jeffhergert I was shocked this morning that one of our engineers, one who has a year or two more time in on the railroad than I do, has resigned. I don't believe he is old enough to retire, even to take an early retirement. No one so far knows anything as to why. Jeff
I was shocked this morning that one of our engineers, one who has a year or two more time in on the railroad than I do, has resigned. I don't believe he is old enough to retire, even to take an early retirement. No one so far knows anything as to why.
Jeff
I'm guessing, and probably guessing wrong, he got another job lined up somewhere and decided to walk. It's an old truism that it's easier to find a job when you HAVE a job than it is if you're unemployed.
I haven't said much on this topic as not being a professional railroader I don't believe it's my place to do so, but from what I've been reading I wouldn't be surprised if many train crew people are contemplating the same thing.
Murphy Siding Ulrich Why aren't they dumping now then? Lots of clouds on the horizon.. now would be the time to dump it. In the case of CEOs with stock options, how do we know they're not quietly execising those options and selling stock?
Ulrich Why aren't they dumping now then? Lots of clouds on the horizon.. now would be the time to dump it.
Why aren't they dumping now then? Lots of clouds on the horizon.. now would be the time to dump it.
In the case of CEOs with stock options, how do we know they're not quietly execising those options and selling stock?
That's a matter of public record... there are various sites that allow one to see what key execs are doing with their stock..
Thanks to Chris / CopCarSS for my avatar.
Euclid charlie hebdo Euclid: Your entire thesis is circular and reveals some degree of naivete or ignorance on your part concerning the corporate world. Did you ever work in management in a large business? Oh yes, and you can't provide any details, just make sure you get your snarky insult across.
charlie hebdo Euclid: Your entire thesis is circular and reveals some degree of naivete or ignorance on your part concerning the corporate world. Did you ever work in management in a large business?
Euclid: Your entire thesis is circular and reveals some degree of naivete or ignorance on your part concerning the corporate world. Did you ever work in management in a large business?
Oh yes, and you can't provide any details, just make sure you get your snarky insult across.
I pointed out several factors in econ. You apparently don't understand so you keep whining that no one will answer your comments.
What you really mean is nobody will provide the answers that you agree with.
Murphy Siding blue streak 1 Could it be that the higher payrates for some CEOs has to do with possibility instability of the higher paying company? If my prospects at company A is only 8 months and company B 1 year what will I accept at A to work there. A big factor is stock options. One company I know of certain management got options starting a $8.75 that went down to $4. Stock rose above $30. They bought at the lower cost and sold at higher. Which the management exercised at low price and sold at high price even with some paying short term capital gains. BTW price went down below option price later. What do each of the Class 1s have in the way of stock options? Real incentative to do every thing to increase stock prices including PSR. The only upside of stock options is that Amtrak cannot offer them. Stock options almost make it seem like the CEO's main job is to get the stock price higher, so he, and the powerful people who put him in the job can cash out, take the money and run.
blue streak 1 Could it be that the higher payrates for some CEOs has to do with possibility instability of the higher paying company? If my prospects at company A is only 8 months and company B 1 year what will I accept at A to work there. A big factor is stock options. One company I know of certain management got options starting a $8.75 that went down to $4. Stock rose above $30. They bought at the lower cost and sold at higher. Which the management exercised at low price and sold at high price even with some paying short term capital gains. BTW price went down below option price later. What do each of the Class 1s have in the way of stock options? Real incentative to do every thing to increase stock prices including PSR. The only upside of stock options is that Amtrak cannot offer them.
Could it be that the higher payrates for some CEOs has to do with possibility instability of the higher paying company? If my prospects at company A is only 8 months and company B 1 year what will I accept at A to work there.
A big factor is stock options. One company I know of certain management got options starting a $8.75 that went down to $4. Stock rose above $30. They bought at the lower cost and sold at higher. Which the management exercised at low price and sold at high price even with some paying short term capital gains. BTW price went down below option price later.
What do each of the Class 1s have in the way of stock options? Real incentative to do every thing to increase stock prices including PSR. The only upside of stock options is that Amtrak cannot offer them.
Stock options almost make it seem like the CEO's main job is to get the stock price higher, so he, and the powerful people who put him in the job can cash out, take the money and run.
From the viewpoint of decisions being made - You nailed it. Pump & Dump
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
The Annual Reports almost always claim that .most exec compensation is pay for performance. I rarely see any report where the exec's don't meet the minimums even though sales and net earnings are below the previous years. I think there is a significant amount of Fiction in annual reports
[quote user="BaltACD"]BaltACD wrote the following post 9 hours ago: Euclid Maybe CSX just believes Foote is worth that much more than the UP and NS CEOs. Which really means all three boards are idiots. [/que]
BINGO!
UlrichAs much as is possible, everyone's pay should be tied to performance, with performance criteria clearly spelled out for each position. Certainly no management bonuses should be paid where the Company has performed under par or has downsized its workforce to trim costs. No golden parachutes for anyone..
