Steve Ballmer quits

[Skybird]

Originally Posted by Catfish

Oh this perfectly suits my idea of getting a job as a 'Fired Manager'

I let myself be employed, and promise not to do ANYthing. This has the advantage that i do not directly fire people, nor do i any harm to the (big) company.
(This is much better than most big managers have in their sorry portfolio.)

After 3 years i resign, against a payage of say 5 millions.
Deal ?

In ancient Greece, they had the "Scherbengericht" (octracism). Citizens were able to file one name per citizen into a yearly counting, a leader or official whom they wanted to get rid off due to his lousy performance in office. If a needed minimum of counts was met, let'S say 3000 votes or so, the person had to leave not only the office, but also the city (=state) and was banned, under threat of death, for a period of ten years. If in this time he would return, he was as good as dead.

Now that sounds like a nice idea when thinking of politics - and company management.

Treaties with leading personnel also need to be transparent, there shall be no golden handshakes, no secret payments, no secrecy about special privileges. Contracts need to be published in full. Managers are liable with their private wealth for their decisions, they shall no longer be allowed to just gamble with money that are not theirs. Finally, a solution must be found to prevent managers running business in a way that may maximise their income, but is at the longterm perspective of the company even after the manager has left again already. While a good sales climate and success shall be shared in boni by ALL working personell, boss and worker alike, and according to everybody's contribution, losses shall not be externalised and must be shared by everybody as well. No boss shall be allowed to privatize profit but to nationalise or externalise losses - or just leave dodge and get away with what he has, leaving behind a ruin. Honest traders (ehrbare Kaufleute) know that. Antisocial parasites, hedgefond managers, opportunists and the like, do not. That is what makes the difference between a constructive, creative, good system of capitalism, and a perverted, damaging capitalism that is a race for monopolism, and ruins community interests instead of contrbtuiong by it. Really free market versus monopolism, so to speak. Monopolies, and capitalism in its constructive, posiitve understanding, are mutually exclusive. Where you have the one, there cannot be the other.

Damn, I think you just stepped onto one of my auto-buttoned reflex-triggers there.