Just for perspective here,
1000 * $15/hr = $15,000 / hr $96,000,000 / $15,000 / hour = 6,400 hours 6,400 hours / 40 hours / week = 160 weeks 160 weeks / 52.17857 weeks / year = 3.0663929655412174 yearsThey could afford to keep those employees on for another 3 Years with that amount.
They could have paid every one of those employees nearly 6 figures instead. If the company is doing so badly that they feel they need to lay off a thousand people, they should not be handing out CEO bonuses, period.
Pretty sure a good portion of that was union busting, but that’s what we’re all about now.
This would not shock me in the slightest
I guess it’s a good thing I make my own coffee at home. Bonus! It doesn’t taste like burnt bean water!
That’s $96,000 per layed off worker
This is the same douche canoe that was the CEO of Chipotle and denied that the serving sizes were getting smaller and told people to just harass the worker making the food if they thought their serving size was to small.
Also the same guy trying to green wash plastic waste to be customer responsibility while commuting on a private jet from Southern California to Seattle.
Had to get the money from somewhere. Just like Trump. Fire a bunch of workers for the tax cut payments to billionaires. Like clockwork.
Starbucks gives the new CEO a $96 million bonus, then a month later, lays off 1,000+
workersPotential Luigis.FTFY.
We wish
Cap the maximum compensation gap (including bonuses and stocks) between the highest paid and lowest paid person in a company at 1000:1. Any overpay goes into a UBI account that pays out equally to all.
Should be 30 :1 on whichever is lower average or median salary and contractors count if they perform core business functions/work on location.
There’s absolutely no way he’s adding enough value compared to Joe MBA to justify that compensation.
That’s what I’m trying to do understand as well. What’s the explanation for these kinds of things? What’s the actual sequence of events and how conditions that lead to these things? Why would the board approve of this kind of compensation?
“It’s a big club, and you ain’t in it.”
Friendly reminder, comrades: There is no such thing as a good billionaire. From the East to the West, they are humanity’s enemy.
I don’t know why people think large companies aren’t allowed to get rid of people when they want to? And especially Starbucks, it’s shit-work, not a 20y long career maker.
It’s not like individual locations determined they’re overstaffed or something. The CEO is just blanket firing people because it makes some numbers look more gooder on some spreadsheet.
Oh so that’s their reason is it, make number look good, company be strong.
It wouldnt be because of your idiot president causing a recession where more people wont be able to afford to buy coffee as often? You dont think that could be a contributing factor?
I’m European.
Do you keep a list of workers or jobs who you feel are beneath you and don’t deserve enough money to support themselves with basic essentials like food, water, or shelter?
Why would I do that.
Let me translate that rhetorical question for you:
Why do you believe society should allow certain businesses to remain in existence, when those businesses utilize human labor, yet do not pay enough for human laborers to subsist?
I don’t believe that, you’ve just attached that to my argument because you either can’t understand my point or don’t want to.
I don’t believe that,
I see. Maybe we have had a failure to communicate. What I was referring to was this:
And especially Starbucks, it’s shit-work
Whatever you meant by “shit-work” is what I asked you about.
Why do you believe companies offering “shit-work” should be allowed to remain in business?
By shit work i mean unskilled labour basically. It’s not worth much for a reason. I dont see why you would ask me that.
Some business operate on unskilled labour, it shouldnt be a surprise that its not paid well, just because something doesnt pay well doesnt mean the company shouldnt exist, and since when did anyone expect that a part time job at startbucks could or should be able to fully support a person? That’s fucking ludicrous. And before you start with people have to take what they can get, yes thats true and starbucks isnt responsible for that shortfall, in a real socialist democracy, that should be taken up by welfare if needed.
I understand the gut reaction to go after the CEO or board for making decisions that affect so many people, but it doesnt help, its misdirected energy that should go to the government.
We cant expect any company to do what in the interest of the workers, unless its financially beneficial. The best way to handle this is to use government to reign in corps to limits we can be happy with.
I stand by all I’ve said, but I respect your position, i just think it’s misguided.
