often in the business world, and most of the time, they get away with it... but they shouldn't.

      In a proper business, layoffs should approximate last-in-first-out (at least within a given class of workers), with possible exceptions made for people in business-critical positions. Anything else is likely to cause harm to the business in the long run.

      --

      Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.

    10. Re:Democracy? by wsherman · · Score: 3, Insightful

      What do employee/employer relationships at Best Buy have to do with democracy? Nobody has subverted representative government here.

      People mean a lot of different things when they talk about "democracy".

      What I tend to think about is the early history of the USA. Basically, you had bunch of monarchies in Europe with the attitude that "what's good for the king is good for the country". Then, some rather enlightened people in what was to become the USA looked at the situation and concluded that if you let the leaders act in their own best interest then they take just about everything for themselves and leave everyone else with very little.

      The way I see it, the key realizatoin was that, unless leaders are subjected to oversight and compelled to act in the best interest of everyone, leaders will instead act in their own best interest to the detriment of everyone else. At the time, these ideas were applied to the leaders of governments.

      While there are differences between governments and corporations, there are also fundamental similarities. In theory, one can avoid being subjected to either governments or corporations (e.g. buy a house boat and live out on the ocean). In practice, for a normal life, one must be subject to both governments and corporations. While it is the governments that most directly use force (e.g. polie and military), in practice the governments use their force on behalf of the corporations so there is little practical difference.

    11. Re:Democracy? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I see that another dumbed-down product of government schools and media has weighed in with the old Bucky Fuller fallacy. "All executive salaries go to is corporate investment"? That's called capital. You must invest capital to design and create products, to design and create factories that produce products, to design and create advertising that informs people about products, to pay people and buy equipment to produce, store, distribute, and sell products to buyers, etc., etc. No capital, no product; no product, no capital.

      And there are still no guarantees: if your product sucks, or someone makes a better product for less, or your government decides to regulate you into oblivion...you invest capital and it goes bye-bye. Circuit City salespeople don't have to buy at Circuit City; Circuit City executives don't have to buy Circuit City stock. Your mathematically elegant game theories are based upon one demonstrably false assumption: that you control all the variables and essentially, that people can't choose. We can. We do. Nyah nyah!

    12. Re:Democracy? by crawling_chaos · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Yeah. That's why the small government heaven of Somalia is paradise on Earth. I wish more of the Randroids would move there.

      --
      You can only drink 30 or 40 glasses of beer a day, no matter how rich you are.
      -- Colonel Adolphus Busch
    13. Re:Democracy? by Johnny5000 · · Score: 1

      Are you willing to believe that perhaps they really are just trying to reduce the salaries of sales staff? And why shouldn't they, considering that it's a low-skill low-responsibility job?

      Sure, that is probably what they're trying to do, and they're free to run their business any way they want.

      I don't generally shop at Circuit City, but from what I hear a major complaint that many people have is that most of the sales staff have no idea what they hell they're talking about. If you're trying to sell electronic equipment, it helps to know what it is that you're selling.

      Firing the highest paid (and I think it's probably safe to assume that the highest paid sales staff are either the most knowledgeable and/or been working at the store the longest) and replacing them with some minimum-wage 16-year-old kids isn't exactly going to set their sales on fire.

      --
      The libertarian solution to the failures of capitalism is to apply more capitalism til the failures are fixed.
    14. Re:Democracy? by atomicdoggy · · Score: 1

      Note that is says pursuit of happiness, not happiness itself. No one owes you jack, go get it yourself.

    15. Re:Democracy? by falconwolf · · Score: 2, Informative

      What I tend to think about is the early history of the USA. Basically, you had bunch of monarchies in Europe with the attitude that "what's good for the king is good for the country". Then, some rather enlightened people in what was to become the USA looked at the situation and concluded that if you let the leaders act in their own best interest then they take just about everything for themselves and leave everyone else with very little.

      Actually it wasn't in the US that these enlightened people came from. "As a movement", The Age of Enlightment "occurred solely in Germany, France, Britain, and Spain, but its influence spread beyond". From there it influenced the USA's Founding Fathers. The founding father of capitalism Thomas Paine, who served under Washington, was a big advocate, having written several tracts supporting democracy during the Revolution. He was the one who wrote "These are the times that try men's souls." And the 18th century's Age of Enlightenment was preceded by the 17th century's Age of Reason which also took place in Europe.

      The way I see it, the key realizatoin was that, unless leaders are subjected to oversight and compelled to act in the best interest of everyone, leaders will instead act in their own best interest to the detriment of everyone else. At the time, these ideas were applied to the leaders of governments.

      Unfortunately these ideas are no longer applied, to politicians or to others.

      Falcon
    16. Re:Democracy? by theshowmecanuck · · Score: 1

      They did go for it themselves. No-one said that Circuit City had to pay those people what they did in the first place. Not that working at Circuit city can be classified as happiness either.

      --
      -- I ignore anonymous replies to my comments and postings.
    17. Re:Democracy? by MBGMorden · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Money only has ANYTHING to do with happiness (well maybe life too, but welfare programs will keep most people from flat out starving to death). You can be as poor as you want and you're still free, unless somehow our vision of "free" has been warped into having HDTV's and iPods.

      As to happiness, all that you have the right to is the PURSUIT of it. Doesn't mean you're ever going to obtain it. These guys were pursuing happiness and their horse just broke it's leg. They better shoot the damn thing and go get another job/horse or they can be content to sit there crying while that happiness gallops into the sunset.

      --
      "People who think they know everything are very annoying to those of us who do."-Mark Twain
    18. Re:Democracy? by Hognoxious · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Basically, you had bunch of monarchies in Europe with the attitude that "what's good for the king is good for the country". Then, some rather enlightened people in what was to become the USA looked at the situation and concluded that if you let the leaders act in their own best interest then they take just about everything for themselves and leave everyone else with very little.
      How ironic that the country ruled by the second King George in close sucession is West of the Atlantic this time. Seriously, the USA is turning into a bad version of Olde Englande and nobody's noticing. The American dream is becoming just that - a dream. Best way to end up rich? Be born that way.
      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    19. Re:Democracy? by feepness · · Score: 1



      In order for workers to CONSUME there must be things for them to CONSUME. So workers must also PRODUCE. CC made a choice that these workers were not PRODUCING as much as they were CONSUMING and so laid them off.

      Whether this is good business sense is debatable. Whether it is ethical is not.

    20. Re:Democracy? by Maxo-Texas · · Score: 0, Redundant

      With the addition of property taxes and reservation of medical insurance at reasonable rates for corporations- we are basically all slaves.

      America as a "free" country is gone.

      We need to vote someone into office that will at least put in basic medical care as a national plan (many examples of this being less % of GDP around the world). Sure- you get cancer, you are screwed. But EVERY american should be able to get a baby delivered, a broken bone set, and drugs that are out of patent (I mean come on- BP bills cost about $1 if you have insurance and $5.50 if you do not.)

      Then we need to adjust these property tax rates so the average person isn't hit significantly by them. these days, I'm paying $350 a month "rent" to the government for the house I'm supposed to own.

      --
      She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
    21. Re:Democracy? by Maxo-Texas · · Score: 1

      I was the 2 out of 3 for 20 years.

      Lately, I'm starting to think being that 3rd guy is a better plan.

      With SOX, they can't tell the difference between a lazy programmer and a good programmer.

      --
      She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
    22. Re:Democracy? by theshowmecanuck · · Score: 1

      You can be as poor as you want and you're still free, unless somehow our vision of "free" has been warped into having HDTV's and iPods.

      I guess on this side of the world the old saw can be changed then to 'some people are more free than others'. Obviously you've never had it tough in your life before. Good for you. And I don't mean you couldn't afford that game console you wanted.

      I don't like welfare abuse either. I can tell you I was on welfare once for 6 weeks when some bad things happened. Yes I got a job, went back to school, and am doing well now. But I did learn in the only real way that is possible that money has a bigger role in society than providing food and shelter. You can conjecture academically, and be high and mighty all you want, it doesn't change what I learned.

      These guys were pursuing happiness and their horse just broke it's leg. They better shoot the damn thing and go get another job/horse

      That is what circuit city is doing. As I said earlier, no-one told them how much to pay those employees. But now, to use your analogy, they figure they are hobbled by an earlier agreement they made and want to break, so they are going to shoot the horse they are riding since they have the freedom to do so with no chance of any repercussions. It's the golden rule: whoever has the gold, rules. So are the "rulees" more or less free than the rulers?

      --
      -- I ignore anonymous replies to my comments and postings.
    23. Re:Democracy? by Hijacked+Public · · Score: 1

      most of the sales staff have no idea what they hell they're talking about


      This is true everywhere apart from small special purpose shops. The problem is the people who really know their stuff usually won't work for the kinds of wages the big box stores have to pay if they want to compete on price. If you shop at Circuit City or Wal-Mart or the like you are essentially trading lower prices for service.

      Some companies prefer to side with knowledgeable sales people. Some don't. Given the relative success of Home-Depot compared with my brother's shop, where he sells Stihl, it appears that the masses are happy to be mumbled at by imbeciles if it means they can save $8 on their weed trimmer.

      I was speaking with a marketing guy from Canon USA's camera unit the other day and they have big plans for selling consumer level digital SLRs in the big box electronic stores. Previously they didn't push them too hard because the feeling was that SLRs need to be 'sold' while Point & Shoots 'sell themselves'. Now they think that consumers are becoming educated enough before they ever get to the store that the selling is no longer needed, they can just put the things in flashy boxes and people will snatch them up.

      --
      "Sacrifice for the good of The State" - The State
    24. Re:Democracy? by shaneFalco · · Score: 1

      Those rights you listed only apply to the government- ie the government can not deprive you of life, liberty, or property without due process of law. (See 5th Amendment for the federal government or the 14th for the states). Circuit City's actions- under the present case law, does not represent such a violation- although I join you in asserting it should be.

    25. Re:Democracy? by bnenning · · Score: 1

      The American dream is becoming just that - a dream. Best way to end up rich? Be born that way.

      Most Americans are quite wealthy compared to the average American 50 years ago.

      --
      How to solve most of our problems: 1.Lots of nuclear plants. 2.Cure aging.
    26. Re:Democracy? by wellingj · · Score: 1

      Best way to end up rich? Be born that way.
      Best is a realative term. I think the Best way to become rich is to work hard.
      Maybe its becuase of the "I want to be rich, gimmie!" mentality that the original
      alure of the 'American Dream' has been lost.

      The 'American Dream' to me is to work hard and be justly rewarded by it, whether that be money or personal enjoyment of the work.
    27. Re:Democracy? by NeMon'ess · · Score: 1

      The problem with sociopathic corporations is they don't care about the workers. They'd rather pay nothing, or next to it, so the company makes more money for shareholders.

      There ARE businesses and some corporations that really do care about the well-being of employees as people, friends, family. There just aren't enough of them.

    28. Re:Democracy? by superdude72 · · Score: 2, Informative

      George III wasn't an absolute monarch. England had the Magna Carta, a Parliament that wasn't a rubber stamp, and a well developed legal system well before the American colonies existed. When the American colonists rebelled, they were demanding the rights they felt they were entitled to as Englishmen, having lived under representative governments their entire lives.

      Checks on royal authority and the existence of a broad middle class helped the British monarchs keep their heads while absolute monarchs on the continent were literally losing theirs.

    29. Re:Democracy? by DerekLyons · · Score: 1

      The American dream is becoming just that - a dream. Best way to end up rich? Be born that way.

      ROTFLMAO. Ask the dot-com millionaires (few born that way) just how remote the American Dream is. Some of 'em hit it big because they were in the right place at the right time - but more than a few because they had an idea and worked their asses off to make it happen.
       
      The American Dream has never been easy - and the road is littered with potholes and landmines. But the road is there, and can be followed to it's end if you guts and will and just a wee smidgen of luck. That's pretty much always been true.
    30. Re:Democracy? by SQL_SAM · · Score: 1
      "They're pruning the bottom of the tree- rather than take a chunk out of the executive money-sink"

      I dont disagree with your statement here, most company's that are in financial problems often do this, and I still dont know why. As being in the workforce for a long time I have come to the conclusion that most management positions are a waste of money anyway, as most of the managers I've worked with have NO CLUE what is going on, what I do, or how I do it, but by god they somehow know how long it can take and give me deadlines. I've often told my co-workers any idiot can stand there and give me a deadlines errrrr.

      "taking care of workers is better for the economy because workers CONSUME. Need I remind you that the American economy is held up chiefly by international corporations and massive consumption?

      I have to disagree with your statement here however. this sounds more on the socialist side to me. From what I have read the American economy is held up by small independent business btw, not international corps (but I'm willing to view other data on this as I will always listen to both sides - but I do tend to believe it's the small business's at this point). Also if I create my own business (Hopefully someday) I'm not creating my business to "take care of workers" I'm creating the business to MAKE ME MONEY period end of story. If my business makes me buku rich I could see compensating the workers/employees that may have helped my business, that's just being good natured. But, Can you tell me of one business that was created stictly to benefit the workers and not the owners of that said business? I would tend to think that you can't name to many, because I would imagine they're no longer in business (but I wish they would be my competition - understand?).

      --
      There are 10 types of people in the world: Those that know Binary and those who don't.
    31. Re:Democracy? by mdozturk · · Score: 1

      Laid Off Circuit City Employees Sue for Age Discrimination.

      Good point. Especially if they can prove that the new employees made almost the same amount.

    32. Re:Democracy? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Nobody has subverted representative government here."

      True, but government is involved, when tax dollars go to pay for the welfare checks of those fired from Circuit City.

      Or have you already forgotten when Congress had to bail out the airlines years ago, because it was cheaper to buy off a few lackluster airlines, than have to bail out the backed pensions of the would-be fired workers? Make no mistake here, the government IS involved.

      "There's no violation of contract, no usurpation of rights. There is no right to employment in the United States, and never has been."

      True again on the legal aspects, but apparently unlike some human beings who have compassion and altruism towards their fellow human beings, you missed out on those genes.

      Circuit City may have the ability and legal right to do this, but that doesn't mean they suck and what they are doing, much less how they are doing it, doesn't suck.

    33. Re:Democracy? by lrichardson · · Score: 1
      Rights are pretty much defined by society. No more, no less. There are no absolute 'Rights'. And let's not forget every 'right' also has a matching 'responsibility'.

      That said, US law does support wrongful termination, in many states. Which, strangely enough, covers people quitting when their work is substantially changed ... i.e. a $50K programmer gets transferred to a $11K washroom scrubber. Or telling someone that their salary has just been cut in half.

      The legal fiction of firing, and then rehiring for the same position, at a lower wage, has been stomped on by the courts.

      Although - and this is where things get interesting - I'm wondering if 10 weeks is long enough to get around the courts' interpretation of the prior precedent. That's slightly over two months, which far exceeds the previous cases.

      The reason the courts originally jumped in was because this was used as a union busting tactic. A company's workforce goes union, the company lays them all off ... changes hands on paper ... and then offers to rehire previous employees (albeit with different titles and lower wages). Needless to say, the (US) courts take a very dim view of anyone trying legal trickery (that is, after all, reserved for themselves in their decisions).

      But man, Circuit City? The company that even beats cable companies at the BBB for number of complaints? Buying there is idiotic enough (Go NewEgg!), working there about the same.

