Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
General Motors said today that it is putting two of its five corporate jets out of service because the planes are not being used enough. The top three executives at GM, however, will continue to use the private luxurious jets for all of their business and personal travel, despite a flurry of criticism over the perk following an ABC news report this week.
An ABC News investigation revealed that the top three automakers have together spent several hundred million dollars to buy, maintain, and operate a fleet of top-of-the-line private jets for their top executives.
GM leased a fleet of seven planes at the beginning of this year, according to a company spokesperson. Two of the planes were dropped from the fleet in September and two more will be dropped by the end of the year.
I am not a business man but when my company started to not look so well like about fifteen years ago I would have not leased the planes in the first place but if I had they would have been the first thing I would have given up along with my large bonus and I my bloated income. All this also before I laid off my workers.More
Wow, what a concession! Giving up 2 of the 5 corporate jets. Times are hard all 'round. I wonder if they'll put them on eBay?
Today's megocorporate managment has no integrity.
They screw the workers, they screw the stockholders, and then they screw with the money.
Gem I don't think you really realize how well paid these guys are in comparison to their workers.
Nobody is worth that much money.
editec wrote:
Then why do they all get paid that much money? Don't misunderstand me...I think that their salaries and compensation and retirement packages are downright obscene...but its a corporations perogative to set the salaries of its employees.
Look at all the successful corporations in the world...tell me what their CEO's make and what their benefits packages look like. I think we can both agree that most large corporations have ridiculously well-paid execs.
We can rage about that all we want...but the bottom line is that rarely is that the reason for a corporations failings.
I just feel like we are harping on this issue of the salaries because its easy to point to one fat-cat and say "Look! HE'S the problem!"
Well, why isn't the salaries of these people the problem when a corporation is doing well...but suddenly its the problem when the company isn't doing well?
As far as their salaries in comparison to their workers...well come on now...a lead actress makes more than an extra....a doctor makes more than a nurse assistant...a teacher makes more than a paraprofessional...
As I said...I get as angry as the next man at the sight of men riding in corporate jets in expensive suits to ask me to give them money. But if they all said they wouldn't accept a dime in salary or benefits....the problem would be nowhere close to solved.
I just feel that this is swiftly becoming media manufactured "faux-outrage" to stop us from really examining why these businesses are REALLY failing.
So the employees of the big three are getting reduced salaries and benefits?
Does getting rid of the jets...even all of the jets...address why these companies are failing in the first place?
I'm sorry, maybe I'm missing something, but I just don't understand the hoopla over the corporate jets. So many in the media and the corporate world seem far too willing to get the masses all in a tizzy over the jets so that we can ignore the real problems these companies face.
If we got rid of the jets...if we started paying the CEOs $40,000 a year...would these companies miraculously recover? No, of course not. Getting rid of the jets, lowering the salaries of the company execs would be tokens, symbols only. I'm tired of trite politically staged apologies...big gestures that look good on tv and mean nothing. As far as I'm concerned they can keep their jets and their salaries...as long as they are willing to do what needs to be done to fix their friggin' companies.
Unfortunately, I don't see the CEOs being interested in doing that...and I don't see the Congress or the media being interested in making them do that...
I agree.
However, it is not congress' responsibility to MAKE them do it, nor the media. Either they want to, or they don't. It is their choice.
If you are going to compare the contribution of the CEO to the contribution of the assembly line worker - then we are going to have to agree to disagree. I'm not saying that the assembly line worker isn't an essential member of the company...just that I think that comparing the salaries of the two is non-helpful.When you look at the real value of the service of executives vs. employees and then compare their respective compensation, the idea that low level employees are making too much is laughable.
editec wrote:
Then why do they all get paid that much money? Don't misunderstand me...I think that their salaries and compensation and retirement packages are downright obscene...but its a corporations perogative to set the salaries of its employees.
Look at all the successful corporations in the world...tell me what their CEO's make and what their benefits packages look like. I think we can both agree that most large corporations have ridiculously well-paid execs.
We can rage about that all we want...but the bottom line is that rarely is that the reason for a corporations failings.
I just feel like we are harping on this issue of the salaries because its easy to point to one fat-cat and say "Look! HE'S the problem!"
Well, why isn't the salaries of these people the problem when a corporation is doing well...but suddenly its the problem when the company isn't doing well?
As far as their salaries in comparison to their workers...well come on now...a lead actress makes more than an extra....a doctor makes more than a nurse assistant...a teacher makes more than a paraprofessional...
As I said...I get as angry as the next man at the sight of men riding in corporate jets in expensive suits to ask me to give them money. But if they all said they wouldn't accept a dime in salary or benefits....the problem would be nowhere close to solved.
I just feel that this is swiftly becoming media manufactured "faux-outrage" to stop us from really examining why these businesses are REALLY failing.
Is it the governments job to regulate that?
Gem,
What made the highest paid CEO go from getting paid 25 times the average employee to the average CEO now getting paid 450 TIMES the average worker within their company?
NO SINGLE PERSON is worth more than 450 workers for any company imo, and because of this change from 25 times more to now 450 times more is what stands out and upsets a great deal of people because they see this as UNJUST and they see the means in which they get these salaries with their buddies that they chose as the board of directors giving it to them as UNJUST....
Not fair ? Well how much better off will you be if they don't make that much ?
