this post was submitted on 13 Oct 2024
347 points (99.7% liked)

Work Reform

12982 readers
67 users here now

A place to discuss positive changes that can make work more equitable, and to vent about current practices. We are NOT against work; we just want the fruits of our labor to be recognized better.

Our Philosophies:

Our Goals

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
all 16 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] KillingAndKindess@lemmy.blahaj.zone 44 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

Executives report that they have finally finished the number crunching that has been the topic of discussion for weeks now regarding the new budget changes. One board member told us "The nerds in accounting kept complaining about how many expense reports we've been sending lately. After looking into it, we've found a rapid uptick in hitman related expenditure." Confirming recent suspicions that vendors did take note of the recent demand increases and decided on a market adjustment industry-wide. Our source did not confirm that these new layoffs were due to the investigation results, but inside rumor is saying that's the case.

[–] Badeendje@lemmy.world 38 points 9 months ago (2 children)

If the government needs to step in, they need to make sure they get ownership. Take it off the market. Shares should just become worthless.

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 6 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Western governments don't want ownership. Politicians see ownership of capital assets as political liabilities. They require real labor and talent management and long term maintenance and planning. Western governments want kickbacks from successful privately run enterprises (or, at least, profitably run businesses) in the forms of employee income taxes, which can be turned into sinecures and patronages for their underlyings.

Nationalization is antithetical to how a modern western politician succeeds in their positions.

[–] Badeendje@lemmy.world 10 points 9 months ago (1 children)

In Europe we have seen banks nationalized, politically appointed people put in charge. The banks managed back on track and now slowly sold back into the market again to make up for the loss. The shareholders got nothing when the banks where nationalized.

[–] nickwitha_k@lemmy.sdf.org 1 points 9 months ago

Sounds nice.

[–] hydrospanner@lemmy.world 0 points 9 months ago (1 children)

And that's how you permanently destabilize a market economy!

[–] anon_8675309@lemmy.world 7 points 9 months ago

What’s it called when private equity steps in, buys it and then starts selling off chunks of it?

[–] yesman@lemmy.world 23 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (1 children)

Layoffs: that one weird trick to solve all business problems, the working class hates it!

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 21 points 9 months ago

Business Actuary: "So you fired all the superfluous VPs and middle managers, right?"

Boeing HR, drawing a big red line through the Quality Control and Safety Assessment departments

Actuary: "Right?!"

[–] TheFrogThatFlies@lemmy.world 20 points 9 months ago

Social Responsibility is not only making your workers build houses for the poor, it's having enough cash in hand to take care of them when times are harder.

[–] Shadywack@lemmy.world 14 points 9 months ago (1 children)

This new Boeing is not the same as the Boeing that America stood on. If this new Boeing is swept away and we lose American dominance in Aerospace, it's something I can live with perfectly fine. There's no patriotism in corporate success, let it all burn down. We've faced this before in the first gilded age, if we come out of the second gilded age, we'll be a better country for it.

[–] IndustryStandard@lemmy.world 4 points 9 months ago

No need to run a functional company. When crucial industries get lost because of poor management, blame China.