    34. Re:Democracy? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Got something against black people, honkey?

    35. Re:Democracy? by Eli+Gottlieb · · Score: 1

      I see that another dumbed-down product of government schools and media has weighed in with the old Bucky Fuller fallacy. "All executive salaries go to is corporate investment"? That's called capital. You must invest capital to design and create products, to design and create factories that produce products, to design and create advertising that informs people about products, to pay people and buy equipment to produce, store, distribute, and sell products to buyers, etc., etc. No capital, no product; no product, no capital. It's not absolute either way, but his point stands. Spending X dollars in anything also involves paying a fixed overhead of Y and a percentage overhead (such as taxes) of Z.

      Now the issue of capital is that it "trickles down": it gets distributed in a tree from a root node to leaf nodes. Every time a node passes capital down to a leaf, it pays Y and Z again. So capital that travels through N leaves before it consumes a tangible product or service eventually gets reduced down to X(1 - N/Z)^NZ - NY. Note that "negative compound interest".

      But money payed out in wages only travels through two levels: once to the worker and then once to each producer whose product or service the worker consumes. For X dollars of wages going to the worker we get X(1 - Z) - Y. To then distribute that through N consumptions gives (1 - Z)(X(1 - Z) - Y) - NY. Look Ma, no exponents! Now of course, overhead on wages and consumption is different, so we really get (1 - Z2)(x(1 - Z1) - Y2) - NY2 for N consumptions made using a before-overhead wage of X.

      Of course, these treatments are informal and probably not professional economics work, but you get the point. An executive's money pays more investment banker's commissions (and stock-trading and bank fees), while a worker's money ends up in tangible consumptions sooner.
    36. Re:Democracy? by Eli+Gottlieb · · Score: 1

      But, Can you tell me of one business that was created stictly to benefit the workers and not the owners of that said business? The Mondragon worker cooperatives, in which your two sets of people are identical?
    37. Re:Democracy? by that+this+is+not+und · · Score: 1

      Speaking as a 2+ year employee at an old rust-belt company where the average age of the employees is _still_ +55 years, and that after a number of 'cut the dead wood' layoffs, I consider it 'caring about the well-being of the employees' when a company sloughs off a layer of the corpulent 'old skool' desk jockeys. I mean, in some areas of the company, there are people who have been entry level technicians for 25+ years. They spend half the day talking about sports! The layers of patronage and tolerance of sloth need to be cut, to save the company for those of us who want to 'strive and succeed' not just 'slide along 30 years for a pension.'

    38. Re:Democracy? by that+this+is+not+und · · Score: 1

      In a proper business, layoffs should approximate last-in-first-out

      Why?

      What causes harm to the business in the long run is when the dead wood piles up and fungus grows on it.

      That's my opinion. Just like you have your opinion. The truth lies somewhere in between. Which I acknowledge. I hope you will too.

    39. Re:Democracy? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Too bad that currently it's usually necessary for both husband and wife to work in order to afford this so-called "wealth". Too bad also the idea of being able to work at a company for 20+ years and retire is almost extinct. They had to cut those benefits long ago because it's a "cut-throat" economy. These guys are just taking that idea one step further.

    40. Re:Democracy? by that+this+is+not+und · · Score: 1

      they figure they are hobbled by an earlier agreement they made and want to break,

      What 'agreement' are they breaking? At my last annual review, I got a raise, but no promise of a perpetual income was promised.

    41. Re:Democracy? by that+this+is+not+und · · Score: 1

      An alternative solution is to break up the 'big business'/insurance company collusion. Eliminate ALL tax deductions for employer-provided health plans. Toss it ALL out into the open market and let people choose and purchase the health coverage they want, not the coverage their HR goon chooses for them.

      This would freshen the marketplace, wake people up to the reality that Health Care is a cost that they should bear, not an entitlement they can expect, and also reduce the power of corporate bureaucrats in HR over the employees at companies.

      I can never understand why people want to jump out of the frying pan of corporate-bureaucrat-driven health care to government-bureaucrat-driven health care. Are you really just longing for a bigger more powerful Boss?

    42. Re:Democracy? by that+this+is+not+und · · Score: 1

      Seconded. My maternal grandparents didn't have running water and a toilet until 1960. They didn't live in a poor blighted area of the country. They lived in a typical semi-rural setting. Most families 50 years ago had at most one black-and-white television set in the living room, and a phonograph.

      We're all richer than any 'people' have been before in America. Also, we're spoiled and brattish about it.

    43. Re:Democracy? by Fred_A · · Score: 1

      The problem with sociopathic corporations is they don't care about the workers.
      Of course they do, employees are full of valuable organs that have fabulous resale value. Just wait until they get rid of outdated workplace safety legislation and you'll see downsizing will be a thing of the past !
      --

      May contain traces of nut.
      Made from the freshest electrons.
    44. Re:Democracy? by violent.ed · · Score: 2, Interesting

      first, a disclaimer: i work at my local circuit city, and yes i do actually know a few things so dont throw me in the bin with that nimrod that cant remember when the next 2pac album is supposed to come out or with the blond chick trying to sell you $50 monster cables for your $79 dvd player just becuase they told her to.

      the fact of the matter is this: Each position in the company (at least salesstaff related position) has a begining hourly rate and a "cap" on how much you can get paid. what corporate did is they scoured teh databases & found everyone that was making $0.51 OVER the hourly wage cap, and fired them. plain and simple,

      they chalk it up to saving the company money, this year they claim it will save them $20 million, next year it will be around $30 million. 4 or so years ago they stopped commision sales. why? the top sellers were making more money than the manager & the managers bitched (while depositing their bonus check for making budget, that only managers get, not sales staff.)

      One thing that pisses me off is that we lost 5 guys in our store that is already short staffed, one of whom was John J. someone who has worked at the store for over 6 years in the TV department, and Tim V. who was a a warehouse guy for over 6.

      John consistantly made budget, getting the attachments & extended service plans almost all the time (dude, the service plan is worth it on a projection tv, those bulbs COST!)

      it just pisses me off to so many degrees you cant tell. the REASON John was making over 51Cents over the wage cap for his sales position is BECAUSE he was there when they stopped paying commision, and he was such a good saleman that they ended up matching his average bi-weekly commisions to his new only-hourly check, not to mention the 6-month performance reviews in which you can get up to a $0.50 raise (most get like a quarter or 15 cent.)

      what they shoulda done is fire the fucking managers that gave them the raises that broke the hourly wage cap in the first place, since they are complaining about them getting paid to much to be the most experienced sales people there.

      so i say fuck ccity as a company because they are shady when it comes to the employees, they want to fire the best people they have just because they make too much? then why the FUCK did you give them the raise in the first palce?!?! the idea is to clear out the highest paid, replace them with ignorant people that the rest of the already short handed sales staff have to train, not to mention all the up-and-coming customer service issues due to newbies promising one thing and only being able to actually do half of it.

      i would fucking quit right now if i diddnt have a newborn & the fact that im leaving for the navy in a couple months anyways.

      P.S. if any of you higher ups read this & can figure out who i am: go ahead, fire me, i'll burn the damn building down just for principal. lets see how much money that'll save ya when $1mil+ of merch goes up in flames... im not called violent.ed for nuffin y'know

      --
      - You're not paranoid, they really are after you.
    45. Re:Democracy? by otopico · · Score: 1

      Your approach would work if the problem was a top-heavy organization. We don't know that this is the case at Circuit City.

      Furthermore, they aren't downsizing at all. From TFA I infer they intend to replace the casualties with new hires.

      Are you willing to believe that perhaps they really are just trying to reduce the salaries of sales staff? And why shouldn't they, considering that it's a low-skill low-responsibility job? "Low skill"?

      Maybe, but how do they ignore the fact that a person with experience is generally going to do a better job than the new hires?

      What kind of loss in sales will CC see when the cheaper new hires fail to answer questions not outlined on the product information sheet? What happens when customers leave without buying anything because they couldn't get their questions answered?

      Saving money isn't a bad thing, but cutting out people with the skills to make you money is.

      CC is being stupid here. Unless of course you really believe a good sales person is worthless.
    46. Re:Democracy? by Asic+Eng · · Score: 1
      But man, Circuit City? The company that even beats cable companies at the BBB for number of complaints? Buying there is idiotic enough (Go NewEgg!), working there about the same.

      I don't know you, but I suspect we are probably both in the same position of having a good education and valuable skills. Not everybody is in that nice position and can really chose where they work. Not everybody even has the capability to gain those skills, quite apart from having the opportunity. For some people working at Circuit City probably sounds like a dream compared with being a Walmart greeter. I don't think it's fair to look down on people just for taking that job.

      About buying there I tend to agree with you, though...

    47. Re:Democracy? by Moridineas · · Score: 1

      Hmm.. I would have thought that layoffs sohuld target the least effective and worst workers.

      That's probably too discriminatory, somehow, though...

    48. Re:Democracy? by NeMon'ess · · Score: 1

      Hey I agree with you there. Employees at all levels of a business that aren't pulling their weight need to correct their behavior or leave.

      What Circuit City is doing though is jacked. What Walmart does by burdening the local welfare system with its forced-part time employees is jacked. Firing workers two weeks before Christmas with no warning is jacked. Paying workers crap while giving upper management millions in bonuses that often don't even correspond to performance, is jacked.

    49. Re:Democracy? by MosesJones · · Score: 1

      Ummmm you do know that the UK was actually at that time (as it is now) a democracy? That was why people in America got so upset about "taxation without representation" because there actually was representation for people in the UK.

      The Magna Carta is a good place to start to understand about how people understood about the requirement for oversight of the monarch a long way before 1776.

      --
      An Eye for an Eye will make the whole world blind - Gandhi
    50. Re:Democracy? by KudyardRipling · · Score: 1

      Sonds like someone here has a stake in the status quo. Keep him off any jury.

      --
      Submission as evidence constitutes plaintiff and/or prosecutorial misconduct.
    51. Re:Democracy? by RogerWilco · · Score: 1

      The Age of Enlightment "occurred solely in Germany, France, Britain, and Spain
      Don't forget the Netherlands. We might not have as many big names as other countries, only Hugo de Groot and Spinoza come to mind.
      Being the only other republic in those days we did share a lot of the visions of the early USA. The the Dutch island of St. eustatius was the first to salute the US flag and states of Holland and Frisia were the first to diplomatically recognize the USA. John Adams spent some time here around 1780-1782 coordinating with Dutch Patriots and sudying the republic. (his son John Quincy Adams became fluent in Dutch)

      --
      RogerWilco the Adventurous Janitor
    52. Re:Democracy? by unitron · · Score: 1

      If you're trying to sell electronic equipment, it helps to know what it is that you're selling.

      And yet Radio Shack has somehow managed to stay in business anyway :-(

      (although the percentage of customers who know anything about electronics has probably gone down every year, along with the parts selection)

      --

      I see even classic Slashdot is now pretty much unusable on dial up anymore.

    53. Re:Democracy? by SQL_SAM · · Score: 1
      I guess I should have been more to the point and said American business since I thought that is what we were talking about. But needless to say I did find the following Wikipedia statement funny and to the point of the 'socialism' thing (apparently the 'workers' always get the shaft in a socialist society):

      The huge size of MCC has caused tensions between the needs of an international corporation and adherence to traditional co-operative principles. There have been accusations that factories have been relocated by stealth abroad, mainly in Latin America, where workers are not given the same membership rights. In 2004, it was estimated that just less than half of the then 70,000-strong workforce were full members of the co-operative, most of which will become full members after completion of a probationary period. Since members cannot be separated from the cooperative except for misconduct, new potential members must undergo a probationary period to determine whether they are an appropriate fit for the cooperative. Potential members must also provide a buy-in capital contribution to the cooperative equal to about one year's base salary at the lowest level of employment before becoming a full member, which is usually financed by a loan from the cooperative bank. It is claimed that these measures are taken to discourage adventurism and ensure that all members have a financial stake in the success of the cooperatives.

      Trade unions have complained of anti-unionizing policies in Eroski. Some have accused Mondragón of using the co-operative ideals as a marketing figleaf.

      The distance between the most senior levels of management and individual managers has also caused concern. There is less feeling amongst the members or socios that they run the company. Measures to prevent too great a gap between manager and worker payscales have been relaxed to better compete for high-level professionals, leading to greater tensions. In recent years, some co-operatives have withdrawn from MCC to try and reinstate a more personal management of each company by its workers.

      In 2004, the merger of Eroski with the Valencia-based cooperative Consum failed and both companies went separate ways.

      --
      There are 10 types of people in the world: Those that know Binary and those who don't.
    54. Re:Democracy? by dgatwood · · Score: 1

      No, if workers are not effective, that's where "lay-offs" should occur. And by "lay-offs", I mean the "we think that both you and we would be better served if you worked for someone else" speech. If you have to use a lay-off to get rid of poor workers, there's something wrong with your corporate culture that goes way beyond the need for lay-offs. I suggest that you start at the top and work your way down. :-)

      --

      Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.

    55. Re:Democracy? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Best is a realative term.
      No it isn't, it's supearlative one.
  84. What Does Circuit City's CEO Make? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Inquiring minds want to know.

  85. A page from the Wal-Mart handbook by jamietre · · Score: 1

    Another corporation decides that saving a few dollars is more important than creating a stable work environment. I am sure CC will defend their actions by saying they need to be competitive, just like Wal-Mart in their similar policy of salary-capping their "associates" (which basically has the same effect as CC's action, the idea being workers will move on voluntarily once they hit the cap).

    Why is it, then, that Costco is kicking Wal-Mart's (and Sam's Club's) in growth and profitibility? Costco pays their workers on average almost twice as much as Wal-Mart, and has generally employee-friendly benefits and policies. And they're making a ton of cash, too. Maybe, just maybe, it is actually GOOD for business to create a positive working environment, retain staff, and have good morale.

    The Costco Way - Business Week (couple years old but relevant)

  86. A little insight by kick6 · · Score: 5, Informative

    During my time in college I worked for both Circuit City and Best Buy in the same town. Overall I think CC treated their employees better. Everyone wants to boycott CC for screwing their employees over but they're missing a few important bits of information on how things work there. I'll see if I can shed some light. When CC went from commission to non-commissoned sales they gave their old employees one HELL of a deal. They tallied up everything the employee had made in the previous year (including comissions) and made that their new hourly wage. We had people at our store making $19 dollars an hour because of this. $19 an hour........selling digital cameras. Compare this to the $9.50 an hour that someone who came in after the commission/non-commision switch, and you can easily see that there were a lot of SERIOUSLY overpaid sales staff. These people weren't necessarily the best salesman they were just the ones that had happened to have been around at the right time. So this is not a killer of the american dream. This is not a case of canning people who have worked their way up the sales ladder. This is merely cutting some bloat, getting the labor prices back down to reasonable levels. Having been an employee (one of the $9.50 ones) I can say: good for them! Some of the $19 an hour people were WORSE salesman than I was. Now they can possibly get to a situation where people get raises based on merit as opposed to not being able to afford to give ANYONE raises because you have emplyoees being paid twice what they're worth.

    1. Re:A little insight by WayneCA · · Score: 1

      So what exactly is your problem? That other salesmen were getting paid more than you? You say Circuit City gave them a sweet deal but all they really did was screw new hires. The original salesmen continued getting paid what they were getting paid under the commission scale. You happened to come in during the flat pay scale. They didn't get a sweet deal, you just got screwed. You should've been making hourly plus commission. Don't blame the salesmen, blame Circuit City for lowering their wages.

      If you want a pay scale based on merit, return it to commission. Then the people who actually move product will make the most money. What Circuit City just did pushes down everyone's wages.

    2. Re:A little insight by jafac · · Score: 1

      When CC went from commission to non-commissoned sales they gave their old employees one HELL of a deal.

      So, the upper management that made that deal, made a mistake.
      And they're now punishing the beneficiaries of the deal. Instead of the upper management that made the mistake.

