Lenovo CEO spreads his bonus to lower level workers

[JS80]

Assuming i was the owner/ceo of the company, i would do these things in order:

I would freeze external hiring, except for truly urgent positions that need to get filled that can't be done internally.

Assume you have already done this (hiring freeze).

Any open jobs, i would give preference to internal hires (IBM did this when i worked there).

Any great company would already have this policy in place, but assume none of the workers are qualified for the heads required for the division with the requisitions. Remember, my premise is that you have X number of dead lard heads, which you can whack to make budgeted room for the new division.

I wouldn't even wait for a bad economy and basically make my workers become more multidisciplinary by training them, even in good times so they can move around.

Assume you have an annual review process and these dead heads are always rated below average.

I would take a temporary pay cut.

CEO won't take a pay cut. Assume he's the only one that makes enough to matter - and you are only senior management and you cannot afford a paycut (and even if you could, any cut wouldn't even be enough for one person). Oh, and you can't fire the CEO.

I would temporarily cut the pay of senior officers

They all resist and threaten to quit. Assume they are highly coveted talent and the competition would gladly hire them away from you.

I would work down the line and make lower workers take smaller pay cuts

So you'd force pay cuts for the productive workers that you should keep in order to subsidize the unproductive heads that everyone else knows does nothing all day?

I would institute temporary furloughs

Assume they are all FT salaried.

etc. etc. etc.

Assume you're a tech company on the brink of survival.

 

[Phokus]

Assume you're a tech company on the brink of survival.

Those are some really stupid assumptions you've put in there. If you had terrible employees, you would have gotten rid of them in good times and bad. If, for example, you had employees that didn't do anything, because that's the way the job was designed, that's the company's own fault and they should make an effort to put those employees in a useful situation.

And the CEO won't take a pay cut? We're assuming i'm in charge of the company making those hard decisions, if i'm just someone else, that doesn't make any sense. I've heard about CEO's (at privately held companies) sometimes taking voluntary paycuts during bad times.

You can temporarily furlough salaried employees. I think Cisco did this. It's not like you pay them when they're furloughed.

Edit: One thing i WOULD do is set expectations for employees at the company, that during bad times those policies would be implemented but it would ALWAYS start at the top first. I would also require mandatory financial education that would encourage them not to take on too much debt/too big a mortgage either.

 

[JS80]

Those are some really stupid assumptions you've put in there. If you had terrible employees, you would have gotten rid of them in good times and bad. If, for example, you had employees that didn't do anything, because that's the way the job was designed, that's the company's own fault and they should make an effort to put those employees in a useful situation.

And the CEO won't take a pay cut? We're assuming i'm in charge of the company making those hard decisions, if i'm just someone else, that doesn't make any sense. I've heard about CEO's (at privately held companies) sometimes taking voluntary paycuts during bad times.

You can temporarily furlough salaried employees. I think Cisco did this. It's not like you pay them when they're furloughed.

So getting rid of bad employees is a good thing? So you're just an evil Repug like me?

Stupid assumptions? Those were the assumptions I was running under when I had to whack the worthless piece of shits. But you keep bringing that up to make it sound like I like to fire people for fun.

 

[Phokus]

So getting rid of bad employees is a good thing? So you're just an evil Repug like me?

There's a difference between firing someone because they can't perform and planning mass layoffs due to recessions. At my last company, shitty people AND good people were laid off.

 

[Phokus]

Stupid assumptions? Those were the assumptions I was running under when I had to whack the worthless piece of shits. But you keep bringing that up to make it sound like I like to fire people for fun.

Well, when you posted it, you denigrated them and sounded pretty giddy at the time. In YOUR case, you can't suggest to the CEO to take a pay cut, but those other suggestions are doable.

I mean as an employee, i'd welcome things like furloughs/job sharing instead of looking over my back at layoffs all the time.

 

[Phokus]

Oh and i forgot, you can also institute voluntary layoffs as well, a lot of people at my last workplace took that deal, they got a full year salary to get laid off and were pretty happy about that. They tended to be older workers near retirement.

 

[JS80]

Well, when you posted it, you denigrated them and sounded pretty giddy at the time. In YOUR case, you can't suggest to the CEO to take a pay cut, but those other suggestions are doable.

I mean as an employee, i'd welcome things like furloughs/job sharing instead of looking over my back at layoffs all the time.

As much as I disagree with your politics, I'm pretty sure you'd be leaving and land another gig quickly before you take a fucking haircut so your CEO can bank in millions.

 

[sunzt]

Oh and i forgot, you can also institute voluntary layoffs as well, a lot of people at my last workplace took that deal, they got a full year salary to get laid off and were pretty happy about that. They tended to be older workers near retirement.

It doesn't count as involuntary right?

 

[JS80]

Oh and i forgot, you can also institute voluntary layoffs as well, a lot of people at my last workplace took that deal, they got a full year salary to get laid off and were pretty happy about that. They tended to be older workers near retirement.

Furloughs, voluntary layoffs are unheard of at smaller tech companies.

 

[Phokus]

As much as I disagree with your politics, I'm pretty sure you'd be leaving and land another gig quickly before you take a fucking haircut so your CEO can bank in millions.

Nope, i'd actually wait it out for a while. I live a VERY austere lifestyle. I wouldn't mind a break. I have a 250k mortgage, but i can afford MUCH MUCH more than that. Edit: Also 1 car between me and my wife, a 2002 camry.

A furlough gives me options. I can take a break. Or i can go looking elsewhere. The KEY is that i'm still technically with the company and if i was interviewing, i don't have to show on my resume that i'm 'unemployed'. If you get laid off, you are FUCKED. There are a lot of companies that basically say 'unemployed need not apply', but if you are employed, it's so much easier. That gives me a piece of mind.

 

[Phokus]

It doesn't count as involuntary right?

Right. They say, 'hey who wants to retire early and get this huge fucking check?' And a mad rush of old folks sign up. You should have seen their stupid grins, i was actually kind of jealous of them.