My answer is some of that is ok (to motivate) but they shouldn't feel obligated. Rationale:
Do workers share losses? Obviously not. Do workers invest time and money into a business? Nope. Do workers take any risks? Nope.
My answer is some of that is ok (to motivate) but they shouldn't feel obligated. Rationale:
Do workers share losses? Obviously not. Do workers invest time and money into a business? Nope. Do workers take any risks? Nope.
Mencken1976 wrote:
My answer is some of that is ok (to motivate) but they shouldn't feel obligated. Rationale:
Do workers share losses? Obviously not. Do workers invest time and money into a business? Nope. Do workers take any risks? Nope.
If the company losses enough money, they start laying off people. So, the answer would be maybe. ?♂️
Mencken1976 wrote:
My answer is some of that is ok (to motivate) but they shouldn't feel obligated. Rationale:
Do workers share losses? Obviously not. Do workers invest time and money into a business? Nope. Do workers take any risks? Nope.
workers don't invest time into a company???????
as a whole workers invest far more time than the owners
just pointing out that your stance is stupid wrote:
Mencken1976 wrote:
My answer is some of that is ok (to motivate) but they shouldn't feel obligated. Rationale:
Do workers share losses? Obviously not. Do workers invest time and money into a business? Nope. Do workers take any risks? Nope.
workers don't invest time into a company???????
as a whole workers invest far more time than the owners
I could agree with that, they invest time and receive a dividend very quickly, might be within a week, 2 weeks, or even a month, either way it is much faster than other investments that might only pay after 6 months.....we call it a paycheck.
Show me the Money! wrote:
just pointing out that your stance is stupid wrote:
workers don't invest time into a company???????
as a whole workers invest far more time than the owners
I could agree with that, they invest time and receive a dividend very quickly, might be within a week, 2 weeks, or even a month, either way it is much faster than other investments that might only pay after 6 months.....we call it a paycheck.
right, so you agree they invest time in a company and OP's statement that they don't is moranic.
thank you.
Let me ask you this.... Are the workers millennials?
The whole framing of this discussion doesn't make sense to me. Profit sharing isn't something that "should" or "shouldn't" be done. It is just one option that is available to employers and employees when negotiating compensation. It might be right in some situations and not others. It's not really a philosophical/moral/ethical question. It's just something to be agreed upon through negotiations.
Of course not. Workers aren't equity holders, they explicitly deferred that risk in exchange for a constant paycheck, because that's a better deal for them.
Hardloper wrote:
Of course not. Workers aren't equity holders, they explicitly deferred that risk in exchange for a constant paycheck, because that's a better deal for them.
Looks like you don’t know what “explicit” means, among other things. Stick to being an IT drone.
Workers don't invest time. They get paid for time.
Invest - expend money with the expectation of achieving a profit or material result by putting it into financial schemes, shares, or property, or by using it to develop a commercial venture.
Everybody should work for free. All the money needs to go to the chief executives and owners, I'm tired of all these commie workers demanding pay for working. This is basic trickle down economics. Give all the money to rich people and it will create jobs for the peons, Also, workers should pay taxes on the money that goes to the owners. Only poor people should pay taxes.
brojos sez: us hear brojos aint not no nuthin bout werkin, gettin payed fer werkin, payin werkers, sellin anythang, or prosessin anythang as a kareer. us don't want to sell anythang bought or prosessed, or process anythang sold, bought, or prosessed, or repare anythang sold, bought, or prosessed.
Some corporations do share profits with workers. Profit sharing, pensions, medical & dental coverage became a thing while F.D.R. was president. F.D.R. and U.S. Congress agreed to an informal wage ceiling. Top marginal tax rate for most years from 1930's to early in J.F.K.'s presidency was between (90 & 100)%. Most workers would rather have a larger pay check than all the perks.
I don’t know why you mention what they may be obligated to do.
If they devise a profit sharing plan that leads to long term growth that benefits the owners it would be go to do, right?
That doesn’t work for all types of businesses so it shouldn’t be the only way or main way to go.
I am working in a maturing startup and thus issue came up in my last performance appraisals, partly by me addressing it.
I am personally investing into the company by plenty of overtime hours that I just nil at year's end. If our operations were effective these hours might not accumulate.
Many of my workers are turning increasingly non-inventive and "bureaucratic" as we mature. Good for them to have less stressful lives than before, startups are no fun.
With that context: The question of profit-sharing with workers is easily answered: No. Workers are no entrepreneurs and share no risks. They are no managers which ensure smooth operations.
IF all debt and obligations of the company are fully paid off (we burned some venture capital that needs to be earned in whole) then a company might use some parts of the profits to share, with the aim to reduce fluctuation.
Beyond that it is a foolish thing to do.
Sounds like when you asked the question they gave you some kool-aid and you drank it.
Profit sharing is one of many possible compensation and motivational tools. In startups stock options are a typical benefit used to retain and reward employees. Hopefully you are getting that and hopefully your company goes public and makes you rich. I have worked at 3 startups and only one of them succeeded.
Holy sh!t, learn to write a sentence.
I didn't have a problem reading his sentences.
ForgotOneMoreThing wrote:
I didn't have a problem reading his sentences.
Awesome. You are proficient in drivel. Congrats.