      And - it's not a "deal" if you later pull the rug out from under these guys. They had an incentive to perform well, they did perform well. That linkage was taken away, so it's hardly surprising that maybe in some cases, the performance went away too. Now they're going to offer these guys lower pay, with no commission - that's a "deal" that's guaranteed to give them the same low performance they're getting now (if that's the case).

      This is a really, really stupid plan.

      It's probably true, that CC salesmen are superfluous - because people will comparison shop on the internet, and if it's something they need right away, they'll probably run out to CC and buy it instead of ordering online. I suspect that's the case in a lot of situations. That just goes to show that this intermediate situation of the "deal" was very, very stupid. And the folks who came up with and approved that idea should have been fired.

      But my guess is that they're probably getting bonuses. And it's easy to guess where that money came from.

      --

      These are my friends, See how they glisten. See this one shine, how he smiles in the light.
    3. Re:A little insight by kick6 · · Score: 1

      They didn't get a sweet deal, you just got screwed. You should've been making hourly plus commission. Don't blame the salesmen, blame Circuit City for lowering their wages. I didn't think I was getting screwed at all. The job was only WORTH $9.50 an hour. I mean....in the grand scope of things I really didn't do much. I feel that $19 an hour was overpayment for the job. The problem is these guys that got that $19 had no incentive to accel. They had pretty much exceeded the salary cap for their position, and the only motivation left was to simply not get fired because they weren't going to make that kind of money anywhere else. Thats right, the only motivation these massive salaries gave was the BARE MINIMUM necessary to keep the job.

      If you want a pay scale based on merit, return it to commission. Then the people who actually move product will make the most money. What Circuit City just did pushes down everyone's wages. A lot of people have offered this as a solution, but it is absolutely not a solution. Why? Because commissioned sales don't work. As several people in this very thread have stated, they refuse to shop at CC because of the commissioned salesman. They're STILL saying this even though CC has been non-commissioned for almost 5 years. If 5 years after going non-commission people still have a bad taste in their mouth, how is going back going to solve anything?
  87. Yay, I can keep Speakeasy now... by QuasiEvil · · Score: 1

    Earlier this week, I hated BB because they swallowed up Speakeasy. Now I hate Circuit City, so things are good with my ISP/Big Box conglomerate again.

    I kid, I kid... I still hate BB, and more so since Tuesday. :)

  88. I am going to return the cable modem I bought... by MrJerryNormandinSir · · Score: 1

    yesterday. Hmmm... Idiots. I hope the employees that are laid off get better paying more fulfilling jobs.
    I'm not going to Worst Buy or Circuiy Shitty anymore. Go NewEgg!

  89. This is why people form unions by Raisey-raison · · Score: 2, Insightful

    This is why unions exist. I agree with people who say that no-one owes me a job. If they want they can fire my ass just because they want to, to cut costs if they want. They can they agree to rehire me later for less money. However I do not have to work for some company either. I can get together with a bunch other employees and form a union. We can insist on better pay and treatment and insist that we aren't treated like shit. They company doesn't have to listen to us. It can ignore us and fire us all and go out of business if it wants. Then maybe the employees will perhaps get some better health benefits and better pay and contracts that stop the company from abusing its workers. Bottom line: whats good for the goose is good for the gander. If you are gonna insist its a dog eat dog world then sometimes the company get to be bitten too and it too will suffer. So no wining about abusive unions....circuit city asked for this.

    1. Re:This is why people form unions by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      Unions may make sense in some places, but in retail they definitely don't.

      Here's what will happen if the CC employees unionize:
      1) CC's prices will go up, to pay for the overly-high wages for these employees who really aren't any more skilled than janitors. Other stores' prices won't go up, and price-conscious customers will just go to the competition. CC folds.

      2) If ALL electronics retail employees manage to unionize, all the stores' prices will rise as in scenario 1, but since they're all higher, customers won't just go to Best Buy. Instead, they'll turn even more to online merchants, again putting CC out of business since the only places that would survive would be local stores that people must shop at, such as Wal-Mart and grocery stores (things would have to get awfully expensive for people to buy their groceries online).

      Unionization is just a stupid idea for retail employees. If you don't like the pay offered by working at CC, or at Wal-Mart, or flipping burgers or cleaning toilets or digging ditches (these last three of which require more skills than retail sales), then get an education and get a real job.

  90. Yes, you will by palladiate · · Score: 1

    But, as someone with a degree in economics, I love to throw this argument out to people who act like they know WTF they are talking about:

    If this is a free market, and people are resources, why shouldn't someone start a company, much like a union or guild, that manages the sale of labor? A union is a business whose product is selling labor.

    Oh, there's a whole lot of information, debate, and schools of thought around unions and labor, but the above simplicity usually makes the armchair Randians STFU.

    1. Re:Yes, you will by Dr+Reducto · · Score: 1

      The problem with that approach appears when you start to look at game theory. If said corporation commands an above market wage, companies could find people willing to break what is essentially a cartel agreement, thus removing the power. It only works if the corporation holds ALL the potential retail labor. Unfortunately, it can't, because retail is not a skilled profession. The retailers could then just recruit at high schools to find kids willing to work without the benefit of said corporation

  91. Amazing by Soothh · · Score: 1

    What amazes me about this is, i know they will lose atleast myself as a customer from this move.

    I doubt im the only one.

    --
    We have seen that living things are too improbable and too beautifully "designed" to have come into existence by chance.
  92. Sell your CC stock by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Whenever a company has to derive profit from the salary of their employees its a sure sign that the company is on the brink of bankruptcy.

    Don't believe me? Check out their ticker today. $18 and falling.

    I'm not sure I'd want to make a purchase there - they may not be around to service their warranty or return policy.

  93. And the bosses? by rueger · · Score: 1

    Oh yes, I am sure that the senior management of CC will also be fired and offered the chance to apply for their jobs at lesser salary packages ...oh sorry, that would be Leadership.

    Even better, how about firing 8% of management employees above the store level, and see if that changes anything.

    In Canada CC bought out Radio Shack (but not the name) and made it "The Source: by Circuit City."

    Last time I was in one of their stores a sales drone told me, in all seriousness, that he didn't know how many milli-amps there were in an amp.

  94. Fire the beancounters! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Behind all of this is the mentality that the only way to become more profitable is to reduce wage expenses. This is the typical beancounter mentality that all American companies seem to suffer from today.

    You know, if they fired all the high-paid beancounters, they could probably hire 3,400 additional highest-paid sales-staff and actually make more money through increased sales! Instead, they have decreased sales-staff (no matter how temporarily) which will definitely decrease sales/profits and they still have the beancounters, who don't sell a damned thing, on salary.

  95. If you are trying to live... by night_flyer · · Score: 1

    the "American Dream" working at Circuit City (Best Buy, WalMart, etc...), you deserve whatever you get...

    --


    Thanks to file sharing, I purchase more CDs
    Thanks to the RIAA, I buy them used...
  96. American Dream - not just a clever name by wuice · · Score: 1

    If you think the American Dream was ever anything more than exactly what it says it is (a dream), I'm sorry pal, but the joke is on you. The American Dream, like religions and ideology, has been given to us in order to keep us motivated in our task of generating more wealth for the elites and upper classes, obeying their rules, and perpetuating the class system that keeps the elite in power.

    1. Re:American Dream - not just a clever name by dbmasters · · Score: 1

      I dunno, while the pessimistic side of me agrees with you, I look at my life and consider it pretty damn good...coming from a modest background with supportive parents I did stupid shit for years getting into drugs and crap...pulled myself up (with no tax money from you all) got my shit together and am now married, two great kids a nice house in an upper middle class neighborhood with a decent job and good neighbors and family... Am I an elite, in charge and wealthy beyond my dreams, no, but I do consider myself blessed to live in this greatest nation on God's green earth.

      --
      dB Masters
  97. What about the people that are getting hired? by Shambly · · Score: 1

    Isn't it unfair to those people Circuit City will employ who are willing to work at the lower wage if CC doesn't do this?

    I mean if there is more supply of labour then demand then the price should be lowered. I don't understand why people think seniority matters in a low end job, its not that the skills and training you require to do a passable job are unatainable. If you want to be paid more you have to be worth more to the company.

    1. Re:What about the people that are getting hired? by dbmasters · · Score: 1

      Exactly, pretty much the same way I feel when people bitch about Walmart...the big difference is Walmart didn't fire people in masses that made too much, they just never let people make that much in the first place.

      --
      dB Masters
    2. Re:What about the people that are getting hired? by tweek · · Score: 1

      This is an interesting comment and begs a few thoughts from the entitlement crowd:

      You bitch and moan because walmart doesn't pay enough and keeps costs down that way.
      You bitch and moan because circuit city has layoffs because they pay too much.

      What's your frackin' solution? Have you ever been the CEO of a company, much less one the size of a Wally world or CC?

      Let's look at some of the things that the CEO of a company has to deal with:
      - Answers to the board of directors
      - Is legally obligated to make the most money possible for shareholders (in a public company)
      - decisions will literally and directly impact every single employee in the company
      - decisions could impact the entire economy for a given area

      Do you think you could do any better if you ran Walmart? One stupid mistake and you could destroy what amounts to the economy of some nations. Can you imagine the unemployment rate if walmart went out of business tomorrow? What about the effect it would have on freight carriers. What about the impact it would have on all the Walmart suppliers?

      CEOs get paid a lot of money because they have a lot of responsibility. Tough choices must be made. Do they make stupid ones? Hell yeah. It's quite possible that this move could put Circuit City out of business because of public outrage (which the public is perfectly allowed to have). I personally have never run into a skilled employee at any big box store of any kind. The last time I ran into a person who knew more than me was when I was a kid and was buying capacitors at Radio Shack. The point I'm making is that it's easy to sideline judge the actions of the company but it you're a person who's invested money in CC, you want return on that money.

      --
      "Fighting the underpants gnomes since 1998!" "Bruce Schneier knows the state of schroedinger's cat"
  98. Daddy, were electonics stores ever real? by bgfay · · Score: 1

    Selling electronics from a brick and mortar store is a thing of the past. My parents will still buy their television at a store. I might buy one out of ten electronic devices at a store, but my kids, I imagine, will buy online and have it delivered to them.

    In my area, CompUSA is gone, Fry's never showed up, Circuit City is dying, and only BestBuy, Staples (et. al.) and Apple are left. But go to BestBuy and you'll see that they don't know anything about the products they sell either. Go to Staples and it's much worse.

    ****Disclaimer: I do not own a Mac, but I do own an iPod****
    Only the Apple store has people who know about the product they sell. The problem there is that they either don't know about PCs or are so starry-eyed about Apple that they can only denigrate anything else that isn't Apple made.

    My kids won't know much about brick and mortar electronics stores. They will evaluate, comparison shop, and buy on the web. In other words, this is just another company imploding through its own stupidity.

    --
    Yeah, I'm as old as my UID would suggest.
    1. Re:Daddy, were electonics stores ever real? by Reapman · · Score: 1

      Online is great... until you have a problem with the product. I find it much easier to troubleshoot my LCD TV dieing by talking to a moron in person at a brick and mortar, then a moron over the phone at some online shop. As well I can drive over and return my $40 router and be home in 30 minutes, or I can return it to Amazon or whatever online store and wait the 4 weeks of shiping it will take (oh yeah, and probably pay for shipping too)

      They've been saying Brick and Mortar would die since the late 90s, I don't think it will, not until they install a teleporter for instant delivery.

    2. Re:Daddy, were electonics stores ever real? by macaroo · · Score: 1

      The only people who are going to benefit from this transition will be the over paid delivery boys working for UPS and FedEx. It won't be long before the delivery charges will amount to more than what you paid for the item. Especially since gasoline and other fuels are approaching record levels. On line stores are very aware of the customer's sensitivity to shipping charges and are starting to bundle in the cost of shipping into the product pricing schedule.

  99. Wrong by iceperson · · Score: 3, Informative
    1. Re:Wrong by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Losing ground to what? Why does a wider income gap automatically translate into "poor people are poorer"? If the poor are seeing improvements as well, just not as quickly, why do so many of you assume that's equivalent to "their lives are getting worse"?

      Not trolling, just asking.

    2. Re:Wrong by marck · · Score: 1

      I have no doubt that the income gap statistics are true, but the point that keeps getting lost is that each person can choose their own future. Nothing prevents a person from making more money if that's what they want to do. We keep trying to make low income the same as victim, when that's rarely the case. Everyone has control over that and there's plenty of room at the top for anyone who wants to go there.

      A good example is a friend of mine from Tennessee. She was a single mother as a teenager with no job and nothing but a basic high school education. Sounds like a charity case example, how could she overcome that?

      Well, she decided to make a future for herself, so she worked part time and put herself through college, no free handouts, and now makes a very healthy salary as an engineer. She went from the minimum wage category to the top 10% just because she wanted to. She had all the classic excuses, but instead of taking the easy road she chose to rise above it.

      It was probably pure hell, working part time jobs, taking care of a kid and getting good grades, but, no one said it was easy. Easy is not part of the deal, the deal is just that you have the ability to change your destiny if you want to. There's no class system, no one preventing you from pursuing any dream you like.

      Bottom line, in this country there's no limit except those we impose on ourselves.

    3. Re:Wrong by LizzyDragon · · Score: 1

      Actually, it seems to me based on the article that it's not so much the 90% losing ground so much as the top %10 is gaining ground much faster then everyone else.

    4. Re:Wrong by falconwolf · · Score: 1

      I have no doubt that the income gap statistics are true, but the point that keeps getting lost is that each person can choose their own future. Nothing prevents a person from making more money if that's what they want to do. We keep trying to make low income the same as victim, when that's rarely the case. Everyone has control over that and there's plenty of room at the top for anyone who wants to go there.

      I think, no I know, you're wrong. Not everyone can improve their socioeconomic future. My background is low income but I went into the army to save money to go to college and once out I started working on a degree in Computer Engineering. Unfortunately as a college student I was hit by a moving van while riding my bike after class. When I came out of the coma I was in I had to move into a rehab house, then spent almost a year in therapy. As a survivor of a Traumatic Brain Injury, TBI, I quickly found I would not be about to get the CE degree and it's doubtful I'll be able to get any degree though I did go back to college. Work hard? My life is hard work and I have very little energy for fulltime manual labor. However even if I did I've been repeatedly warned that if I get hit in the head again it could kill me.

      Falcon
    5. Re:Wrong by shalmaneser1 · · Score: 1

      not to mention the fact it takes 2 full time working people so that a family can stay above water, when 30-40 years ago it only took 1. not that the past was a happy place for everyone, but it does seem like average americans have taken a crazy paycut to me.

  100. I don't understand by JustNiz · · Score: 1

    Why they don't just restructure sales staff's pay to be mostly commission-only. That way they don't cost anything if they don't sell anything, and anybody earning more money is actually worth it.