Who said these were part time jobs? No one. A lot of Batistas work full the jobs actually, because they can’t get any other jobs. Should they die of starvation or exposure or buried in medical debt just because you think they’re beneath you? What if you lose your job and the market is shit and all you can find for a year or more is some “shitty unskilled labor” job? Should you be forced from your home to live on the streets just because you can’t find a job in your career field through no fault of your own?
Let’s do some quick, back of the napkin math. I’m going to round for simplicity.
This asshole took a bonus of 96 million dollars. Let’s assume that all 1,000 employees have an average salary of $45,000, which was the US average salary last time I checked. Employee benefits, which include health insurance and retirement contributions, typically cost an employer 1.5x the salary but I’m being lazy so let’s 2x it. So each of the 1,000 employees costs the company $90,000.
$$96,000,000 / $90,000 = 1,066
Or in other words: At $90,000 per employee, the $96 million bonus could fund these employees at full time schedules with full benefits for an entire year. This asshole stole their salaries for themselves.
Just because the government lets them do it doesn’t make it moral or OK. If he didn’t take the bonus he’d still be a gazzilionaire and one of the highest paid employees in the company, but he elected to steal 1000 salaries instead.
No one is in this thread calling for Starbucks specifically to change their ways, they’re outraged that this is allowed to happen at all. And yes, the only organization that can stand up to corporate power is the government, but that has been completely sucked up corporate Americas asshole, so all we can do is point out the injustice and hypocrisy of the system and hope enough other people get as angry as we are so we can all overthrow this bullshit system of oppression, and your “well what did you expect working a shit job” attitude does absolutely nothing to help, and only reinforces the idea that this is all somehow normal or OK.
By shit work i mean unskilled labour basically. It’s not worth much for a reason. I dont see why you would ask me that.
The question wasn’t about the labor. The question was about the employer. The question was about the mindset you demonstrated in your first comment, that you later clarified:
since when did anyone expect that a part time job at startbucks could or should be able to fully support a person? That’s fucking ludicrous.
The question is about how you decided that this idea is “fucking ludicrous”.
You lied to me when you said you didn’t hold this belief. It may have been an unintentional lie at the time, probably because you didn’t understand what I was asking. But, I was talking about what you describe as “fucking ludicrous”. Those two words are a vociferous acknowledgement of the beliefs I was talking about; beliefs that you clearly hold. I want to know how you came to believe this idea to be “fucking ludicrous”.
We cant expect any company to do what in the interest of the workers, unless its financially beneficial
Why not? I think we most certainly can. I think we can absolutely demand that they fulfill an obligation greater than just their own financial interests. I think we can certainly demand that their business operations benefit their workers, and society in general. When their business is demonstrably exploitative “shit-work”, we are not obligated to allow them to continue to do business. We can prohibit them from continuing to engage in that harmful business.
Some business operate on unskilled labour
Unskilled human labor.
They require the labor of a human for their business to function, but they pay less than subsistence wages to that human. That is “shit-work”.
The net effect of their business practices is harmful. Those workers are also consumers, and those consumers have less to spend. These “shit-work” companies are strangling the economy and damaging society in general.
Again: we do not have to allow this. We do not have to allow “shit-work” companies to compete in our markets, where they drive reasonable, responsible employers out of business.
To the company it is “an adjustment.” To those people, it can be a devastating loss of healthcare, of the money they use to pay for food and shelter, and even an identity crisis. Starbucks has all sorts of positions, ranging from seasonal part time employees, to store management that gets paid pretty well, to corporate employees that presumed they were in 20y career trajectories. Every single one of them deserves better than losing their job just to pay for a big bonus for one guy.
It’s not about whether they are allowed or not. It’s that actions should have consequences but the modern corporate structure has so divorced leadership from the consequence of their actions that this is normal. Let me rephrase: Hurting people to pump your personal wealth is not just normal, it’s expected. That’s sick.
Lol, okay, blame starbucks all you want, it’s a faceless entity. You could be mad at the politicians who set you up to instantly fall into desperation the moment you lose a minimum wage job, but if you want to be mad and ineffectual at the same time, be my guest.
it’s a faceless entity.
Not only does it have a face…
… It’s a perfectly punchable face.
