Continuing Rant Thread - Get it Off Ya Chest here

[pedleyr]

Yes, Australia has no history with black people.

That's right. Terra nullius. Don't forget it.

 

[Bridges]

Had to endure listening to the head of Aus post today trying to justify sacking 900 workers, when he earns $4.8million a year. When his letter post is losing money but parcel post is raking it in. They made a profit of $312 million last year.
I can see that letter volume has and will reduce. But in a business that is still profitable this bloke wants to sack 900 while he makes $4.8mill. Total KARNT.

 

[wide eyed and legless]

That's how businesses operate profitably, put someone in charge who can run a business, has to have a rewarding salary or he would go elsewhere, and remember the government will get about half of that salary back in tax.

 

[warra48]

Slight correction there chaps...

Nobody EARNS $4.8mil a year, they might get PAID $4.8mil a year but they DON'T earn it.

 

[wide eyed and legless]

Slight correction there chaps...

Nobody EARNS $4.8mil a year, they might get PAID $4.8mil a year but they DON'T earn it.

Why not.

 

[seamad]

my ego thinks it could earn 4.8 mil a year easy

 

[wynnum1]

They paid more then that a year to **** Telstra.

 

[warra48]

They paid more then that a year to **** Telstra.

Proves my point, methinks...

 

[wide eyed and legless]

Proves my point, methinks...

Two empty statements does not prove any points.

 

[Airgead]

There has been research done that shows that the CEO has about zero impact on the profitability of a company. Estimates range from 3% to somewhere round 10%.

No one EARNS that kind of money.

50 years ago the CEO:Employee pay ratio was about 5:1. You can justify that. Now its closer to 100:1. You can't justify that. No one person has that amount of impact on performance.

The hero CEO is a myth (put out mostly by CEOs to justify their huge salaries). Businesses do well because they have good products and a receptive market. The CEO is just an expensive figurehead. We can do without them.

 

[Camo6]

While I don't agree that someone can make that ridiculous amount of coin while others struggle for work and get fleeced like sheep, there's no denying they work hard for it and commit more time than most towards their career. We live in and support a society where this is possible for any individual with enough ambition. I reckon there's more out there that don't earn their dole check.

 

[Bridges]

Does Aus Post even have to make a profit? What ever they make is returned to the government anyway. 900 families are about to lose an income when the company is making a profit, I can see a restructure may be needed as the volume of letters being posted drops but with the increase in parcel deliveries surely these jobs can be saved.
And Camo fixed this for you.
"there's no denying they **** over and backstab more people than you or I could count in their relentless climb to the top, they generally get there on the sweat and toil of others that they couldn't give a crap about, and for the most part view as less than human. Thus they reach their goal CEO"

 

[pedleyr]

There has been research done that shows that the CEO has about zero impact on the profitability of a company. Estimates range from 3% to somewhere round 10%.

No one EARNS that kind of money.

50 years ago the CEO:Employee pay ratio was about 5:1. You can justify that. Now its closer to 100:1. You can't justify that. No one person has that amount of impact on performance.

The hero CEO is a myth (put out mostly by CEOs to justify their huge salaries). Businesses do well because they have good products and a receptive market. The CEO is just an expensive figurehead. We can do without them.

I'm going to have to call ******** on this unless you can give a link to said research.

I'd also refute in the strongest terms that 10% impact is "about zero". If it's even half that, and the company makes $100m, she's clearly worth $5m.

 

[pedleyr]

Does Aus Post even have to make a profit? What ever they make is returned to the government anyway. 900 families are about to lose an income when the company is making a profit, I can see a restructure may be needed as the volume of letters being posted drops but with the increase in parcel deliveries surely these jobs can be saved.

Devil's advocate - why should the 900 least important employees be subsidised by the rest? Or the customer? Or the taxpayer?

That's what a market economy is, inefficient or surplus capacity is cut so it can be redeployed elsewhere.

Yes it's bloody tough on the poor *******s who get cut, but the alternative economic systems are worse.

 

[Bridges]

When they are given the arse the taxpayer will still be subsidizing their wages.

"That's what a market economy is, inefficient or surplus capacity is cut so it can be redeployed elsewhere."

This is my point they are looking at one part of their business, letter post and saying we need to sack all these people. Redeployed elsewhere to me is what should happen. They can probably be redeployed in the parcel post part of the business that is growing by the day.

 

[Camo6]

And Camo fixed this for you.
"there's no denying they **** over and backstab more people than you or I could count in their relentless climb to the top, they generally get there on the sweat and toil of others that they couldn't give a crap about, and for the most part view as less than human. Thus they reach their goal CEO"

Haha! I'm not denying they're *****, just hard working ones! My wife has worked for some of the bigger financial companies in Melbourne and knows what they make. While there's a lot that would match your description there's also a lot that, aside from working ridiculous hours, also contribute a lot of time and money towards charity organisations. I'm just glad I live in a society where social caste doesn't necessarily dictate who you are or can be. Take this away and I reckon we'd have a lot more to complain about.

 

[shaunous]

I just went out to my shed to check the sound system for this weekends Bonfire Farm Party. Looked at the Guiness-esk stout I bottled 2hrs previous and thought 'I'll move that tub full of bottles to a dark area under my shelf' and then, 'Bang, crash, boom, splash', fukin glass tallies smashed all over my bare feet and black stout all over the shed floor.

Lucky I designed my bench and shelving so the shed can be washed out, but *** that just sucked, 6 tallies from 20+ survived the fall. No way I could get all the glass, it's everywhere. Didn't have my phone to take a photo of the carnage either.

But anyway, the sound system works a treat, and I only got a couple of cuts on my feet.

Way, wah, wah!!!

 

[pk.sax]

When they are given the arse the taxpayer will still be subsidizing their wages.

"That's what a market economy is, inefficient or surplus capacity is cut so it can be redeployed elsewhere."

This is my point they are looking at one part of their business, letter post and saying we need to sack all these people. Redeployed elsewhere to me is what should happen. They can probably be redeployed in the parcel post part of the business that is growing by the day.

You might find that contractors provide a cheaper service than employees. This would have to be true for any govt owned corporation, the 'do things by the letter' attitude is stamped all over it and in the end makes you far more expensive. Balancing game between safety/efficiency/profit.
Our general attitude towards work doesn't help. It's a pity because good work conditions should encourage employees to work harder to maintain them, not take them for granted.

 

[spog]

That sucks the big one no doubt .

 

[pedleyr]

Definitely the wrong time of year to be losing a batch of stout, tough going mate.