Workers (and customers) fight for ousted CEO's reinstatement

[TheHuckster]

This (article) is an ongoing spectacle in my neck of the woods where a CEO who has been paying its supermarket workers a livable wage, plus some stock options and a 401k got fired because the board didn't believe the chain was making enough money.

The fact is, the chain was making enough money to support its workers, executives while maintaining low prices for its customers. The board was just upset that they weren't making as much profit as the other supermarkets in the region.

Now, there's backlash from not only the workers, but from the customers as well, who have organized boycotting campaigns and other forms of protest, demanding the CEO's reinstatement.

As the article states, a lot of this has to do with some bad blood among the executives and the board, and the ousted CEO's demise is almost reminiscent of Mustafa's in the Lion King, betrayed by someone who thought he should be heir to the throne. Still, it's an interesting developing story, and something which is gaining some (but not enough) attention.

[Panacea]

It's greed, plain and simple. The Board has decided to bleed the company dry.

My guess is they're cashing out; get the profit out of the company and when it goes downhill sell for big bucks to a competitor.

The really sucky part is the previous management managed not only to pay its workers well, offer a good retirement plan, have a good working enviornment for employees AND make money for the family (there are a total of 9 shareholders), but they also managed to offer quality items for 10-20% less than their competitors.

That's why employees are striking, and the public is supporting them. This store was what capitalism should be.

[SkullKing]

That's why employees are striking, and the public is supporting them. This store was what capitalism should be.

I just want to say that IMO this is the best compliment a businessman can receive.

[TheHuckster]

That's why employees are striking, and the public is supporting them. This store was what capitalism should be.

Actually, that is what capitalism is. The US economy is not really a capitalist system anymore. It's a corporatist system, where the most powerful and wealthy people are not only undermining fair trade, wages, and consumerism, but are also undermining the democratic government via lobbies and campaign contributions.

A corporatist government and economic system can be just as oppressive as an communist or extreme socialist system.

[Hyena Dandy]

Trying to find a way to ask this without being condescending, so please assume I'm not trying to insult you.

Do you know what "Corporatist" means, or are you thinking of a plutocracy lead by corporate interests?

[siead_lietrathua]

Definition of CORPORATISM (merriam-webster)
: the organization of a society into industrial and professional corporations serving as organs of political representation and exercising control over persons and activities within their jurisdiction


when the corporations (which most people now work for in some regard) start controlling the government though paying off politicians to reach their own gains (hobby-lobby anyone?), then yeah i think the word applies.

i mean, if you think about it enough they do run almost everything. shipping companies, medical supplies, food industry. even those with a family farm rely on corperations for machinery and supplies.

[TheHuckster]

Trying to find a way to ask this without being condescending, so please assume I'm not trying to insult you.

Do you know what "Corporatist" means, or are you thinking of a plutocracy lead by corporate interests?

Perhaps corporatist, at least as defined in wikipedia, is too broad a word. Their definition of what I'm talking about is more refined to neo-corporatism or a Corporatocracy.

Still, my statement stands.

i mean, if you think about it enough they do run almost everything. shipping companies, medical supplies, food industry. even those with a family farm rely on corperations for machinery and supplies.

I don't have a problem with "big corporations" in and of themselves. It's when they abuse and exploit democracy that I get upset. I'd say that a good chunk of corporations you see that are huge are huge not for their merits of "building a better mouse trap" but through colluding with political interests to get their way.

[EricKei]

It's when they abuse and exploit democracy that I get upset.

*cough* *ahem*