State of Union: Trumka (AFL-CIO President) says.........

[umbertino]

 

January 30, 2018 3:28 PM CST By Mark Gruenberg

 

 

 

 

commondreams.org

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

http://www.peoplesworld.org/article/state-of-union-trumka-says-trump-has-actively-hurt-workers/

[markb57]

time to buy more ammo. war's comin'....

[Karsten]

37 minutes ago, markb57 said:

time to buy more ammo. war's comin'....

Ammo, I started buying up everything I should ever need back before obama stole the 2nd term while it was still affordable....I will just say the Brown Truck guys were really happy for about 1 .5 years.

 

Karsten

[Pitcher]

Trumka needs to worry about AI taking over all his union members jobs.   

[nstoolman1]

31 minutes ago, Pitcher said:

Trumka needs to worry about AI taking over all his union members jobs.   

 

 

Tha'ts funny. There are jobs that no AI could ever replace. 

[Pitcher]

Agree, but it is a fact that numerous union type jobs will be done by robots in the not too distant future.  

[bostonangler]

12 hours ago, nstoolman1 said:

There are jobs that no AI could ever replace. 

 

But sadly there are many jobs AI will take. You know that imported beer company Budweiser is looking at self-driving tractor trailers? Have you been in an auto plant in  the last 5 years? I have been in the new Volkswagen plant and most of it is robotic. I even read where a giant ad agency in Japan tested a script writing program against one of their best creative people and the computer generated creative was the winner... Of course all machines will need someone to repair them, but the average blue collar worker is not up on such skills. The average truck driver is not a plumber or carpenter. Many jobs will have to be done by humans, but how many humans such as taxi drivers, school bus drivers, welders, doctors, cashiers and countless others will be left in a tough situation? Maybe we need to spend tax dollars on education instead of building more bombs... JMHO

 

B/A

[Shabibilicious]

Republicans are already pushing "right to work" here.  It's only a matter of time before construction unions implode as prevailing wages take a nose dive because of competitive bidding.  

 

GO RV, then BV

[bostonangler]

14 minutes ago, Shabibilicious said:

"right to work"

 

We have that here and it has a nice ring to it... What it really means is a company can end your employment without reason. American workers don't seem to want any rights. The company mantra, "if you don't like it there's the door" is the new way of life for American workers. Lower wages, less hours and no rights.... Strange days indeed.

 

B/A

[bostonangler]

Are you interested in AI?

 

https://www.technologyreview.com/s/604087/the-dark-secret-at-the-heart-of-ai/

[SgtFuryUSCZ]

***///MAGA!

 

Our Company -- Our Rules.

If you don't like it -- you "have the right" to seek employment elsewhere.

 

We'll pay you what WE think our Company can afford.

We'll give you a safe place to work & won't beat you daily.

We won't force you to make your under-age children work.

And we'll give you free coffee.

 

Our Company -- OUR RIGHTS.

 

.

[Shabibilicious]

7 minutes ago, SgtFuryUSCZ said:

***///MAGA!

 

Our Company -- Our Rules.

If you don't like it -- you "have the right" to seek employment elsewhere.

 

We'll pay you what WE think our Company can afford.

We'll give you a safe place to work & won't beat you daily.

We won't force you to make your under-age children work.

And we'll give you free coffee.

 

Our Company -- OUR RIGHTS.

 

.

 

And there's absolutely nothing wrong with that with respect to new hires......It's the long term loyal employees who may have to take a massive pay cut because the company has now decided to restructure that gets hurt.....those employees still have their same bills to pay.  Just saying.

 

GO RV, then BV

Edited January 31, 2018 by Shabibilicious

[SgtFuryUSCZ]

***///MAGA!

 

Not our problem, SHABS.

 

We're constantly planning & adjusting our Company...

If our Company has to make cuts in order to survive - so be it...

If we don't - THERE'LL BE NO COMPANY...

then where will you be...?

 

We're NOT responsible for your bills.

 

You're failure to plan / act does NOT constitute an emergency on OUR part.

 

.

 

.

[Shabibilicious]

9 minutes ago, SgtFuryUSCZ said:

***///MAGA!

 

Not our problem, SHABS.

 

We're constantly planning & adjusting our Company...

If our Company has to make cuts in order to survive - so be it...

If we don't - THERE'LL BE NO COMPANY...

then where will you be...?

 

We're NOT responsible for your bills.

 

You're failure to plan / act does NOT constitute an emergency on OUR part.

 

.

 

Spoken like a good little lock stepped 1 percenter.  

 

GO RV, then BV

[bostonangler]

29 minutes ago, SgtFuryUSCZ said:

***///MAGA!

 

Our Company -- Our Rules.

If you don't like it -- you "have the right" to seek employment elsewhere.

 

We'll pay you what WE think our Company can afford.

We'll give you a safe place to work & won't beat you daily.

We won't force you to make your under-age children work.

And we'll give you free coffee.

 

Our Company -- OUR RIGHTS.

 

.

 

Funny how greed has taken over American business. Companies wanted to share their success. Not anymore..

[bostonangler]

The average CEO-to-worker pay ratio for the 168 companies included in this report stands at about about 70-to-1, with some CEOs making more than 300 times the median salary of their employees – just in cash (base pay, bonuses, profit sharing, etc.). Many CEOs receive substantial stock/option grants and perks as part of their compensation, which can more than quadruple their total annual pay. But similar data for employees by company is not readily available, so we looked solely at cash compensation for both CEOs and workers to calculate ratios for this report.

Larry Merlo, the CEO of CVS Health Corp, made roughly 434 times the salary of the median CVS employee in 2015, the largest ratio between CEO and employee pay at any company on this list.

See the full list of CEO-to-employee pay ratios

---

It wasn't always this way. In 1965, the CEO-to-worker compensation ratio in the United States stood at about 20-to-1, according to a 2015 report by the EPI. But starting in the 1970s up through 2014, "inflation-adjusted CEO compensation increased 997 percent, a rise almost double stock market growth and substantially greater than the painfully slow 10.9 percent growth in a typical worker's annual compensation over the same period."

Is this a problem? Is it out of line for the Chief Executive of a successful company to be paid hundreds of times the salary of his or her average employee? Or is CEO a demanding enough job requiring such a highly developed skillset that these high salaries are deserved?

"Excessive executive pay is deservedly blamed for rising income inequality, because worker pay has stagnated as executive pay has soared," said the New York Times in a July 14 editorial. Additionally, the idea that the inequality between executive and worker pay is contributing to the downfall of the American middle class has been prevalent on the campaign trail this election year.

---

 

 

But not everyone sees the disparity as an issue. Some even question the validity of the data, pointing out the pay of a CEO at an average company is only about four-times higher than the average American worker, a decidedly more balanced ratio than found at the largest firms. The problem there, however, is that the average firm is very small, employing just 20 workers, and workers at those companies are not representative of the typical American employee. Again, according to the EPI report, a typical American worker "works in a firm with roughly 1,000 workers. Half (52 percent) of employment and 58 percent of total payroll are in firms with more than 500 or more employees. Firms with at least 10,000 workers provide 27.9 percent of all employment and 31.4 percent of all payroll."

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Remember when families could live comfortable lifes with one wage earner? The effect of what companies have done to their employee wages has had a direct effect on the quality of life for American workers and the implosion of the family. JMHO

 

B/A