    1. Re:I don't understand by kick6 · · Score: 1

      Why they don't just restructure sales staff's pay to be mostly commission-only.quote? Have you ever been into a store where the employees are paid like this? They employees are terribly pushy, and terribly annoying. Circuit City used to be commissioned sales, but they were losing business because no one wanted to deal with pushy salesman.
  101. Not Just Sales... by O'Krap · · Score: 1

    It bears mentioning that this layoff isn't just sales. It is *any* hourly associate making $.50 above an unrevealed cap for that position (the cap appears to be industry ave. pay for that position). So there are Customer Service, delivery guys, techs as well. I know this cause I am one of the layoffees. Circuit City ain't exactly a career, but it also isn't McDonald's. Many of you mention clueless associates, and poor service, which certainly exists. Most of these clueless are people hired to replace the well-trained people laid off when they got rid of commission. In short, they just got rid of the rest of us that new our butts from a hole in the ground to be replaced by cheaper clueless clerks, and not just sales, as I said. One of you guys (can't remember who..) said "doubling someone's pay wont make them smarter." I agree with that, but these were mostly people who earned what they made. "Wow, you are doing a great job here is a raise. Now you're too expensive, you're fired." And before you complain about the quality of service you personally have experienced, remember these competent people account for only 8% of the nationwide staff, and so you probably never ran into one. I wonder though, how much money will this save, and how much will it cost? Most of these people are only making $3-5/hr more than their replacements, but CC will lose revenue from customers not being helped (low staffing until replacements are hired), poor customer service increasing, and from boycotts and the like. O'Krap PS Are you hiring? :)

  102. Your sarcasm is true. by RingDev · · Score: 1

    What I am getting at is this: Circuit City doesn't care one whit about the success of our civilization, and accordingly, the value of their employees as ANYTHING OTHER than "human resources" is essentially nil. There is no value in seeing them as people, because well, it makes them just slightly less profitable. Can't have that now.

    Actually, they can't. If they don't cut corners, someone else (Walmart) will. And if they can't keep their overhead low enough to compete with Walmart, the consumers will shop at Walmart instead. If the consumers shop at Walmart instead, Circuit City will have to cut employees and close stores that are close to Walmarts.

    The end result would be exactly the same. Some number of CC stores would close, Walmart would take over the market segment and would rehire some portion those former CC employees at a lower wage.

    So you can't really say that CC is being unethical here, they're just doing what they can in a crappy situation. And it's not like taking down Walmart would end it either. There is a huge demand in the American public for low cost goods. If Walmart wasn't available to fulfill that need, someone else (KMart, ShopKo, Sams, etc...) would gladly move to fill it.

    And it's not like legislating it will improve it either. With the continued growth of Internet commerce, you have international competition from organizations that are not subject to US labor laws.

    Point being, so long as consumers demand the lowest possible price on goods, companies will have to cut corners to remain competitive in that market segment. If you actually want to look for someplace to start working on a solution, look at consumer debt, that's the real demon.

    -Rick

    --
    "Most people in the U.S. wouldn't know they live in a tyrannical state if it walked up and grabbed their junk." - MyFirs
  103. Tyranny of the Majority? by istartedi · · Score: 1

    It just so happens that the majority like to shop at places like Circuit City and... gack... Wal Mart. In that sense, democracy triumphed over the minority using capitalism as a means. Arguably, it triumphed over the majority as well as the minority. How is that possible? Well... it's just self-destructive tendancy en masse. Yep. The whole country has gone self-mutilating emo. Excuse me. The sun is out. I need to either hide from it, or burn myself with a magnifying glass.

    --
    For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
    1. Re:Tyranny of the Majority? by mrchaotica · · Score: 1

      Yep. The whole country has gone self-mutilating emo.

      Holy crap, it all makes sense now!

      --

      "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz

  104. A-76 by iceperson · · Score: 1

    I suggest you do a little research.
    http://a-76.nih.gov/a76_rev2003.pdf

  105. Bah. by raehl · · Score: 1

    If you want to make more than the minimum wage, then learn to do something worth more than the minimum wage.

    Yes, it sucks that CEOs are paid so much, especially when they're not worth it. But moaning that the CEO makes too much is just scapegoating. It's like complaining that people win the lottery.

    Not paying you what you want has nothing to do with how much the CEO makes. In fact, the CEO's *JOB* is to not pay you any more than they have to. That's what companies do.

    But you know what? This works both ways. You can work for anybody you want! So find a better job, and work that one!

    The problem here isn't that the company is always looking for lower-cost labor. The problem here is that the labor isn't always looking for a better-paying job. If the labor spent as much effort trying to get higher pay as the companies spent trying to pay less, maybe the labor would be making more money.

    1. Re:Bah. by don_bear_wilkinson · · Score: 2, Insightful


      But moaning that the CEO makes too much is just scapegoating.


      I disagree.


      I think there's a very reasonable objection to having your CEO make millions while others makes thousands. The lowly sales drone on the showroom floor is not as skilled or educated as the Boss, nor is he putting in as many hours, nor did he pay his dues by years in college going without sleep and fun to get where he is, etc., but they are both contributing. They are both spending most of their waking hours working at the Company. I think they both deserve a little respect.


      The problem here is that the labor isn't always looking for a better-paying job.


      Some people don't want to constantly run on the treadmill. Some people don't have endless greed^H^H^H^H^Hambition. Some people have priorities outside of work. Some people want to be able to give 100% for 40 hours a week and receive some stability and long-term value for the commitment and effort they give.

      An average person, with modest needs and simple aspirations, who is willing to do the work they are being paid to do, does not deserve to be mistreated.

      --
      In Nature, stupidity is a capital offense. In human society, too many get off with less than a warning.
    2. Re:Bah. by raehl · · Score: 1

      An average person, with modest needs and simple aspirations, who is willing to do the work they are being paid to do, does not deserve to be mistreated.

      Not employing you forever is not mistreatment.

  106. No. by grumpyman · · Score: 1

    Screw the notion of entitlement. Death to RIAA!!

  107. I do... by way2trivial · · Score: 1

    I'm walking in the door of the same motel building I walked into 17 years ago.

    I started as a one night a week night auditor. Now I run the joint...

    The hospitality industry is -I believe -the last industry that really enables people to move up readily based on ability.

    My first day in this building was in April of 1990, and here it is, 2007.. I'm still here..... damn...

    --
    every day http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Random
  108. Crappy Corp... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Ah yes...

    Circuit Shitty , I never shop there because of a serious problem I had with "them" in 1989.

    Haven't been back since!

    By the way...

    The Good Guys, are.

  109. So what if it is? by raehl · · Score: 3, Interesting

    That's the whole point. If they can make $30 million more by NOT paying you, then guess what? They should fire you! You're not worth the $30 million.

    That's like your plumber telling you "Hey, uh, you should really pay me twice as much, because if you don't, you're just going to keep the money for yourself."

    If you want money, EARN it. Don't expect it to just be handed to you.

    1. Re:So what if it is? by miskatonic+alumnus · · Score: 1

      Great philosophy --- that completely ignores reality. Reality is that when more people do without, crime soars. So, you can spend your high salary on 10ft high electric fences and security cameras with mounted machine guns to protect your "earned" wealth from the masses of the great unwashed.

    2. Re:So what if it is? by Bastard+of+Subhumani · · Score: 3, Insightful

      That's the whole point. If they can make $30 million more by NOT paying you, then guess what? They should fire you! You're not worth the $30 million.
      But the CEO & his cronies who'll pocket that as a bonus are worth every penny!

      Don't take me for a communist - there was a time when big bosses only got the big bucks when they built a successful firm. Successful in the long term, not just the next quarter. Or am I being nostalgic?
      --
      Only three things are certain; death, taxes, and apocryphal quotations - Ben Franklin.
    3. Re:So what if it is? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Troll

      It's cheaper in the long run to adopt the general sort of approach that you sarcastically advocate than to watch society collapse under the weight of paying blackmail tribute to a parasitic underclass to convince them not to run amok.

    4. Re:So what if it is? by miskatonic+alumnus · · Score: 1

      Parasitic underclass. What a laugh! The parasites are the corporations that wreck the environment and usurp the power of the people by bribing government officials, and the banks that steal from the poor to give to the rich. But keep on believing in your little fantasy.

    5. Re:So what if it is? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "If you want money, EARN it. Don't expect it to just be handed to you."

      This doesn't really make any sense. While Circuit City may not be the best job, how were these longer term and/or more skilled CC employees not earning their money? Obviously they'd done well enough within the CC system to be making the most money, so who's asking for a handout? If anything, the CEO who pockets a bonus by screwing his own employees is the one taking the handout.
      I'll tell you what - next time you get fired, don't you dare complain, especially if you are doing well and getting raises. I mean, hey, you got expensive and they chose not to pay you anymore, right? I mean, who the hell did you think you were thinking that your performance and long tenure entitled you to any form of respect or loyalty from your employer?

      I understand that stuff like this CC incident is status quo for the current state of U.S. employment these days, and I understand that the U.S. (and the world) has had a long history of labor abuses, but can we please stop pretending that capitalism at its most depraved is acceptable and good? Is it really that much to ask for employers to give the slightest consideration to the people who work for them?

  110. Oh... scrambling... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    After reading the summary I glanced at the from the field and the first thing I saw was

    from the Scum-bag-for-less dept
  111. Response from Circuit City customer feedback form by nrozema · · Score: 1

    After I read this article yesterday I sent an email to their customer service department via the "contact us" link on their site and told them that they had lost a long-time customer over these announced "layoffs".

    This is the response I received:


    Dear XX,

    Thank you for sharing your thoughts. We value our customers' feedback.

    As we stated in our news release yesterday, we are taking a number of actions to improve our cost and expense structure. We are holding ourselves accountable to our associates, our customers, our communities, and our shareholders to build a strong company that generates sustainable growth for the future.

    Our goal is to provide superior service while effectively competing against low-cost retailers. We are working towards this goal by making changes, such as announced yesterday, and with the help of over 40,000 associates who keep our customers at the center of everything we do. We hope you will allow our Circuit City team to serve you in the future.

    Sincerely,

    M. Garcia
    Customer Support Coordinato


    Seems to me they would be better served by canning the upper management that is so far removed from the customer experience in their stores to actually float this idea.

  112. hmmm I wonder just what the severance package is.. by advocate_one · · Score: 1

    10 weeks pay by any chance??? I'm just curious about the 10 week gap before they can re apply for work there... maybe it's to do with benefits claims or something, maybe they can't claim unemployment if they're only off for 10 weeks. Some one over there please enlighten us...

    --
    Donald 'Duck' Dunn: We had a band powerful enough to turn goat piss into gasoline.
  113. Re:Wrong place to cry ... we all just got out sour by moore.dustin · · Score: 1

    Wrong. Their high end employees were replaced. The jobs we do not want to do(they are below us) in our industry got outsourced. Unless you were doing tech support, your probably are not hugely effected by outsourcing. Exceptions, of course, exist.

  114. Amadeus by rlp · · Score: 1

    Reminds of the line from Amadeus: "The triumph of mediocrity".

    --
    [Insert pithy quote here]
  115. The evolution of the American Dream by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I don't know everything, but it seems to me that the American Dream and what it takes has evolved and will continue to evolve. No longer can you just work hard and get your way to the top. How many posts on this article say that they work hard and it's not getting them anywhere.

    The world is a very big place - much bigger than it was 50 years ago. To achieve success, long, hard hours is assumed, and always will be. But as time goes on, those who succeed above and beyond the rest must combine this hard work with smarts and cleverness, applied at just the right point in time.

    I believe, in general, the world will pay you what you're worth. If you're doing the same thing that millions of other workers are doing, you'll probably get paid the same as they will. Remember, by default, the majority of us are "on average."

    1. Re:The evolution of the American Dream by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I call BS on that. To succeed in the American job market, its not about your job performance, but how you can get ahead of competition (co-workers). In most workplaces, the guy who is always on some sort of phone and always doing a show of looking busy. The guy who can point at weaknesses about other people's work and character will ALWAYS get promoted over the hard working worker bees who just do their jobs. If you are a worker bee, you stay a worker bee at worker bee pay. If you stomp their heads in the ground, come quarterly and FY meetings, you will come out ahead.

      In 99% of companies, its the sizzle that sells, not the steak.

      The 1% of companies where someone isn't doing this, are companies that won't be around in a year or so.

  116. Welcome to the real world! by 313373_bot · · Score: 0

    So: work hard, become the best in your field, and get fired so they can offer you a new job 10 weeks later at a lower salary.


    Think of it as:

    1) You work for a corporation.
    2) Profit is a corporation's (sole) objective.
    3) It doesn't matter how good you are in your field: if someone will do the same thing you do well enough (i.e. not so bad that it would damage the profit) then, seriously, what you expect?
    --
    ^[:q!
  117. The employees deserve it. by raehl · · Score: 0

    If your company sucks, leave it and go work somewhere else.

    If you CHOOSE to continue working there, you deserve what you get. Just because it's easier to continue going to the same job forever doesn't mean it isn't your fault for choosing the easy way.

    Employees need to pull their heads out of their butts and spend just as much effort looking for a better job as companies spend looking for cheaper employees. The people who do that are the ones who end up with better jobs, and the people who don't are the ones who end up stuck in the same job until the company downsizes.

    Beat the company at their own game - LEAVE your job for a BETTER one!

  118. Re:This seems standard behavior for corps these da by Hokie06 · · Score: 1

    Since when does highest paid equal best performing?? In my experience in noncommissioned retail jobs. Highest paid typically = been with the company the longest. The problem is retail for the most part is a pretty unskilled job. Why pay someone more and more each year to do the same the job?

    --
    Kilroy was here.
  119. The future of electronics retail by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    In the very near future, a retail electronics "outlet" will consist of little more than a warehouse and a pickup counter (maybe even a drive-thru). All research, purchase decisions, and ordering will be done online. The need for showrooms will be eliminated by liberal return policies (with liberal fine print no doubt).

    I'm not saying this scenario is desireable, but current economic trends I believe make it inevitable.

  120. Good Riddance by Plekto · · Score: 1

    Yet another company dooms itself to failure by kicking out management.

    When times are tough, the smartest and most experienced people are exactly the ones you need to grow your business out of its problem. Now they have a balanced budget but no way to fix the original problem. Smart move. I give them a year before they implode.

  121. Economics and Sales by andersh · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I know you didn't major in Economics! The $30 million they "save" on wages will quickly have a major impact on lost sales and other losses. Those $30 million probably paid for their most experienced workers - and now they'll lose sales capacity, knowledge and experience in one fell swoop. And I am not referring to their technical knowledge alone - but the corporate business routines. The corporate machine will not run as smooth. I appreciate the need to save however this is literally cutting of your arms and legs.

    They already did this in 2003 and like the article says: "At the time, the move hurt the company's sales, Whalin said."

    It's more like the plumber not getting paid by his employers - they will loose sales and skills.
    If you want to earn money - invest time and money.

    1. Re:Economics and Sales by jedidiah · · Score: 3, Insightful

      They also just took $30 million out of the consumer buying pool.

      That's $30 million that can't go to buy Fords. Similarly, when
      Ford pulls the same shenanigan that means that there's
      $30 million that can't go to by whatever that Circuit City Sells.

      A short term cost savings doesn't always benefit the company in
      the longterm. Circuit City as a store probably should focus on
      other things, like making a guy like me actually WANT to set foot
      in their store.

      Treating their employees like trash is not going to solve this
      basic problem.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    2. Re:Economics and Sales by walt-sjc · · Score: 1

      They did? You seriously think that the people laid off won't get new jobs? Do you really think that the higher paid people will accept a new job somewhere at 1/2 what they used to make?

      On your other point however, I agree. I already don't shop at CC due to the employees there (seriously bad customer service / attitude.) If CC wants people to shop there, they need to figure out how to treat customers. Frankly Bad Buy is in the same boat. I just buy my stuff online at some place with free shipping, lower prices, and no sales tax tacked on.

    3. Re:Economics and Sales by raehl · · Score: 1

      I know you didn't major in Economics! The $30 million they "save" on wages will quickly have a major impact on lost sales and other losses.

      You apparently didn't major in economics either. The question is, "Does paying these people $30 million per year make us more than $30 million per year?" and if the answer is no, then you should fire them. Even if you're going to lose $10 million a year because of it. Or even if you're going to lose $20 million.

