Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
The boards thought they were indispensable... Neumann did a particularly good job of conning Masa-san.
Ah, the board members... a club group that's made up of company insiders, CEOs from other companies, people in the financial industry, etc... They award big CEO compensation packages so they can justify their own high compensation packages. They're all scratching each others backs.

Imagine if employee pay was determined by a group of similar employees and not those higher up.

Too bad CEO pay isn't determinted by shareholder vote. Too bad whenever shareholders vote on CEO compensation packages, it's only advisory and nonbinding.
 
Ah, the board members... a club group that's made up of company insiders, CEOs from other companies, people in the financial industry, etc... They award big CEO compensation packages so they can justify their own high compensation packages. They're all scratching each others backs.

Imagine if employee pay was determined by a group of similar employees and not those higher up.

Too bad CEO pay isn't determinted by shareholder vote. Too bad whenever shareholders vote on CEO compensation packages, it's only advisory and nonbinding.

And that's why they should go and become CEOs.
 
This is so true. We saw in 2008 just how kind our system is to the corporate fat cats. The mantra was "too big to fail." So they got bailouts, while thousands of ordinary people were kicked out of their homes.
That “too big to fail” doctrine has been around a long time. In actuality the company already failed. It’s an excuse to have someone else foot the bill. I’m for free markets. If a company does well they should be able to keep their profits and not pay high taxes. But at the same time when they do poorly they should eat their own losses and not being able to pass the bill to taxpayers. But in 2008 it seemed every one I knew whether Republican or Democrat backed TARP and I was the only person I knew who was against it.
 
I’m neutral on unions. I think a person has a right to do what is in their individual best interest. So I leave it up to the individual to choose. But some states require you to join the union if there is one even if you don’t want to.
well thats dumb for a state to force you to join a union. honestly never knew USA would force unions. Best as you said to allow people to unionise if they want and protect that right, and allow those who dont want to be in unions to stay out
 
Let’s pay money to a fat cat union and not be paid more or get better conditions. Yay! A bunch of machinists who work physically hard for a living will care about self-entitled GenZers who stand around in a retail store.
 
Cool. So now all the current lazy employees who piss & moan about not being able to make a living on minimum wage (something minimum wage was never intended for) can be even lazier, Apple can't fire them, customer service will head to toilet and prices for Apple goods/services will be even more artifically inflated thanks to these bozos.

Well done.

Minimum wage was literally designed to be a living wage when it was created.
 
Unions in 2022 have one basic premise. The company that employs me is ripping me off and I hate them for it, maybe if we gather together we can force then to offer better benefits. It pits the employer against the employee and puts a middle man (union management) in between, who then shakes down both sides for their own cutout. It’s an unhealthy business to its core.
 
Come Monday they’ll all be fired and replaced by the waiting list of those who want to be Apple employees.

Didn’t realize the working conditions were horrible? These people don’t even have to work overnights or behind a hot stove or in a mine or something similar. They sell electronics at a beautiful store.
Which is exactly why unions exist: to prevent an employer for firing employees in retaliation
 
  • Like
Reactions: jons
Now, now...let's not confuse the issue of "unions bad."

Every worker has limitless mobility, and the only thing holding them back is pure work ethic!

Why, every one of us can name a handful of people who overcame incredible obstacles and became successful—the other 300 million Americans who aren't rich? Just didn't work hard enough.

I mean, it's incredibly simple to view this issue this way if you strip out ALL of the nuance and understanding of political and economic structures and their impact on labor.

I want something short, simple, and "common sense" so I can put it on a bumper sticker. Then all those lazy bums behind me can read it and do things the "right way", since there's only one variable to worry about.
People used to believe the earth was flat, too, and that we lived in an earth centric universe. It was a "simple" theory. But it was really, really wrong. Sometimes things are complicated. On the one hand, those "handful" of people didn't overcome those obstacles on their own. They had help from thousands. On the other, you really can't "strip out" economic structures without diminishing our basic understanding of the struggles those "lazy bums" (so-called) are going through on a daily basis.

Conservatives always lament liberal tears, yet take umbrage when they are asked to pay their fair share.
 
That “too big to fail” doctrine has been around a long time. In actuality the company already failed. It’s an excuse to have someone else foot the bill. I’m for free markets. If a company does well they should be able to keep their profits and not pay high taxes. But at the same time when they do poorly they should eat their own losses and not being able to pass the bill to taxpayers. But in 2008 it seemed every one I knew whether Republican or Democrat backed TARP and I was the only person I knew who was against it.
But here is the thing. Those Wall Street banks together accounted for a massive percentage of national GDP. If those companies had gone under, the country would have gone into an unprecedented credit shock and a massive depression would have followed, on same scale as 1920s.

The problem was lobbyists and bipartisan politicians in the 1990s who killed the Glass-Steagal Act. The problem IS free market ideology. If this had been questioned when we had the opportunity, the Wall Street monopolies would never have emerged in the first place.
 
well thats dumb for a state to force you to join a union. honestly never knew USA would force unions. Best as you said to allow people to unionise if they want and protect that right, and allow those who dont want to be in unions to stay out
This is a fiction. There is no state that forces anyone to join a union. There are union shops that require you to pay union dues IF it is a union shop, in order to stop folks free-loading on the hard won benefits the union brings to the shop.
 
More Apple stores may follow this. I wouldn’t be surprised but this seems like a bad move. Since Apple can easily close down this store and move its location. Thus, not having to deal with a union.

Apple can easily close the store down, eh? Know much about business leases, do you? Apple would have to continue paying the lease on the property, plus likely some percentage of sales.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DC Wallaby
Minimum wage was literally created to be a living wage. This is what FDR said on the topic, he was pretty clear:

In my Inaugural, I laid down the simple proposition that nobody is going to starve in this country. It seems to me to be equally plain that no business which depends for existence on paying less than living wages to its workers has any right to continue in this country. By "business" I mean the whole of commerce as well as the whole of industry; by workers I mean all workers, the white collar class as well as the men in overalls; and by living wages, I mean more than a bare subsistence level-I mean the wages of decent living.

Comments like yours are why unionization efforts like this new one are important, not just to pursue new rights but to protect the old ones.
That's alot of words to say absolutely nothing about what the mw was intended for
 
That “too big to fail” doctrine has been around a long time. In actuality the company already failed. It’s an excuse to have someone else foot the bill. I’m for free markets. If a company does well they should be able to keep their profits and not pay high taxes. But at the same time when they do poorly they should eat their own losses and not being able to pass the bill to taxpayers. But in 2008 it seemed every one I knew whether Republican or Democrat backed TARP and I was the only person I knew who was against it.

See, I'm NOT for free markets. I'm against poorer nations being able to pay their workers a slave wage so American companies ship jobs from the U.S. to those countries. I'm against taking a poor country like China and sending so many of our manufacturing jobs there that they turn into an economic powerhouse, an authoritarian kleptocracy that is now our enemy. WE did that. We created our own enemy. Gee, wasn't that smart.
 
Unions in 2022 have one basic premise. The company that employs me is ripping me off and I hate them for it, maybe if we gather together we can force then to offer better benefits. It pits the employer against the employee and puts a middle man (union management) in between, who then shakes down both sides for their own cutout. It’s an unhealthy business to its core.

That's some very nice corporate drivel you've regurgitated there. The actual fact is unions raise wages for everyone in society. Once workers see unionized workers getting better pay, they'll unionize too. In time, unionization raises wages for everyone. Maybe read a history book or something. Apple can afford to pay employees $30 an hour, and they should.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.