When I was non-contract (official) with Chessie System and following through with CSX - there were no levels of remuneration that were established for individual positions throughout the system. All increases came about through the Performance Review type process. The head of whatever organization would undertake a performance review of all his subordinates - ostensibly a 'fair' evaluation against defined metrics. One thing that I observed through this process was that if, say, the head of a department was 'down graded' by his superior - all those under that supervisior would be downgraded without regard to any individual performance.
When I was initially 'promoted' to non-contract status, I was told I was getting a 15% increase over what I was making in my contract position with by new non-contract rate being $700 a month. When I got my W-2 for the year I was promoted it read about $8800. Obviously what I had been earning during my period as a contract employee exceeded what I was being paid in my non-contract position.
Employee compensation, outside of Union Contracts, is a real den of inequity.
And The "Company" is the Board of Directors who decide the CEO raise (or bonus, or …). The subsequent impact on the people making up the Company will take the hit on bad decisions and only get a trickle, if any, should there be a good one.
As much as is possible, everyone's pay should be tied to performance, with performance criteria clearly spelled out for each position. Certainly no management bonuses should be paid where the Company has performed under par or has downsized its workforce to trim costs. No golden parachutes for anyone..
charlie hebdo Euclid Ulrich Euclid I have never suggested or believed that there is any control that determines how large or small the gap between highest and lowest wage should be. But many people here and elsewhere complain that this gap is too large. So since they know this, they ought to be able to explain how large is too large. Of course everyone has the freedom to start their own company and make all pay equal from top to bottom. Actually I don’t expect people to answer these questions. The answer is in their refusal to answer. It works like a charm. The control is supply and demand. You and I might not believe that an entry level NHL hockey player should make more than an experienced cancer researcher.. but the market says otherwise. Diddo for the spread between what the CEO gets and what the worker bees get.. the market is the mechanism that controls the spread. So then why do some people cite a difference between the top and bottom wage as being unfair? They always refuse to answer that question. 1. Perhaps you need to consider that the so-called market* is the best or fair or only way to rationalize and distribute everything? What's good for corn, wheat and soybeans isn't necessarily ideal for humans. 2. Balt calculated the yearly gross earnings of a minimum wage worker. But let us look at a $15.00/hour worker. He or she grosses ~$30k. Is a CEO making 100 or 600 or even 800 times that actually worth that? How? * Let's not even bring in sophisticated market concepts like elasticity
Euclid Ulrich Euclid I have never suggested or believed that there is any control that determines how large or small the gap between highest and lowest wage should be. But many people here and elsewhere complain that this gap is too large. So since they know this, they ought to be able to explain how large is too large. Of course everyone has the freedom to start their own company and make all pay equal from top to bottom. Actually I don’t expect people to answer these questions. The answer is in their refusal to answer. It works like a charm. The control is supply and demand. You and I might not believe that an entry level NHL hockey player should make more than an experienced cancer researcher.. but the market says otherwise. Diddo for the spread between what the CEO gets and what the worker bees get.. the market is the mechanism that controls the spread. So then why do some people cite a difference between the top and bottom wage as being unfair? They always refuse to answer that question.
Ulrich Euclid I have never suggested or believed that there is any control that determines how large or small the gap between highest and lowest wage should be. But many people here and elsewhere complain that this gap is too large. So since they know this, they ought to be able to explain how large is too large. Of course everyone has the freedom to start their own company and make all pay equal from top to bottom. Actually I don’t expect people to answer these questions. The answer is in their refusal to answer. It works like a charm. The control is supply and demand. You and I might not believe that an entry level NHL hockey player should make more than an experienced cancer researcher.. but the market says otherwise. Diddo for the spread between what the CEO gets and what the worker bees get.. the market is the mechanism that controls the spread.
Euclid I have never suggested or believed that there is any control that determines how large or small the gap between highest and lowest wage should be. But many people here and elsewhere complain that this gap is too large. So since they know this, they ought to be able to explain how large is too large. Of course everyone has the freedom to start their own company and make all pay equal from top to bottom. Actually I don’t expect people to answer these questions. The answer is in their refusal to answer. It works like a charm.
The control is supply and demand. You and I might not believe that an entry level NHL hockey player should make more than an experienced cancer researcher.. but the market says otherwise. Diddo for the spread between what the CEO gets and what the worker bees get.. the market is the mechanism that controls the spread.
1. Perhaps you need to consider that the so-called market* is the best or fair or only way to rationalize and distribute everything? What's good for corn, wheat and soybeans isn't necessarily ideal for humans.
2. Balt calculated the yearly gross earnings of a minimum wage worker. But let us look at a $15.00/hour worker. He or she grosses ~$30k. Is a CEO making 100 or 600 or even 800 times that actually worth that? How?