      Now, maybe they'll lose more than $30 million. We don't know. That's a decision of Circuit City's management. If they're going to lose more than $30 million because of it, guess where that loss comes from? That's right, the company. But just because there will be some losses from firing the employees does not mean that firing the employees is not the right decision.

    4. Re:Economics and Sales by raehl · · Score: 1

      They also just took $30 million out of the consumer buying pool.

      No they didn't. They stopped spending $30 million a year on Circuit City sales people. Now that $30 million will get spent on something else.

      It is not good for the economy to just keep people employed. Quality of life only improves when people are employed doing something useful. Hell, in an ideal world, machines would do all the work and we'd just sit on our asses all day.

    5. Re:Economics and Sales by HTTP+Error+403+403.9 · · Score: 1

      You apparently didn't major in economics either. The question is, "Does paying these people $30 million per year make us more than $30 million per year?" and if the answer is no, then you should fire them. Even if you're going to lose $10 million a year because of it. Or even if you're going to lose $20 million.
      If I pay this group of employees $30 million and they only produce $30 million, I should fire them even if I am going to lose $10 million or even $20 million a year? Please explain your logic .
      --
      I'm not a Troll, it's reverse psychology.
    6. Re:Economics and Sales by lordmatthias215 · · Score: 1

      Well, if production only equals costs, you're not making a profit. If you cut costs by $30 million, and only lose out on $20 million because the rest of the store picks up the slack (or a new employee is hired for a lower wage that produces at much) you're now making a net profit of $10 million and are doing better than before as a company.

    7. Re:Economics and Sales by HTTP+Error+403+403.9 · · Score: 1

      I suppose we are making different assumptions from the GPs post. I take a $20 million loss to mean a loss to the company's bottom line profit. You are taking the $20 million loss to mean a $30 million decrease in employee cost resulting in $20 million loss of sales for a net result of $10 million.

      --
      I'm not a Troll, it's reverse psychology.
    8. Re:Economics and Sales by otopico · · Score: 1

      They did? You seriously think that the people laid off won't get new jobs? Do you really think that the higher paid people will accept a new job somewhere at 1/2 what they used to make? They will take less pay if that's all they can get.

      What dreamworld do you live in where people will always move up in pay? Sometimes people move down because that is the only place to go.

      Try this, get laid off and refuse to do anything that doesn't make you the same amount you were making. Go try it, then tell me that these people being laid off by CC have nothing to worry about.

      You get what you pay for, and sadly, CC is going to learn that the most difficult way possible.
    9. Re:Economics and Sales by jedidiah · · Score: 1

      There's just one problem with your rationale:

              Circuit City is firing it's best low level employees.

      What that 30M will most likely go towards increasing
      the concentration of wealth in this country.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    10. Re:Economics and Sales by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      from the GP:

      Those $30 million probably paid for their most experienced workers - and now they'll lose sales capacity, knowledge and experience in one fell swoop.

      But since I'm the CEO, that £30mil will help me make the quarterly targets, so that I get my $10mil bonus. The layoffs were approved by the board because they each get a $2mil bonus when we meet the targets.

      A short term cost savings doesn't always benefit the company in the longterm.

      Long term? As CEO I don't give a toss about the long term. I care about the current quarter and that's it. If I fuck up next quarter I receive a $15mil golden parachute and get to blame the problems on someone else.

      Circuit City as a store probably should focus on other things, like making a guy like me actually WANT to set foot in their store.

      Are you kidding? Someone like you is the last person I want to enter one of my stores. Someone like you won't buy the extended warranty, you won't buy the monster cables or any of the other "premium" accesories. You might even return to the store and complain if the product doesn't work as advertised. Most importantly, someone like you knows far more about our products than our sales staff. If I could ban you from our stores I would.

      Treating their employees like trash is not going to solve this basic problem.

      Problem? How is my receiving a $10 mil bonus a problem?

  122. Excellent! (Re:The will become K-Mart) by cascadingstylesheet · · Score: 1

    >They will become K-Mart

    Excellent! There's a K-Mart near me, and the prices
    rock :)

    'course, I don't feel safe going in there unarmed ...

  123. "Good to Great" Circuit City: what happened? by skoda · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Circuit City was identified as the best performing company in Jim Collins' book, Good to Great. Over about 15 years, Circuit City transitioned from a mediocre retailer to a phenomenally performing company, beating the market over 18-fold over 15 years (1982 - 1997)! (p7 of the book).

    So what happened?

    I no longer shop at the local CC if I can avoid it. Black Friday last year they were a complete mess. It took several minutes to process a customer. Rebates were filled out by clerks, keeping the line waiting. Lines were randomly woven throughout the shopping aisles: you didn't know what aisle you were in and customers were kept from shopping by the congestion. Presently, during normal shopping, their checkout system is quite slow and cumbersome.

    In contrast, Best Buy was very well organized and the checkout lines as fast as possible.

    Where did the "great" Circuit City go?

    Even during

    1. Re:"Good to Great" Circuit City: what happened? by seifried · · Score: 1

      I find it interesting as well, there seems to be a propensity for these good to great companies to last for a while and then enter the doom loop, of which Circuit city is obviously in the middle of. I suppose the corporate culture of being great wasn't firmly entrenched enough to withstand this, and fell apart in the face of mediocre managers/board directors.

  124. MOD PARENT FUNNY! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I almost missed this comment, glad I lowered the threshold.

  125. The "me" generation by peterbiltman · · Score: 1

    You can really see the "me" generation in these replies. Just because someone chooses to work in retail does not mean they aren't good at anything else. Some people enjoy working retail. It's amazing how people, especially here, seem to think that unless you are out clawing your way to the top of the corporate ladder by stepping on everyone else then you are a nobody.

    My grandfather was a salesman for Sears & Roebuck. He worked there from the time he was 30 until the day he retired at 72. He was proud of what he did, and enjoyed every day of it. Back then people being a salesman was a noble profession. He knew every product he sold (appliances, hardware, etc.) and if a customer came in he would listen to them and recommend the best solution -- even if it was not a Sears solution.

    I am sure there are people who work at Circuit City who are modern day versions of him. They may enjoy what they do, and enjoy helping people make the right decisions. Now, instead of cutting the fat from the top of this tanking company, they decide to attack the low level employees. I can tell you right now I will never shop there again.

    People deserve respect no matter what they do in life. I'm shocked and disgusted by how I see people not only on this forum but elsewhere just have such utter disrespect for those who have lower-level jobs than they do.

    Remember, at the end of life you are just as dead as the salesclerk, janitor or dishwasher will be. Try showing a bit of kindness and respect, you might be surprised how well that goes over.

    1. Re:The "me" generation by macaroo · · Score: 1

      Amen, brother. To quote the lyrics of a popular Country Western song: " I've never seen a hearse with a luggage rack."

  126. Meritocracy by toriver · · Score: 1

    Here at /. there seems to be a general support for paying people for their skills. Now, if Circuit City did that, it follows that the top-paid store workers would also be the most knowledgeable about the products sold - or at least the employees with the longest experience in the field and the greatest loyalty reflected by their staying in the company and having gotten raises to bring them where they are now. So imagine this conversation:

    - Say, there is Frank? He always had the best contacts in the field and knew the latest release dates straight from the source...
    - Oh, he was laid off for earning too much money. He went to work for EB two blocks away.
    - EB two blocks away, you say? *leaves and never returns*

    Maybe Circuit City are satisfied with the following exchange?
    - Excuse me, will this game work on my PC? I have a...
    - Shut up and buy something!

    Perhaps that's a reason for dwindling number of PC games in the stores: Selling PC games actually requires technical knowledge.

    Maybe the execs should try to look at how much revenue they bring in personally. If you can keep 500 in-store employees by firing one suit, why wouldn't you? (The answer is of course because the suit is one of the same group that would do the firing.)

    1. Re:Meritocracy by rholland356 · · Score: 1

      Tech skills and loyalty count for nothing in retail. It's all sales, and not just trended sales. It is "how much did you sell today?"

      Loyalty just means you've been around a long time and failed to make much more of yourself (you didn't move into management, so you are at a dead end).

      Tech skills only get in the way of the sale, because either the customer knows the details (from the internet) or the customer will make the choice based on brand name and model color. Either way, talking tech delays getting $$$ to the cash register, and opens the door for arguing with the customer over esoterica.

      Customers don't trust tech talk in a store, anyway, because they know that you will try to sell them only what you have available to sell, not what actually suits them. They know (and your boss knows) you won't refer them to a product your store doesn't sell.

      So, Circuit City knows its customers and it knows its competition, and is making a shrewd business move. They know their sales ppl will find other retail jobs, and in 10 months come knocking on the door once more (assuming the doors are still open--perhaps Circuit City will shed some storefront property now.)

  127. Why are there retail outlets at all? by gelfling · · Score: 1

    Circuit City, Best Buy, all the rest aren't interested and won't and can't help you with anything you want unless you're buying a big ticket item anyway. They could eliminate most of their floor space and most of their employees outright by pushing everything except flat screen TV's, car stereos, and appliances to the web. They don't need retail floor space for PC's, cameras, game consoles or any of the add-ons' like multifunction printers, scanners, drives and networking equipment. And racks of software, DVDs, CDs and games is just stupid. In other words, they should just brand all that stuff, stick on the web like CDW and leave the retail space for the high margin items.

  128. Better way for them to save $100 Million + by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Circuit City is spending way more than is necessary for health insurance premiums for its employees. Doing some rough calculations, they could save the same amount of money (probably more) if they could reduce the amount spent on premiums by 20%. (Current estimates put the amount of health care dollars 'wasted' on unnecessary administrative expenses required by the current broken private insurance system at 30%.) Sadly, this is a major problem for all US businesses, and only getting worse. Until we reform the US health care system systemically, this will continue to impact US businesses of all sizes. I've seen it time and time again... Unable to do anything about the rising cost of health care, businesses either shift the cost directly to employees or get rid of some of their higher-cost employees altogether. Currently, the only model that can do this is a single-payer national model like that proposed by H.R. 676 and endorsed by many groups around the country.
  129. Reminds me of a similar situation... by GuyMannDude · · Score: 5, Funny

    The fired workers have a chance to apply for lower-paying positions after a 10-week wait, the company said.

    However, that circuit city feels that they can exercise their lack of loyalty so egregiously is disgusting.

    Recently, my girlfriend dumped me but said I was encouraged to reapply for the position of "friend" instead. I told her that if she upgraded the offer to "friends with benefits" that we could consider that a severance package for my being so loyal to her. She told me rather sternly to take or leave her original offer.

    Bitch.

    GMD

    1. Re:Reminds me of a similar situation... by Jackie_Chan_Fan · · Score: 1

      hahaha.. been there my friend. But hey we were friends, and we even fucked a little here and there as just friends :) Anyways we dont talk anymore cause she's a crazy fucking bitch.

  130. What the employees should have done by British · · Score: 1

    You see, they should have bought the "layoff protection plan" for $19.95. You can bring your job back to any Circuit City store for a replacement job, no questions asked.

  131. Avoiding CompUSA's fate. by Kaenneth · · Score: 1

    CompUSA cut costs by closing stores; would it have been better for the employees on Circuit City if that happened?

    There are/were simply to many of these same generic 'Box' stores around. CompUSA, Circuit City, Best Buy, overlapping with Office Max, Office Depot, Staples, and competing with Fry's, Target, Wal*Mart, Fred Meyer, Radio Shack... They utterly destroyed the small local computer shops with their over-expansion. With on-line sales now destroying the Box stores, there are just too many stores, and except for when something like the Wii launches, they are under customered.

    I'm just waiting for Best Buy to fail utterly, I'd hate for them to be the sole survivor.

  132. They did this in 2003 by mercthree · · Score: 1

    Circuit City laid off all of their best (highest paid) salespeople in 2003 and went to non-commisioned sales. Typical corporate thinking; if it didn't work the first time, you just didn't do enough of it. They also offered lower paid positions at the time, available immediately. Typically these were about 1/3 of current salary. Sorry I can't find a good link, WSJ has a good article if you pay for access.

  133. Re:You have *got* to be kidding me. (oblig) by darkhitman · · Score: 1

    We are born in Circuit City hospitals, we work in Circuit City outlets, and we are buried in Circuit City graveyards.

    (yay pullman)

    --
    Tell me something...it's still "We, the people"... right?
  134. Re:This seems standard behavior for corps these da by NeutronCowboy · · Score: 1

    Good point. I was talking more generically about corporations in general. I've heard about the hell that is floor jobs in retail, and never want to get into it. That said, I still think that even in retail, people underestimate the cost of training new hires.... what do you think?

    --
    Those who can, do. Those who can't, sue.
  135. Corporate suicide. by Brandybuck · · Score: 1

    Typically a business will pay its salesmen on commission. This has the result that the highest paid salesmen are also your most productive salesmen. They pay for themselves.

    To lay off your most productive salesmen is an act of supreme stupidity.

    --
    Don't blame me, I didn't vote for either of them!
  136. Maybe not the message they wanted by Captain+Sarcastic · · Score: 1
    From the article:

    "What you have here is a particularly nasty approach to say to shareholders that 'we are lean and mean.'"


    So, instead of depicting themselves as "lean and mean," they show that they're "skinny and psychotic."
    --
    Strike while the irony is hot! -- The Freethinker
  137. New Egg! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    New Egg Baby!

  138. More problems than that too by palladiate · · Score: 1

    Oh, there's that and tons more problems. I never said that these "labor retailers" were monopolies (like unions). It just happens that traditional business models of unions require a monopoly to survive.

    A better approach would be value-adds to both employee and employer, like a temp agency. That's why we've seen a big uptick in temp agencies in the last decade.

  139. What hard work gets you by phorm · · Score: 1

    From my experience, hard work basically gets your... more work.

    If you're in a union-style environment, hard work gets your work done just in time to have them ask you to do the work of the next guy who can't be fired (because he's union, and he hasn't done anything extreme like steal from the company, he just does 20% of the work you do).

    If you're in a private/non-union environment, hard works gets your work done just in time to have the boss's son/nephew/niece/brother/cousin dump a bunch of half-baked shit on you... so you can fix up his mess so that he can tag out early head to the golf course.

  140. Re:Stupid management never suffers, only employees by Doc+Lazarus · · Score: 1

    ..and he'll make really silly music? Okay, I don't listen to Phish. I just wanted to be the first on that joke.

  141. I just turned 60 and have been laid off twice.. by the_rajah · · Score: 1

    from Engineering, not sales, jobs. The first time it was because I was the new guy without seniority. I found a better job before my termination pay ran out, although it was 1,000 miles away. The second time I was laid off because I was the senior higher paid guy. I changed careers for a few years and taught electronics instead of designing it, although I still kept my design hand in through consulting.

    My point is that you can be laid off at either end of the spectrum. Feces occurs. There is no entitlement, and there shouldn't be. This isn't Soviet Russia....yet.

    Be flexible. Roll with the punches. Have a "plan-B". Get used to it.

    I wouldn't trade my career for anything. It's been good to me and allowed me to have a very good quality of life.

    --


    "Do the Right Thing. It will gratify some people and astound the rest." - Mark Twain
  142. Re:This seems standard behavior for corps these da by Hokie06 · · Score: 1

    I think a lot of it depends on what type of retail. Clothing stores for example, training probably doesn't matter as much, there isn't too much product specific knowledge.

    If you are selling electronics like in circuit city's case yes more knowledge and training will be required. But that has probably dropped of some recently as more and more customers are doing research before hand. Not to mention there a lot of high school and college students that know a lot about those products before hand. So the learning curve isn't has high for some employees.