I don’t understand why you think it’s either/or? I didn’t say, “Starbucks is solely to blame” or anything of the sort. It’s incredibly stupid that living requires an employer, and that’s something we need to fix, but as long as it does they should act and be treated like they have the ethical responsibility they’ve been given.
Maybe you should stop giving people free passes for psychopathy just because it’s within the law.
There’s a fucking recession coming you dolt, ofcourse large companies are going to dump people, and it doesnt take a psychopath to do it.
Your hearts in the right place, but if you cant be realistic about the why and how of running a business, i dont want your opinions.
I don’t get it. We did not let kings and lords and counts keep their belongings. Why are we treating this scum any different?
Capitalism has no face to punch
In the time of kings and lords, it got way, way worse than this.
Not saying we should wait that long now, just saying.
Boycott what you don’t like. Vote with your money.
Haven’t spent money in a Starbucks for over a decade…nor fast food chains, nor Walmart.
Did do a few Amazon purchases a few years ago and I still feel guilty about it.
Don’t use Starbucks anymore. It’s American
Don’t use Charbucks anymore. It’s shit coffee
There ain’t no smile in those eyes. Creepy AF.
Mr. Beast smile
You have to be willing to exploit your fellow humans to get where he is. Either you don’t have a soul to start with or it gets torn to bits every step you take up the ladder.
I’ve known people like that. I’ve been very close to people like that. It’s crazy, everywhere they look they’re looking for some win/something they can take. They never feel guilty. Honestly, the only thing they feel is betrayal when someone won’t bend the knee.
That’s my little observation.
Sad thing is, they still have people who love them but they aren’t truly capable of reciprocating. Everything is transactional and they always expect it to be profitable for them. The only thing that truly hurts them is when it isn’t profitable. It sucks being caught in their orbit too. Believe me.
My brother was a sociopath, unsuccessful in business but a user and abuser.
I have spent most of my life dealing with a successful sociopath. Thing is, at times it really looks like he means well.
It’s a constant battle in my head. Is it just his belief system? Is it just that he views everyone else as incompetent?
I constantly find myself making excuses for him because I love him. I get angry and I’m able to really look at everything sometimes, or he does something really shitty to someone else. Like recently, he wanted to buy tires for his son. Great, right? But he had to find a way to make it a tax write off or he didn’t want to do it. He got his daughter a car, but with the condition that her mother couldn’t drive it under any circumstances. And it had to be a flood damaged car. Good deals with the salvage titles and all.
He finally caved and sent his son money when I guilt tripped him, but he was mad for weeks about it. He’s probably still fuming. Mom ended up buying his daughter a car she couldn’t afford on credit and he gave the one he bought her to his girlfriend.
He ended up buying his son used tires because he couldn’t work it out to get the write off without sending a check and he didn’t trust him with it (with no reason to feel that way).
He built a cabin with his step brother in the 80s. They both poured blood, sweat, and tears into it. He had the money so he technically owned it, but it was understood that it was theirs with no strings attached.
When it was completed he informed him that he was welcome to use it any time he wanted, so long as his mother never stepped foot through the door. Naturally his step brother said “fuck that”, took the L and never went back.
I don’t know I’m doing dealing with it. Emotions are weird.
I trust you know this person well and that your experience is accurate.
However, you might find it useful to look up coping mechanisms in dealing with someone with OCPD. OCPD is extremely common and people with this personality disorder usually are extremely miserly and controlling. I’m not saying your person has this disorder. But from your story, the issues with money align closely enough that the tools people use in dealing with OCPD miserliness might help you. Or at the very least it might help you feel less alone in that experience.
I’m really sorry you are having to manage that and deal with this person. You sound like a very reasonable and empathetic person yourself. Please do something small and kind for yourself tomorrow. ❤️
I understand, my brother only ever fucked over everyone else except me (probably because he knew what would happen) and it was an ever frustrating thing. I miss him but I think it’s for the best that he isn’t around to do more damage.
What ended up happening to him? Was it drugs that stopped him from being successful enough to really hurt people?
Sorry to say it like that. That’s just been my experience.
He got hopped up on coke and booze and tried to kill a random driver with one of his beloved guns and they ran him down.