* Let's not even bring in sophisticated market concepts like elasticity
adkrr64 charlie hebdo Is a CEO making 100 or 600 or even 800 times that actually worth that? How? Because a CEO sometimes make decisions that can have 100 or 600 or even 800 times greater impact on performance or future of the entire company?
charlie hebdo Is a CEO making 100 or 600 or even 800 times that actually worth that? How?
Because a CEO sometimes make decisions that can have 100 or 600 or even 800 times greater impact on performance or future of the entire company?
Evidence? And as Balt points out, where are the severely negative consequences for terrible decisions? Seldom on CEOs, often seen in paycuts or RIFs for a company's workforce.
And generally the ones that make BAD decisions, jump ship with a Golden Parachute worth several years of their inflated salary & options from the time before they put the company in distress and had a financially fatal effect on all the employees of the company.
Someone being rewarded for failure doesn't leave a good taste for the employees that are disadvantaged.
charlie hebdoIs a CEO making 100 or 600 or even 800 times that actually worth that? How?
zugmannWho cited that?
I mentioned it.
The key thing with that is not the level of compensation as such. I've seen it mentioned in the past in various places that the concern is the widening gap between the average worker and the top executives.
One might think that wage increases between top and bottom would be relatively linear - ie, my pay goes up 5%, the CEO's pay goes up 5%. I'm left with the impression that some folks feel that such hasn't been the case.
Others might feel that it should be on a decreasing scale - I get 5%, the CEO gets 2%.
When I was in USAF, there was a huge readjustment in pay (late 1960's). A basic airman (E1) went from about $109 per month to around $235 a month - better than a 100% increase. In fact, an E1's monthly pay was now more than an E4 would have been making, had their pay not also been increased. When you got to O10 (general), the increase was well less than 100%.
A variable with the CEO's pay, however, has been mergers and consolidations, which obviously increase the CEO's responsibilities.
It would take a lot of research and interpretation to sort it out.
Food for discussion.
Larry Resident Microferroequinologist (at least at my house) Everyone goes home; Safety begins with you My Opinion. Standard Disclaimers Apply. No Expiration Date Come ride the rails with me! There's one thing about humility - the moment you think you've got it, you've lost it...
The figures posted are their whole compensation package. Their actual wages are probably a lot less. (A few UP CEOs back was the last time I checked, but the actual wage was 2 or 3 million dollars. The add-ons and bonuses was worth about two or three times their listed wage. A lot of those extras are to give them, so it's said, "skin" in the game. Also those extras are non taxable or taxed at a lessor rate than wages are.
It could simply be that the way the packages are done is why CSX comes out better.
EuclidMaybe CSX just believes Foote is worth that much more than the UP and NS CEOs.
Which really means all three boards are idiots.
Today's News Wire:
CEO outlines ongoing crew shortages, need for changes in jobs
https://www.trains.com/trn/news-reviews/news-wire/csxs-foote-blaming-psr-for-rail-problems-is-nonsense/
Mr. Foote's statements, within this article, actually explains that PSR via CSX's upper management IS key to the rail problem. He states that presumably under his watch, [his] CSX management cut about 1,000 jobs. After being able to recall ~800 and have hired another ~2,000. "… and we’re going backwards,” Foote said." So if PSR implementation, layoffs & work rule changes, isn't the problem why hasn't CSX management responded by offering positions that will attract and keep capable people? Management should know their employees and customers. IF they are failing to address either then Management is failing. IF they are failing on both fronts they HAVE failed!
Maybe CSX just believes Foote is worth that much more than the UP and NS CEOs.
zugmann Euclid So then why do some people cite a difference between the top and bottom wage as being unfair? Who cited that?
Euclid So then why do some people cite a difference between the top and bottom wage as being unfair?
Who cited that?
I'll not cite anything - the $7.75 'minimum wage' at 8 hours per day and 260 days per year works out to $16,120. The photo I posted earlier showed Foote's total compensation to be north of $20 Million; with the UP and NS CEO's going for $14 Million. I won't argue the difference between CEO's and minimum wage but I will question how Foote is $6 million 'better' than the UP and NS CEO's?
EuclidSo then why do some people cite a difference between the top and bottom wage as being unfair?
It's been fun. But it isn't much fun anymore. Signing off for now.
The opinions expressed here represent my own and not those of my employer, any other railroad, company, or person.t fun any
zugmann Health insurance, RR retirement, and many business owners in a lot of areas still think it's 1950 and $11 an hour is a lot of money. And I know this is weird, but many RRers actually like RRing.
Health insurance, RR retirement, and many business owners in a lot of areas still think it's 1950 and $11 an hour is a lot of money.
And I know this is weird, but many RRers actually like RRing.
Hey, not that weird.. I like my job too although it has its drawbacks.. customers who don't pay.. accidents.. stolen loads.. freight claims.. but.. I guess overall it still pays the bills and beats gargling broken glass.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.