    It wouldn't surprise me if this might be more of move on Circuit City's part to dump some of their more expensive full time employees with benefits in favor of part time employees who don't receive any benefits.

    --
    Kilroy was here.
  143. me too: by Wooky_linuxer · · Score: 1

    my girlfriend fired me, ops, dumped me and told me she would still like me to work in the "friend" position, with lower wages, ops, benefits, well, whatever. I said ok, and now she hardly says anything more than hi and goodbye to me. Since I am obviously not in the aforementioned "friend" position, should I sue her for breach of contract?

    --
    Where is that guy who'd die defending what I had to say when I need him?
    1. Re:me too: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Oops", you mean? Both times?
      But then you spelled "aforementioned" right. Huh.

  144. Set up like bowling pins by Xesdeeni · · Score: 1

    So let me get this straight.

    Circuit City hired these employees, and set their salaries. When these employees were there long enough, or performed well enough, they were given raises, by Circuit City. And now, Circuit City has decided that they can't afford the salaries that they were responsible for setting?

    What gets me is that they could have laid off the employees, and then a month or so later begun hiring new replacements. The ex-employees would have suspected (or even been sure of) that they were just cutting costs. But they come right out and admit that Circuit City's mistakes are costing the employees their jobs. What a set of cahones!

    I cannot possibly fathom why this isn't grounds for a class-action lawsuit. Regardless of any "agreements" signed, this is not acting in good faith on the part of Circuit City. It also shows a serious lack of loyalty to those employees that Circuit City itself acknowledged were good enough to warrant raises. I hope Circuit City doesn't expect loyalty from the remaining employees in return.

    Besides, what were the employees supposed to do? Turn down the raises because they were worried that they might out-earn their value!?

    I think I'll choose to shop elsewhere.

    Xesdeeni

  145. Don't sales staffers make... sales? by RexDevious · · Score: 1

    Yes this is unfair (assuming the CEO wasn't included in the "highest paid get axed" scheme). But unless the highest paid sales staffers weren't being paid based on having the best performance; getting rid of them will *by definition* NOT increase profits.

    My experience with Circuit City sales staffers has been that they are knowledgable and helpful without being pushy. As opposed to Best Buy's guys who say "Hi!" every two seconds, and then if you ask them something like, "Do have any bluetooth headsets?" will give you a blank look and reply, "Um, these one's over here are black and silver!".

    People who know their wares make me more comfortable buying those wares than people who's knowledge is limited to which floor things are kept on. It seems to me that replacing effective salespeople with newbies will cut costs, but also sales, thus cutting profits.

    Barring that though, it's easy enough to just make a big stink out of this and avoid Circuit City. If you lose more money by *publically* announcing you're getting rid of anyone experienced and competent (and generally treating workers like crap in the bargain), than you would by keeping them - you'll either avoid that odious behaviour... or lose in the marketplace to those wise enough to.

  146. Why do I suspect... by bcharr2 · · Score: 1

    Why do I suspect the executives at Circuit City had some egregious bonus they could receive *IF ONLY* they could find some way to bump their stock price up a few points by the end of Q1 2007.

    Great business plan, that. Now may I ask what incentive future Circuit City employees have to perform well? So they can guarantee that they will be the first employees fired in the next round of lay offs?

    What's my incentive as a customer to now shop there, knowing they have fired their best salesman?

    Ah well, what's the loss of a few thousand of your best performing employees, the good faith of your customers, or the long-term financial health of your investors?

  147. Re:Unions, was (You have *got* to be kidding me) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yes, and steel, and mining, and longshoremen making $80K/year which gets added to the cost of all imported goods, etc, etc, etc...

  148. Do your own research by iceperson · · Score: 1

    The bottom 90% in the US is "maintaining" a lifestyle by borrowing, that will eventually collapse.

    I'm curious, what do you call accumulating debt while others accumulate wealth?

    1. Re:Do your own research by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Some people managing their money improperly (growing debt) while others are managing it properly(growing wealth). If you gave the same people that are accumulating debt 1 billion dollars per year they would still find a way to accumulate debt.
      It is called personal responsibility.

    2. Re:Do your own research by iceperson · · Score: 1

      So the argument is that "poor" people have it pretty good for being "poor" and when someone points out that the only way they maintain the standard of living they do is by borrowing all you can say is they're "managing their money improperly". You're about as obtuse as the guy who says "everyone has the same opportunity." Sure you have the same opportunity (if you have the same ability and environment.) The fact is not everyone has the same ability. Someone with an IQ of 90 from a poor single parent family DOES NOT have the same opportunity as someone with an IQ of 180 born into the Walton or Gates family.

      There is one area in which the disadvantaged do have the same ability, that's at the ballot box. It won't be long before they figure out that they simply have to vote to get a bigger piece of the pie and I for one am scared to death of that day. I would rather those in control recognize the problem before there's a revolt, unfortunately that's not going to happen.

  149. Redefine poor to make your point by iceperson · · Score: 1

    That's what the gov't did. Poverty income for a family of 4 in Oklahoma is something like 18k. I'm sorry, but if you're a family of 4 living on 30k in Oklahoma you're poor and Oklahoma has one of the lowest costs of living in the states.

    1. Re:Redefine poor to make your point by couchslug · · Score: 1

      Define "poor" as you see it.

      Attacking the government definition without providing an example of your better definition and why it IS better is a "poor" argument.

      --
      "This post is an artistic work of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact."
    2. Re:Redefine poor to make your point by iceperson · · Score: 1

      An example of why the government definition is flawed is enough to render your previous argument based on their numbers invalid.

  150. shopping at Circuit City by falconwolf · · Score: 1

    I don't generally shop at Circuit City, but from what I hear a major complaint that many people have is that most of the sales staff have no idea what they hell they're talking about. If you're trying to sell electronic equipment, it helps to know what it is that you're selling.

    I don't shop there generally myself but I go in occasionally. And while I sometimes find a worker there who knows what they're talking about most don't. When I go to a store I want to be left alone until I have questions, and I want someone who is knowledgeable. This is getting harder and harder.

    Falcon
  151. Pursuit of Happiness. Not the Receipt of Happiness by falconwolf · · Score: 1

    This is pretty much like some people not realizing the difference between equal opportunity and equal outcome. Unfortunately not everyone has the same opportunities depending on where they live and their socioeconomic background.

    Falcon
  152. Which 8%? by bogidu · · Score: 1

    Now if they'd only cut the top 8% of management (presumably higher paid than the sales staff), THEN they would be accomplishing something!

  153. Speaking of Best Buy... would you*PLEASE*help me? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I used to love Best Buy and even was bragging about the $4.50 voice recognition with microphone I found there on clearance. Being a loyal customer I went in to buy a laptop. Some cute young guy pressured me to do their finance plan with 0% interest. I firmly told him no! He wasted a half-hour of my time trying to convince me if a got a card how much sense it would make, but since my credit card, checkbook, and debit card were ready to pay the mere ~$1K or so I continued to say no. Then I went to the cashier and had some special paperwork to fill out since it was a large ticket item and I had to register the pre-installed microsoft software and free internet service. Well the cashier made three mistakes and I believe the young salesman convinced him to install the Best Buy credit card as well. By this point (45 minutes later!), I was late to an appointment and badly needed to go to the bathroom. The pathetic cashier tried to take off the BBcredit card and failed. He said a manager would be with me in another 20 minutes. I gave in. The laptop completely broke in about a week, I bought it to go out of town on business so I didn't need the internet, and I couldn't pay off the bill since I did not recieve it and was out-of-town. (All of my other bills are autodeducted [which takes 30 days and my trip was in a week], I desperately needed a computer to go out of town, due to the classified environment of my 3 month business trip-- I had very limited work access.) I couldn't pay online since my machine was broken. Who knows what this has done to my credit and I probably have some never-used "loose" Microsoft account that I cannot get to to save my life. I tried calling to no avail. I haven't been back to best buy in three years when I used to go there every month. Their sales guys may be good in the short run, but I don't know about the long run. This from someone with SPOTLESS credit who just got a mortgage a couple months earlier, so has records to prove it. For those of you in the DC area, this was the Route 7 Tysons area BB near Tiffanys.

    ~5 minutes away I bought a new laptop from Circuit City at Tyson's I mall in VA. It also broke within 3 days, but I showed the cute young sales guy who sold it to me there and he let me pay the difference right there for a better one. No pressure for anything-in and out in 5 minutes. It still works and all was paid off that day. I LOVE YOU CC GUYS!!! LOVE YOU, LOVE YOU, LOVE YOU! RADIO SHACK, newegg.com, and pricewatch.com THANK YOU AS WELL. If you are from Best Buy and know a good manager I can talk to *please* post the Manager's *DIRECT* line/extension. Thank you!!!!

  154. I call bullshit on you by Mycroft_514 · · Score: 1

    Because it has happened before. Early 1970's and Travelers insurance company did the same thing in their DP department. How do I know? Well, my father was at the top of the list of those "laid off". To this day, Travelers HR tells people that they have never laid people off in their history.

    Or how about Aetna? One days some years back, all employees were required to be at there desk at 8am one particular morning. If your phone range, you were fired.

    So, to those of you all upset abotu this one. Well, where were you then?

  155. How about changing your rebate policy by Thomas+Charron · · Score: 1

    I might shop there again if they changed their GD rebate lies. They screwed my household when three different people in the household bought laptops, and they noticed the address and denied one of them.

        Another time I bought somthing and the online cart listed them as BOTH being eligible for rebate, and docked the price acordingly, only to have them turn around and deny one of them.

        Liars and thieves, the whole lot.

        Hell, fire your web site company while your at it, and get someone who doesnt spend as much money attempting to mislead customers.

    --
    -- I'm the root of all that's evil, but you can call me cookie..
  156. Fixed that for you by Chmcginn · · Score: 1

    Lets encourage most of the industrialized world to go to war with each other again and destroy most of what they have again so they have to buy from good 'ol USA again.
    --
    Have you been touched by his noodly appendage?
  157. Some should fail as a warning to others. by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

    Don't do like they did. If you take away their public failure kids will emulate their non-working, shifty asses.

    Stay awake in school, work hard or prepare to eat a lot of mac and cheese in a weekly residential apartment.

    I think your confusing ambition and drive. Ambition is the desire to succeed. Drive is the internal energy to actually do something to succeed.

    Rich kids often have ambition but no drive.

    You don't have to be a workaholic to succeed. Many a workaholic is burned out by 35. Working and playing hard and smart is the key (but beware the manager that uses that worn out phrase).

    --
    John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
  158. Yes, they are. by Slashdot+Parent · · Score: 1

    I dunno. By the mid 1990s, Apple, Inc. was losing money hand over fist. Apple bought NeXT (and Steve Jobs) and made him CEO of Apple. Jobs turned the company around and made it into the profitable company that it is today.

    Do you honestly think that 400 of Apple's finest engineers (or any 400 people you pick) could have done what Steve Jobs did and made Apple profitable again? (Ignoring, for the moment, that his salary at the time was $1) :)

    Really, CEOs are worth 400x the regular employees. The good ones are, anyhow.

    --
    They don't grade fathers, but if your daughter's a stripper, you fucked up. --Chris Rock
  159. an ideal world by falconwolf · · Score: 1

    Hell, in an ideal world, machines would do all the work and we'd just sit on our asses all day.

    When you have a machine do the job of a human, you take away somethng from the human.

    Falcon
    1. Re:an ideal world by bnenning · · Score: 2, Insightful

      When you have a machine do the job of a human, you take away somethng from the human.

      So the pinnacle of humanity was when we were living in caves? From the printing press to industrial robots, machines have eliminated countless jobs that humans used to do. And yet, the human race survives.

      --
      How to solve most of our problems: 1.Lots of nuclear plants. 2.Cure aging.
    2. Re:an ideal world by falconwolf · · Score: 1

      When you have a machine do the job of a human, you take away somethng from the human.

      So the pinnacle of humanity was when we were living in caves? From the printing press to industrial robots, machines have eliminated countless jobs that humans used to do. And yet, the human race survives.

      That's not what I meant, afterall I'm using a computer. People need to work, even if not for money. Here saying "work" I mean people need to be active. Preferably at something they love to do. I used to say I'll never retire, as I always wanted to keep working, even if I didn't need to for the income. Unfortunately it might as well be said I am retired though not of my own choice, I am disabled and collect disability. I am hoping to start working this year though, as a photographer and developing websites for other photographers.

      Falcon
    3. Re:an ideal world by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How about this point of view:

      A person will not be paid more to do a job than the cost to do the same job with a machine.

      The 'working man' will have to be better than 'the machine' (do a better job, and/or do a job no machine can do (yet)), or will have to accept having to compete on price with 'the machine' for his labor.

      When his work is replaced by a machine, the 'working man' can maybe be the machine operator, but as machines get better there will be less need for operators, plus operating the machine well may get too complicated for many workers.

      Extrapolate this further, and as machines get better and better, more and more people will find that there are machines that can do whatever they can do.

      So, in the so-called 'utopia' (that may or may not ever be reached), where machines do all our work, no 'working man' will be able to get a well-paid job.

      Then the economy will all be about who owns the machine. If you want something that is made by a machine, but you don't own a machine yourself, and your labor is worthless, then what are you going to trade to get what you want?

      Some people think that situation will never happen because there will always be jobs that a machine can't do available for everybody, but is that really true? How can you be sure of that?

      Are we all destined to be either machine owners or on welfare? If so, I think there will be some turmoil before it gets that far (unless welfare will be high enough to keep the majority of people 'content')...

    4. Re:an ideal world by Arcane_Rhino · · Score: 1

      I think the GP was speaking metaphysically. And, while probably true, the metaphysical loss to my soul of no longer washing my dishes by hand is something I think I can live with.

  160. You've got a VW. Ha Ha! by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

    You are an idiot that buys the worst possible car on the market and has the nerve to rip GM.

    BTW VWs sales figures are awful. They reflect the lack of quality and maintainability the new VWs are affected with. Everybody from 'Consumer Reports' on up rates the last ten years of VWs as terrible. Don't walk away, run.

    Enjoy taking you car to the dealer to get the spark plugs changed or the transmission fluid topped off. Mechanics love VWs (well they love getting all the work, they hate doing it because it's such shit work). First step to change the brake master cylinder in a new beetle? Remove front bumper (no exaggeration).

    VW can't make a good water cooled car to save its life.

    --
    John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    1. Re:You've got a VW. Ha Ha! by tthomas48 · · Score: 1

      From what I've read Volkswagen has been doing pretty well. They might have burned themselves out a bit by not having a new product, but the last 5 years have been very good for them. I'll agree their quality sucks. My Golf has been fantastic (knocks on wood). My wifes Cabrio was pretty bad. But that brings up the point. People don't buy cars based upon reality. They buy based upon image and a general reputation. VW still has a generally good reputation (that they've been working hard on throwing away). Ford and GM have horrible reputations, but have actually been building a lot better quality cars as of late. Ford and GM are paying for sins their management made over 20 years ago.

    2. Re:You've got a VW. Ha Ha! by falconwolf · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Enjoy taking you car to the dealer to get the spark plugs changed or the transmission fluid topped off.

      Haha, funny. It's not just VWs you have to take into the dealer or other service center to have fluid level checked or tuneups done. Cars made by US manufacturers are the same today. As a "shade tree mechanic" I have worked on my own as well as others' cars. I've even rebuilt the engine and tranmission in one of my cars, the only thing I had to take something into a shop for was when I rebuilt the engine for a '78 Monte Carlo I had to take the engine block into a machineshop to have the cylinders bored out. However I have to take my 2000 Saturn, a GM company, in for tuneups and fluid changes. Special tools are required are needed to do this and there's only one use for the tool, which costs a lot if you can find one. Then you have to have the right diagnostic computer as well. On serviceability that old Monte Carlo puts to shame any Detroit car made today.

