| >For instance - If overhiring happened, how is this not at least a little bit on the individual that approved of a hiring spree? Why is it that they should be able to yield a baton that hurts the workers they hired, without having to actual bare the brunt of the decisions? Do you think shareholders do not consider their employees performance when deciding to hire/keep them? Do you think CEOs don't do that when it comes to their executive team? Do you think the executive team doesn't consider that? It all comes flowing down. I can assure you as a shareholder i am 100% focused on getting a return, and I will fire (or vote to fire) any executives that i believe are doing a bad job, or who accept that their underlings do a bad job. Hiring people, and then firing them some time later is not intrinsically the same as doing a bad job, nor does it mean there was "overhiring". Also. "hurts workers"? What? Workers receive the payments that were agree to, for the period that was agreed to. No more, no less. You are no more entitled to a job than the supermarket is entitled to my patronage, and me choosing to no longer purchase from you, whether it be groceries or labor, is not me hurting you. |