SUBSIM Radio Room Forums - View Single Post - Behold!! The cancerous growth of Wal Mart!!!

Skybird · 04-09-10, 12:09 PM

I always thought it to be a good idea to have some kind of a legally fixed relation between the lowest income of a worker at the top, and the most senior and responsible leader at the top of a company. Let there be a span of - just as an example - a factor of 25. the man on top earns 20 times as much, at maximum! - than the man at the bottom. All other jobs in that company gets scaled according to how much qualification you need, how much responsibility you have to take, how exgausting and time-intensive and how ridden with certain stress factors the job in question is. that means the worker at the bottom of the hierarchy gets let'S say 3000, and the man at the top gets 60000. . If the work of the worker is worth only 1000 for that company, the boss also gets scaled down and still gets 20000.

Something like that, with the relation between the upper and lower limit being legally binding.

what the company has left in profits after paying out it's staff, is money free for modernisation, education, insurrances, expansion. but more improtant than this fixiated insane idea of endless expansion and endless growth is to manage the core business of the company that way that the customers are satisfied and stay with it, and the jobs are safe and are fair, and keeping away foreign desinterested investors who do not know the busines and are not interested in it, only are interested in making quick money. If this balance would be acchieved, what else could there be to wish for? This is the most dominant priority for any responsible management there could be - not this megalomaniac craving for more and more profits for those at the top.

Say, in how many palaces can walk around at the same time? How many private jets are the one jet too much? how many Ferraris can you drive simultaneously?

04-09-10, 12:09 PM	#5
Skybird Soaring Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: the mental asylum named Germany Posts: 42,727 Downloads: 10 Uploads: 0	I always thought it to be a good idea to have some kind of a legally fixed relation between the lowest income of a worker at the top, and the most senior and responsible leader at the top of a company. Let there be a span of - just as an example - a factor of 25. the man on top earns 20 times as much, at maximum! - than the man at the bottom. All other jobs in that company gets scaled according to how much qualification you need, how much responsibility you have to take, how exgausting and time-intensive and how ridden with certain stress factors the job in question is. that means the worker at the bottom of the hierarchy gets let'S say 3000, and the man at the top gets 60000. . If the work of the worker is worth only 1000 for that company, the boss also gets scaled down and still gets 20000. Something like that, with the relation between the upper and lower limit being legally binding. what the company has left in profits after paying out it's staff, is money free for modernisation, education, insurrances, expansion. but more improtant than this fixiated insane idea of endless expansion and endless growth is to manage the core business of the company that way that the customers are satisfied and stay with it, and the jobs are safe and are fair, and keeping away foreign desinterested investors who do not know the busines and are not interested in it, only are interested in making quick money. If this balance would be acchieved, what else could there be to wish for? This is the most dominant priority for any responsible management there could be - not this megalomaniac craving for more and more profits for those at the top. Say, in how many palaces can walk around at the same time? How many private jets are the one jet too much? how many Ferraris can you drive simultaneously? __________________ If you feel nuts, consult an expert.