CEO to Workers: I May Fire You if Obama Wins....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ridge

Actually, no. He is firing these people because he EXPECTS that the government will force him to spend more money. It's speculation. Imagine if global employment fluxed based on theories like the oil industry...

---

It's either going to be the same or more tax - not speculation but a 1 or 0. Seeing the last 4 years of how unfriendly the administration is to non-green businesses in general I'd say his 'speculation' is dead on. Seems to me that he's just giving his employees a "just in case/warning" to have a back up plan. Once again - it's his company to do as he pleases. If he just decides tomorrow to shut it all down and go hang out on the beach or at his mansion then WTF - it's HIS company.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jhood001

It is kind of the same moral standard that makes an employer expect that 'his guys' are going to show up on a business critical day. Or the same moral standard that makes an employer expect that 'his guys' aren't going to wait until a very critical moment to quit on him in order to hurt him.

It is a two way street. It just depends on what side of the coin you're on.

At the end of the day each employer and each employee decides what level of loyalty they're willing to give and what level they demand. I personally believe that there are no ethics in business. Go where the highest pay is. And employers need to stop acting like employing people or 'creating job's makes them akin to Jesus Christ. Employing people simply makes them more money.

---

Nope. No such thing as two way street when it comes to employer and employees. One is paid to do his/her job. He/she doesn't like it, move on. The other creates opportunity by taking risk and putting investment and hiring paid workers. You need make more profit first before employing more workers.. Your statement that employing people simply makes them more money is false.

Your boss can decide no call/no show tomorrow w/o risking much of losing you. On the other hand, if you do so, you may lose your job as it is at his/her mercy. Try to act like your boss and be an asshole at him one day if you dont believe me :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jhood001

Um. They both have that right. Re-read.

---

Yea they both have the right, but the employer is seen as a scumbag for exercising his.

Employing more people does not necessarily make the employer more money, especially if when the government steps in.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Teufelhund

Whoa. No one even suggested there should be a law forcing his decision to maintain or cut employees. It is his business, his choice; I would not argue that point. He wants sympathy for being forced to pay more taxes, and his decision is to put people out of work rather than let those increased taxes cut into his lifestyle of relative excess. I support his right to do so, but I still think he's a scumbag for it.

I should clarify that I think our current system of paying income tax is flawed and should be replaced entirely. It is, however, the current system to which we are subject.

---

Its not an income tax he objects to, its higher taxes on his doing business, these are two different things.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ChunkyMonkey

Nope. No such thing as two way street when it comes to employer and employees. One is paid to do his/her job. He/she doesn't like it, move on. The other creates opportunity by taking risk and putting investment and hiring paid workers. You need make more profit first before employing more workers.. Your statement that employing people simply makes them more money is false.

Your boss can decide no call/no show tomorrow w/o risking much of losing you. On the other hand, if you do so, you may lose your job as it is at his/her mercy. Try to act like your boss and be an asshole at him one day if you dont believe me :D

---

THIS GUY^^^^^ gets it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dwalker460

THIS GUY^^^^^ gets it.

---

I better quit too.. almost hit a water hydrant while typing that on my iphone. Texting and driving is DANGEROUS!!!!

But us worker bees are unappreciative dirt bags because we expect to be treated fairly. But wait we should be "thankful" we have a job right? How about the employers be thankful we work for them, we are thankful we have a job and do good work etc etc.

I don't really care what you union bashers say but fair is fair. I have a certain set of rules above and beyond laws and regulations that I'm held to. And the agreement(union contract) holds my employer above and beyond labor laws. We are both happy, I work hard, they make money off the work I do, I get paid, it's a happy little relationship, I understand them and they understand me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ChunkyMonkey

Nope. No such thing as two way street when it comes to employer and employees. One is paid to do his/her job. He/she doesn't like it, move on. The other creates opportunity by taking risk and putting investment and hiring paid workers. You need make more profit first before employing more workers.. Your statement that employing people simply makes them more money is false.

Your boss can decide no call/no show tomorrow w/o risking much of losing you. On the other hand, if you do so, you may lose your job as it is at his/her mercy. Try to act like your boss and be an asshole at him one day if you dont believe me :D

---

Hey Monkey, I had an employee (OWS type) once who I had cleaning up the shop during slow times. He was slacking and I told him that I really wanted for him to get his 40 hours, but he had to stay busy. His response to me was that he would not work for someone that didn't GIVE him his 40 hours. He didn't last much longer then a few days.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dwalker460

Its not an income tax he objects to, its higher taxes on his doing business, these are two different things.

---

You're right; I misspoke. He's crying about new taxes that may cause him to fire people. The result is the same.

You guys are still arguing this from the standpoint of a business-owner who has to make a decision between keeping the lights on and making cuts. Those are not the circumstances this guy is in.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SuperiorDG

Hey Monkey, I had an employee (OWS type) once who I had cleaning up the shop during slow times. He was slacking and I told him that I really wanted for him to get his 40 hours, but he had to stay busy. His response to me was that he would not work for someone that didn't GIVE him his 40 hours. He didn't last much longer then a few days.

---

I hope he wasn't one of the installers you sent to install those glasses at my house [Tooth]. Those looked like good workers.