      Falcon
    3. Re:You've got a VW. Ha Ha! by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      Your tool box just hasn't kept up.

      OBDII and III are great diagnostic tools and are common to all cars sold in the US for about the last ten years. (Granting that all the car companies have extended it which is a pain, but the basic codes are common and most software has kept up with most extensions, Honda being a notable exception. They guard their codes.)

      VW has sealed automatic transmissions. You fill them like an old school manual (except more complicated). Their spark plugs are proprietary as are the cables.

      The new beetle in particular is built like a Chinese wood block puzzle. It is a fact that the first step to replace the brake master cylinder is to remove the front bumper.

      Ask any professional mechanic about the new VWs.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
  161. Egregious by DaMattster · · Score: 1

    This is the one of the most flagrant and egregious acts I have ever heard of. Corporate America has sunk to new all time lows. Well, Circuit City won't be getting my business (not that it really amounts to much anyway.) Have you ever noticed how the company asks, no demands, absolute loyalty from its employees but shows no reciprocity? At least in Japan, as a salaryman, you are shown the reciprocal amount of loyalty that you invest. Well, I can only hope that the media will spread this story like a firestorm and cause Circuit City to get a monster-sized case of acid indigestion. This has to be also one of the most ill-conceived plans to have ever been drafted. Was there that much utter disregard to the public relations nightmare that would ensue? Some heads will roll over this one.

  162. Whats bad for the employees is bad for the company by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If the company shows no loyalty to its employees, the employees owe no loyalty to the company.
    I would steal as much I could if I worked at Circuit City.
    No chance of advancing from $8 to $13/hr?
    Steal a digital camera a week and boost your salary by several hundred dollars.
    Customer has a question about product features? Who gives a f***?

  163. I'd boycott them... by khelms · · Score: 1

    But I've been avoiding them since they tried to screw up DVDs with Divx in the 90s.

  164. And you wounder why it's hard to get hired? by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

    Seriously if you think firing the most expensive people doing the same job is unreasonable and unfair you need a big reality check.

    The reason employers are very reluctant to hire someone in the environment you describe is obvious to all but the most dim.

    --
    John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
  165. Hunter S. thompson said it best.... by sykodoc · · Score: 1

    But enough of this shit about the American dream! let's talk about what really matters, the great Samoian dream!

    --
    "Our enemies will talk themselves to death and we will bury them in their own confusion!"
  166. Micro Center by Computerguy5 · · Score: 1

    I've been a loyal Micro Center customer ever since I bought my first PC, a 386, at the Columbus, OH store in 1986 or 87 (not sure exactly). It was the Micro Center house brand, Laser, and was an excellent computer. (Some of my young family members still use it for playing old games.) Over the last three or four years, however, I've become increasingly dissatisfied with the BestBuy-ization of their stores: the sales people aren't knowledgeable, after-sale service is really a crap shoot, there for a while the store was rearranged considerably every time I went in (I've stopped in at least once a month or so ever since that initial purchase). These days I find that it's only good for if I know exactly what the SKU is that I want before going in, need a decent price, and need it in hand today. And even then I somehow wind up disappointed with the experience.

    Does anyone know of a better local store (Columbus, OH) where I can pick up parts when I need them the same day? If I can wait, I order from Newegg, but I can't always wait.

  167. Screw Circuit City by ninevoltz · · Score: 1

    They just joined my boycott list. Alongside WalMart and Microsoft. These corporations disgust me with their "business" practices, and I choose not to supply these asshole executives with any more of that money they did not earn. I pray that all 3 go out of fucking business someday.

    --
    Death is life's great reward. R. Hoek
  168. Why not fire the manager by asamad · · Score: 1

    Why not fire the people who have made the silly decisions in the first place, the same people who get paid lots of money for sitting on there arse's dream about the next 5 years.

    Its all coming down to people wanting there 20% growth in 1 year, more money to the share holders.....

    sad sad sad

  169. An alternative to firing people by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How about making the store not suck? Wow, what a concept!
    Maybe if the store didn't suck people would shop there and buy things.

    Oh no, the ship is sinking! Quick, throw the crew overboard!

  170. A little bit of history by abb3w · · Score: 1

    What disgusts me most about the Circuit City scenario (which is also played out in many other industries every day) is that these "artificial persons" (for what is a corporation if not a legally recognized entity under law?) have forsaken their responsibility to society in order to worship at the altar of profitability.

    They haven't forsaken it, corporations were ordered to abandon such responsibility by the courts; one of the last legal legacies of the robber baron age of capitalism.

    And, yes, "artificial person" is the correct legal phrase according to my fifth edition of The Law Dictionary (based on the 1888 Cochran's Law Lexicon).

    --
    //Information does not want to be free; it wants to breed.
  171. A better job? Where? by Travoltus · · Score: 1

    The only people hiring now are lower-paid jobs like Wal Mart.

    No wonder you're -1. *rolls eyes*

    --
    --- Grow a pair, liberals... stop letting the Republicans bully you!
  172. Top of their field? My ass. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Posting anonymously because some of my clients read /. and know I post here occasionally too.

    I work in sales. I have for almost 20 years now. I started in retail back in high-school - home appliances. Did pretty well, but saw that it was a total dead-end. Went to college, worked my way through it by selling cars. Once I got the hang of it it was great money and a free car. Based on my performance (I was routinely at the top) I was made a manager even though I was only part-time. By the time I was two years out of college, I was managing the dealership and making 6 figures easily. Three years after that, I decided I was tired of selling cars and moved into tech, where I have been ever since.

    I have a soul. I don't try to jam people and get them to buy unless it'll actually do something for 'em. I never pushed anyone to buy beyond their means when I was selling to consumers, and now that I do corporate sales I don't push stuff that just isn't needed. I try to add value where I can - yeah, part of my job is to get you to buy stuff, but a big part of my job is also to try to make your job easier by figuring out what you need and getting it to you. I work pretty hard - 60 hour weeks on average, sometimes more, sometimes less - but I like what I do so it isn't a hardship.

    Last year I pulled in 7 figures. This year looks to be about the same. I'm going to be turning 40 next year and I could retire in comfort if I wanted to.

    What's my point? My point is that I started in retail and I was good at what I did, and I got better at what I did, and I made things happen for myself. Nobody who's the "top of their field" in sales is going to sit on their ass working for Circuit City. Sales is the one career path that's a pure meritocracy - you make your sales, you get your commissions, and if you do better than everyone else you get bumped up, or you say fuck it and walk to go somewhere that rewards people who make money for 'em. I've showed my employers exactly the level of loyalty that they've shown me

    So no, I don't have any pity for these people working at Circuit City. If they're any good at sales, they can go anywhere else and make a damn good living. If they aren't, well, then maybe they should have picked up some other skills along the way.

    Mercenary and damn proud of it.

  173. Go Team Rich Bastards! by f1055man · · Score: 1

    There aint no class war, there's a class massacre. McCollough retired in 2006, but I don't want to go through the most recent proxy. Sorry, a bit dated. W. Alan McCollough Chief Executive Officer Circuit City Stores Inc. In 2005, W. Alan McCollough raked in $5,470,049 in total compensation including stock option grants* from Circuit City Stores Inc.. From previous years' stock option grants, the Circuit City Stores Inc. executive cashed out $3,052,902 in stock option exercises. And W. Alan McCollough has another $20,773,329 in unexercised stock options from previous years.

  174. Excessive government by SonicSpike · · Score: 1

    The reason we are not as "wealthy" today as we were previously is because of excessive government regulation stifling innovation, manufacturing, and over the top taxation.

    --
    Libertas in infinitum
  175. Circuit City Response by Hebetsubeach · · Score: 1
    I sent an email to Circuit City and said among other things, "What you are doing to your workers is deplorable. You are going to end up hiring lower skilled workers and so the help available in your stores will be even worse than it is now." This is what they told me:

    >Thank you for sharing your thoughts. We value our customers' feedback.
    >
    >As we stated in our news release yesterday, we are taking a number of actions
    >to improve our cost and expense structure. We are holding ourselves accountable
    >to our associates, our customers, our communities, and our shareholders to build
    >a strong company that generates sustainable growth for the future.
    >
    >Our goal is to provide superior service while effectively competing against
    >low-cost retailers. We are working towards this goal by making changes, such as
    >announced yesterday, and with the help of over 40,000 associates who keep our
    >customers at the center of everything we do. We hope you will allow our Circuit City
    >team to serve you in the future.
    >
    >Sincerely,
    >
    >M. Garcia
    >Customer Support Coordinator

    1. Re:Circuit City Response by slash_fossils · · Score: 1

      Here is the "Contact Us" link:

            http://www.circuitcity.com/cs_customer_email.jsp?c =1

      I wrote...

      "Your plan to save money by firing your highest paid sales staff has backfired; at least in regards to all of my future potential purchases from Circuit City.

      Just wanted to let you know that I will not be shopping at your store BECAUSE of the firings."

  176. Unions would help by Bassman59 · · Score: 1

    There -- I said it. A strong union wouldn't let a company get away with this kind of shit.

    1. Re:Unions would help by srobert · · Score: 1

      UNION!? HOW DARE YOU TALK ABOUT UNIONS!? No one is more adamantly opposed than I to ... oh, the boss just left. OK. Yeah, you're probably right. But I don't want my boss to hear me say it. If he did, I would have wasted so much time kissing his ass.

  177. Circuit City should just sell electronics by Simonetta · · Score: 1

    Circuit City (is that the right one? they're all the same although they're owned by different people) has found that there is not enough difference in the sales between higher paid floor workers and poorly paid ones. That means their stuff either sells itself and people are just using the store as a 'warehouse', or, customers have no need for the higher level of knowledge that the more-experienced (the higher paid) floor workers have about the products on sale.

        Also, are the positions being eliminated spread around the USA? or are they mostly in one geographic area? People in San Jose (you know which San Jose I'm talking about, you are Slashdaughters!) are going to make more money regardless of their experience level than people in, say, the central mid-west where the cost of living is cheaper. Will Circuit City fire 50% of the people in the Silicon Valley stores and offer those jobs to people in central Nebraska? Or will they just close stores in high-salary areas? Or is it 8% of the highest paid people in each store?
        Has anyone else noticed how eBay (and CraigsList)has made stores like Circuit City obsolete? Why doesn't Circuit City accept items for sale on consignment? Not just Plasma TVs, but speciality electronic items like an original Jimi Hendrix FuzzFace guitar distortion with original Germanium transistors.
        They are an electonics store, aren't they? Then why do they have such a difficult time actually selling electronics? Why are they so fucking inflexible?

  178. Without the American Dream, what's left? by rmckeethen · · Score: 1

    I'm seeing a number of comments along the lines of, "The American Dream is a fantasy; no one's entitled to a steady paycheck," and, to a certain extent, I agree with those sentiments. Expecting lifetime employment with a single company -- at least in the US -- is, I think, naive. In my experience, asking US businesses to supply permenant employment for everyone is like asking God to make a sunny day last forever. It's a nice dream, but no matter how hard you wish for it, it's just not going to happen, at least not today.

    Still, the American Dream has never been about entitlement. Some home-grown Americans seem to think it is, but immagrants know better. Poor, huddled masses don't leave their homes by the millions and come to America because they know there's a job waiting for them. People come to the US because it is one of the few places left in the world where an average person can work hard and expect a reward for their labors. That part of the American Dream is critical, and when companies like Circuit City ignore it, we are all in for a heap of trouble somewhere down the line.

    We don't like to admit it, but we all know that not everyone is capable of running their own business, or educating themselves up to the point where they can seek-out and snag a high-paying, high-tech job. Some people just don't have the brains, or they're unwilling to take the risks to move beyond retail work. For those folks, the American Dream is what's left. The idea that you can succeed through shear effort is a powerful one; the American economy is built upon that very notion, and you don't need a textbook to see just powerful an idea this is when put into practice.

    There are reasons why America is still the largest single economy in the world. There are reasons why American workers, across the board, tend to be more productive than their counterparts elsewhere. I submit that the American Dream is a crucial part of the American business strategy; the American Dream is, if you will, the secret sauce in the American formula for economic success. The American Dream offers hope on a massive scale. The American Dream motivates workers. Even if they aren't the smartest, or the most skillful, American workers still believe that hard work will get them ahead. They believe that what they do matters, not only to themselves, but to their families as well. Hard work makes a difference, and you don't need to be an Einstein to do the math on that fact.

    What's troubling about Circuit City's move today isn't any loss of entitlement; what's really worrisome is that Circuit City's management has so obviously failed to comprehand what is perhaps the most important lesson in America's business playbook. You can see this by taking a quick peak at their stock price today -- Wall Street can be pretty bone-headed on occasion, but they can smell stupidity and impending failure a mile away. Today, Circuit City may shave a few dollars off the balance sheet, but they've done with a move that is certain to utterly kill employee morale. Today, Circuit City just told each and every one of their workers that the reward for hard work isn't a raise; it's a pink slip at the end of the week, and a future opportunity to take your experience and start again from the bottom of the ladder in 10 weeks time. With an incentive package like that, only the truely incompetant, destitute and/or desperate need apply for work at Circuit City.

    For those of us not working in retail, consider this -- without the American Dream, US workers are little better than ill-organized serfs. Without the American Dream, the Chinese can do it just as well, and cheeper too, as can dozens of other nations scattered about the globe. Without the American Dream, even those of us with high-pay, high tech jobs can expect to feel the pain. When the girl standing behind the counter has no incentive to do it quicker, cheeper or better, what do you honestly think is going to happen?

  179. Circuit Moron by Haxx · · Score: 1

    The reason why Circuit City stores here in NY can't compete against Best Buy, Kmart and Walmart is so simple that if they can't figure it out they deserve to die off. At every CC store around here the checkout line and customer service line are merged into the same area where it is a confusing free for all when trying to buy something.

  180. income tax by falconwolf · · Score: 1

    I HOPE AND PRAY that we slam back a 50% tax on everyone making over $300 grand a year and similarly lower the taxes on anyone earning under $44,000 a year (the "average" wage + 10%). I think business CEO's and so on should be taxed at 90% for everything over 20x the average salary (so currently about 800,000).

    I am all for abolishing taxes on personal earned income period! If you work you should be able to keep the money you make from your labor. This includes privately owned businesses. But because corporations offer stockholders limited liability, the only thing a stockhold can loose is the amount they paid for the stocks they own, corporate profits should be taxed. I might also go along with a tax on corporations that pay executives more than an income X over the lowest paid employee, say X=1000 or something. So if a CEO were paid more than $26,000,000, say $52,000,000 and the lowest fulltime employee earned $26,000 the CEO's income over $26,000,000 would be taxed. However it woudn't be the CEO who was taxed but the corporation. Done this way the corp would have an incentive to increase the pay of the lowest paid employee. And because the corp doesn't collect employee income taxes to be remitted to the government they would be able to pay employees more.

    Falcon
  181. retail by falconwolf · · Score: 1

    I'll pay the same price or slightly higher for an item if it's delivered to my door than visit a retail store unless I 'need it now'.

    You might, but I want a local brick and mortor store I can return something I bought back to to get a refund or to have it repaired. Expecially for a big ticket item.

    Falcon
  182. Assumptions by andersh · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Looks like we actually agree on something! From what you wrote in your post I thought you didn't grasp the logic described in your reply. Of course, if those people did not produce any value they should be fired. But let's take a closer look at that.

