And I'll continue to insist

Post #302,885 by beepster 1/22/09 4:56:05 PM Reply	And I'll continue to insist that it is nowhere near as >easy< a situation as you make it sound. If management and directors know that people are the heart of the enterprise, then it simply cannot be divorced by moving one step up the chain to senior management. So what you have is the group that is often forced to make the quite difficult decision of people versus the cost of that resource. The pervasive attitude is that by virtue of being granted title CEO, it automatically means that this decision becomes simple..screw the workers. I reject that as no better or less prejudicial than the blanket assumption that all blacks are better athletes and white men can't jump...etc. It may hold for some. It is likely NOT the majority..and as I've said...if Drew is lucky enough to build his own little cookbook fiefdom...I think he may change his tune when he becomes CEO of "How to Cook Like Your Grandmother, Inc." I will choose a path that's clear. I will choose freewill.
Post #302,889 by drook 1/22/09 5:49:30 PM Reply	Red card, player ejected "I reject that as no better or less prejudicial than the blanket assumption that all blacks are better athletes and white men can't jump...etc." Becoming CEO is something you work very hard to achieve. Being black/white is something you're born with. You really think it's not reasonable to suspect that a self-selected group of people who have aspired to CEO-dom might share some other personality traits? Or are you suggesting that being a CEO is just something your born with? -- Drew
Post #302,890 by beepster 1/22/09 6:11:46 PM Reply	No, what I'm rejecting is the blanket generalization. All CEOs are bad, greedy, etc. All accountants are boring, nerdy types. All programmers are shut ins that only drink coke and eat pizza. IMnsHO, these things are no better, no worse, no less prejudicial in practice than statements based on race, religion, etc. Doesn't everyone aspire to their own measure of success? Aren't you doing that right now? I will choose a path that's clear. I will choose freewill.
Post #302,896 by drook 1/22/09 7:11:36 PM Reply	Ahh, now I get it I should treat all corporate officers as individuals, ignoring the demonstrated prevalence of certain personality traits and behaviors among that group. But corporations need only care about employees in the aggregate. Okay, that makes it very clear where you stand. -- Drew
Post #302,904 by beepster 1/22/09 8:15:09 PM Reply	Obviously it doesn't because you're missing the point entirely and sticking with your prejudice. Point being that these people are responsible for balancing your survival with the survival of everyone else involved. Your co-workers, your customers, your suppliers, your shareholders. Your base assumption, based on your prejudice, is that "those people", THEM, the EVIL CEOs, all of them, find the decisions that impact your life easy..in fact, they seem to enjoy your suffering at their hands. And I say to you, when you get to the point, and you may, where you have other's lives in your hands, you may end up realizing what I'm saying and agree. I did not say that corps only must care about you in aggregate...they must provide for you as an individual and at the same time provide for "YOU" in aggregate and at the same time make decisions that impact both you and YOU. I will choose a path that's clear. I will choose freewill.

Welcome to IWETHEY!