    I believe you are still missing the point here; those salaries represent far greater sales than $30 million - they have to in order to pay them! Those salaries probably produced several times over their value in sales (gross). They are losing more income than just the money needed to pay for those salaries. They are just looking at increasing profitability per employee and sale.

    So now what they are looking at is hiring slightly cheaper, inexperienced sales people that will not sell for an equal amount - but still cost almost as much. You don't fire the productive and profitable workers! You find the dead weight. Non profitable stores get closed. A pay cut might have been better - but would still impact their sales (motivation).

    Sure the company is taking the loss, no dispute. And you know what? Those losses that will accumulate, will have an even greater impact on the very problem they are trying to solve. Now, not only will they have less sales, efficiency and profit - they have just lost their greatest assets. And bad press to boot!

  183. Ah yes, the highly competitive retail buisness... by Jackie_Chan_Fan · · Score: 1

    Lets see, there is Best Buy and... well... Circuit City. Ok Walmart sells some electronics, and Target sells a fucking toaster and an xbox360.

    I just dont see how punishing workers that work hard for your company is the way you go about saving money. They are the ones that make your company great and a joy to return and do buisness with. Maybe i dont get it. Maybe i'm too idealistic.... But it just makes me hate the company more when they treat their workers like shit.

    Maybe i'll return the headphones i bought at Circuit City the other day. They were $100 cheaper on amazon anyways... And the guy at circuit city was very nice and helpful, he even took a look online to see if the price was still $200. I fear that today he probably has lost his job.

  184. But did they use email to fire them? by 517714 · · Score: 1

    If you want to compete with the industry powerhouses like Radioshack you have to use the latest technlogy.

    --
    The US government have made it clear that we have no inalienable rights; any we do not defend vigorously will be taken.
  185. 2. do drastic cost cutting moves - some people get by falconwolf · · Score: 1

    fired

    Yea, you can fire productive employees or you can reduce the millions the executives take home. The question is which is better for the business's bottom line, keeping productive workers or firing them?

    Falcon
  186. Thats bad by madbawa · · Score: 1

    This is precisely why, even after doing my post-grad studies in the USA, I didn't stick around for a job. You never know when you'll be thrown out despite being the best in your field.

  187. Irish Potato Famine by falconwolf · · Score: 1

    I'm half Irish. Do you know why so many people died in the potato famine (did you know there was a potato famine in Ireland? Just ask a Boston cop...) Anyway, Ireland had enough arable land to be self sufficient. it's just that the people who *owned* that land...lived in England. And They wanted cash crops. So guess what didn't get planted.

    Somethng puzzles me about the Irish Potate Famine, why was there a famine caused by a shortage of potatos in Eire? Potatos were imported into Eirland, Ireland, from the Americas. So did Irish farmers stop farming indeginous crops then forgot how to grow them?

    (an interesting line from "We're No Angles", a classic Bogie movie)

    Ump, I don't recall that movie. I've got two of his movies, "African Queen" and "Casablanca" and I'd like to get "Key Largo". Key Largo offers some terrific scuba diving.

    Falcon
    1. Re:Irish Potato Famine by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The GP seems to have neglected the potato blight. I don't know WTF he's talking about, really. Potatos weren't indiginous to Ireland, but they grew really well there for a while letting the population explode. The potato blight destroyed most of the crop several years in a row, it had nothing to do with the English land owners deciding what to grow and what not to grow. England could shoulder some blame in their refusal to offer support to the starving Irish people. Millions starved or came to the US. The population of Ireland now is still (now) signifigantly lower than it was before the famine.

    2. Re:Irish Potato Famine by Number6.2 · · Score: 1

      For once, the AC is correct. My mistake, it was the potato blight.

      However, there is some small vindication that "The Owning Class" in Merrie Old didn't do squat while millions died.

      Another interesting read from the era is Jonathan Swift's "A Modest Proposal".

      --
      "If god did not exist, it would be necessary to invent him" --Voltaire
  188. free market in the USA by falconwolf · · Score: 1

    Words you mention in your post lead me to think that you do not understand what free market capitalism is. The United States does not have and for the most part, never has had, a free market.

    For a short tyme the USA had a freemarket. Though it was being whittled away by the Corporate Aristocracy Thomas Jefferson warned of there still was a freemmarket when Alexis de Tocqueville toured the USA in the 1820's. Unfortunately it has been gone a long tyme though.

    Falcon
  189. Class action suit? by agoliveira · · Score: 1

    I don't know there but here in Brazil this is material for a class action suit. A company can't legally fire people and replace them for others with lower wages. Actually, they can't fire you and hire later for a lower salary either. I think our work-related laws here need a very good revamp but there is a few good things there.

    --
    Scientia est Potentia
  190. churn by falconwolf · · Score: 1

    WalMart has been doing this for years; sneeze at the wrong moment and you're gone. One at a time. The churn keeps the payroll cheap.

    Actually turnover, your "churn", is a major expense for businesses. Everytime a new employee is hired there's all of the paperwork to be filled out, the new employee has to be trained, and there's other expenses to be paid. All of these expenses in fact means payroll is higher for high turnover than for low turnover businesses.

    Falcon
  191. Just start a business by patio11 · · Score: 1

    Its actually a lot easier than you think. There are 25.8 million businesses in the United States. About 17 million of them have only one employee. Those seventeen million business owners aren't ALL smarter, better educated, more savvy, etc. than you. They are, however, as a group a heck of a lot richer than you are. Two-thirds of American millionaires are self-employed. Some of them are in stereotypical "Oh, rich educated professionals only" jobs like law and medicine (not that all practioners in these fields are rich). Others, not so much.

    I know one guy who thought moving garbage was easy enough for any idiot to do it, so he might as well start. He went to the construction companies in the area and said "Hey, I've got a truck and time. You've got money and trash. Lets trade." Apparently, you can make a lot of money driving a truck between two fixed points. Anyhow, he was making pretty good money for a guy whose job is getting from A to B, and then he had a brainstorm: wait a second, I make enough money to pay for the loan on TWO trucks. I can get a buddy to drive the second truck, pay him a quarter of what the company pays me, use the second quarter to pay for the truck, and keep half! Anyhow, fast forward a decade, he now owns about a couple of dozen trucks and drives a... darn, I don't know the brand (sorry, I'm a geek, not a car lover). Whatever. Its one of those Alienware of cars where you pay a lot to let people know you've paid a lot.

    Heck, I started my own small business with approximately two weeks of planning, half of which was coding the software product which I sell. My capital investment was $60. That business takes about 2-4 hours of work to maintain a month and, in March, I profited about $620 from it (pre-taxes). Obviously, I'm not planning on leaving the day job (which I enjoy) immediately, but as I gradually develop more sales and more software its certainly an option on the table. Its got a lot to recommend it to -- I can't get fired, I can read Slashdot at work without feeling guilty, I never feel bored at the meetings, and my raise is always determined by merit.

    http://www.bingocardcreator.com/

    1. Re:Just start a business by cyber-vandal · · Score: 1

      And for every success story there are dozens of failures. Sorry but it is a lot harder than you think. I know from experience that the people here who go "just start a business" either don't have a clue, work too hard or have been very lucky.

  192. Businesses are not holy. by sethstorm · · Score: 1


    I believe there is a couple key point to the American Dream that you (and many others) inadvertantly miss. First, the American Dream cannot be realized by most people if they are willing to work for someone else. The American Dream--time and again--has been realized by those who, for whatever reason, could not or would not allow themselves to be wage-slaves. They started cottage industries--some failed, and some succeeded. Those who succeeded saw the American Dream fulfilled. Those who did not succeed faced a choice--either try again (to achieve the Dream) or believe that the American Dream is a lie.

    Apparently you miss the idea that business ownership and all the ethical bankruptcy it brings are the universal path to the American Dream. The only way they got that way recently was by businesses given the signal that they can interfere with government (not the other way around) through Reagan's PATCO blunder.


    What disgusts me most about the Circuit City scenario (which is also played out in many other industries every day) is that these "artificial persons" (for what is a corporation if not a legally recognized entity under law?) have forsaken their responsibility to society in order to worship at the altar of profitability.

    That's called ethical bankruptcy, it comes with the territory. Thank all the pro-business signals being sent the last 30 years.

    --
    Twitter supports and protects racists - by smearing their critics with the "Hate Speech" label.
    1. Re:Businesses are not holy. by HikingStick · · Score: 1

      I would argue that ethical bankruptcy is a risk of our economic system, not a given. There are many businesses that still strive to operate in an ethical manner, but they typically fly under the radar. One big example (and the name of the firm escapes me) was the company in the Norhteast United States that manufactured (while it was still uncommon) that synthetic "polar fleece" type of material. After a tremendous plant fire, the business owner nearly bankrupted the firm by continuing salary and benefits for his employees far beyond what was deemed wise by his financial advisors (we're not talking days and weeks, but many months).

      It may only be one example, but it does prove that ethical bankruptcy is not the defacto model for all US businesses. Ethical bankruptcy is a choice made by people who worship at that altar of greed and profit. Not all businesses worship there, and neither do all US citizens.

      --
      I use irony whenever I can, but my shirts are still wrinkled...
  193. Such are the costs of defending your country. by sethstorm · · Score: 1

    Being your own boss, owning your own home, having a wife that doesn't work and children in exclusionist school. French dream (lifelong employment at one employer). The two are completely irreconcilable.
    Only if you're an adherent to Thatcher or Reagan.

    France kept its head together (for once) and rejected globalization on the greater part, as well as seeing the CPE fail. The only thing better for them to do is to remove the lower tier of higher education and fully open up admissions to the upper.

    They aren't doing incredibly well, but when you go it alone against countries that sell their workers down the river(post-Thatcher UK, post-PATCO US) to countries like China and India, they must be doing something right that keeps them running. I don't see them turning soon, much like Germany has.

    What part of "businesses are not entities deserving godly privilege" do you not understand?
    Repeat the part in quotes if you are in doubt of it.

    --
    Twitter supports and protects racists - by smearing their critics with the "Hate Speech" label.
  194. Maybe in your ideal world... by iceperson · · Score: 1

    "Bottom line, in this country there's no limit except those we impose on ourselves."

    In your ideal world everyone has the same natural ability. Unfortunately that's not true. 49% of the population has a below average IQ. Your friend from HS is the exception to the rule. She was where she was because of bad choices, not because she was stupid.

    Lastly, I'd doubt very much that a single mother working a part time job received no government assistance while getting her education.

  195. Or was it the fault of a crap CEO? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If they'd REMOVED a bad CEO and gotten on with working on what they had, they could have gotten themselves out of the worst of the situation.

    If a good CEO can raise an entire corporation, a bad one can dump it in the tar pits.

    I point you to John Ross Ex-CEO of Nortel as an example...

  196. Bill Gateonomics by novus+ordo · · Score: 1
    Let me propose a similar economic view. Lets look at the dynamics of labor and profit you alluded to. Lower labor costs result in higher profits. When you're an employer you clearly want as many people as possible applying for your opening so you can get the lowest price. That's essentially what has happened with manufacturing.

    All those low skilled jobs went bye-bye when smart people with degrees(read: you) figured out, hey why not move all our factories overseas and fire all these high-payed no-skilled two-bit complaining fat-ass Americans and have all these agreeable starving foreigners(read: Chinese) work for much much less and we can treat them like crap, pollute their environment and they'll be happy about it! Plus we can all give ourselves raises for our brilliance! Brilliant!

    Ah but you keep saying, "I'm no lazy ass redneck. I got a bunch of scribbles on a piece of pressed parchment see?" Well I got news for you. And Greenspan and Bill Gates have news for you:

    Computer science employment is growing by nearly 100,000 jobs annually. But at the same time studies show that there is a dramatic decline in the number of students graduating with computer science degrees.

    Startion salaries for computer science grads in June 2001 were $52,473(adj. inflation $59,732.11) and in 2006 declined to $51,305.

    Maybe we couldn't take the greeter and do the programmer's job but we got someone else to do the programmer's job and now he can compete with the greeter for his job. It's a win-win situation. You see, they really were the same in an economic sense--not Bill Gates.

    Good luck with your $30/hr job. You will be earning the big bucks now.
    --
    "You're everywhere. You're omnivorous."
  197. Which government programs are ineficient? by jotaeleemeese · · Score: 1

    In the UK they have tried to give to private industries rein on services that have been traditionally run by the state.

    Trains? Unreliable, unfrequent, umcofrtable (and still susidized, otherwise they would be even more expensive), but still some how, the CEOs and other fat cats get richer even when the companies underperfomr.

    Water? Pipes are breaking all over London but the companies that now own the infrastructure keep being sold (who would not like to have a captive market?) making millons for the parties involved, but still water is wasted and somehow the companies don't touch their profits in order to fix the infrastructure.

    Health Services? SInce competition was introduced hospital have been closing. For sure the most "efficient" remain, but most peoplr would prefer an inefficient hospital in their own locality than one efficient one far away from where they live.

    IT procurement? Do not make me laugh. The UK IT sector is the bone of many jokes, even by lay persons, when it comes to represent all what is wrong with private procurement for the government.

    Defense? One word: Eurofighter.

    Anyway, my point is that many people put far too much faith in private enterprise when there are many examples of how unreliable private companies can be as well when providing public services.

    --
    IANAL but write like a drunk one.
  198. If the "American Dream" is based in nonsense... by jotaeleemeese · · Score: 1

    ... then no wonder it vanished in a cloud of Chinese smoke.

    I can also dream with a pie in the sky, I am sure one day I will keep it after I have eaten it.

    --
    IANAL but write like a drunk one.
  199. Nonsense. by jotaeleemeese · · Score: 1

    Working hard entitles you to absolutely nothing but what is says in your employment contract.

    Teachers work hard, make little. Some music pop stars get high, work little, earn millions.

    --
    IANAL but write like a drunk one.
  200. What is the real american dream? by worldcitizen · · Score: 1

    After coming to the US, I noticed that for many people it was "sue and get rich"... Where is the lawsuit in his case? :P

  201. Best != only by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

    I never knew there was that much kool-aid in the world!
    Data isn't the plural of anecdote. You could name some sports stars, actors and musicians if you think a few statistical outliers prove anything.

    --
    Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
  202. Age of Enlightenment by falconwolf · · Score: 1

    The Age of Enlightment "occurred solely in Germany, France, Britain, and Spain
    Don't forget the Netherlands. We might not have as many big names as other countries, only Hugo de Groot and Spinoza come to mind.

    I didn't forget the Netherlands, I didn't know this. All I did was copy and paste the wiki article, but thanks for the info. Since you know something about the Netherlands and the Age of Enlightenment maybe you can assist in editing the article.

    Falcon
  203. Speaking of cutting salaries by evansvillelinux · · Score: 1

    Why don't they cut the million dollar plus salaries of those top executives and spread that wealth to the employees they fired? They stated on Good Morning America today that if they took that kind of measure, those fired employees would have three years worth of wages. BAH! Corporate greed.

    --
    IMHO, IANAL, TINLA, etc...
  204. Circuit City Should fire the Harvard MBAs. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Circuit City should fire their Harvard MBAs (or equivilant) and keep their best sales people. What IDIOT fires their best sales people. Corporate executive reward systems are all screwed up nationwide. Look at the demise of Digital Equipment and others high tech companies. CEOs were HUGELY rewarded for saving money vs. making money. Opps.... Sounds like Circuit City is suffering from the same illness. Simple plan for success: Reward your sales teams commiserate with their performance measured by gross profits. The rest will take care of itself. Reward your management on net profits plus business growth and make them manage the business, not micromanage the expenses. Circuit City rates a Darwin award! Just my $.20 worth (adjusted for inflation)