Corporate Responsibility: 80 years of profit sharing, 65 years of no layoffs.


Corporate Responsibility: 80 years of profit sharing, 65 years of no layoffs. - Printable Version +- MacResource (https://forums.macresource.com) +-- Forum: My Category (https://forums.macresource.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=1) +--- Forum: 'Friendly' Political Ranting (https://forums.macresource.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=6) +--- Thread: Corporate Responsibility: 80 years of profit sharing, 65 years of no layoffs. (/showthread.php?tid=161659) Pages: 1 2
Re: Corporate Responsibility: 80 years of profit sharing, 65 years of no layoffs. - cbelt3 - 12-16-2013 Lemon Drop wrote: that's an admirable record, but this company does not pay health benefits, correct? employees are expected to pay them out of the bonus? So in the wake of Obamacare now that they have to provide this benefit will they take it out of the bonus? And do they allow unions or has it ever been attempted? Healthcare: The company provides health benefits that comply with Affordable Care Act. Benefits are paid for out of the bonus, pre-tax dollars. Employees are allowed to seek their own healthcare in 2014 if they wish. Employees under spouse's or parent's plans must provide proof of the plan and are then exempt. Unions: US companies have no say in whether an union is 'allowed' or not. But none of the US operations are unionized. Attempts are made every decade or so, but fail. Some non US plants are unionized, as far as I know. (Europe, I think....). Systems differ outside the US, and the bonus and guaranteed employment clauses do not apply in all cases. Re: Corporate Responsibility: 80 years of profit sharing, 65 years of no layoffs. - Lemon Drop - 12-16-2013 US companies have no say in whether an union is 'allowed' or not. Many US companies (Walmart being one notorious example) very aggressively thwart employee efforts to unionize and make it known that they don't want their employees in unions. This has been going on for a long time. Whether employees can successfully form unions when they want to has a lot to do with the culture at the business. If you cover your family of 4, let's say, under this company's health care plan, how much does that cost out of the bonus? Re: Corporate Responsibility: 80 years of profit sharing, 65 years of no layoffs. - cbelt3 - 12-16-2013 Lemon- Management discourages unions. They've made it clear that adding a third party to the mix would be detrimental to the business, probably result in the loss of the bonus program, etc. Last go-round (about a decade ago) there were meetings and communication. But management never said "If you elect a union you're all fired" or any of the bad stuff. And employees are full time.. there's none of that deliberate part time nonsense there. Trained and experienced employees are a manufacturing company's lifeblood. Management also has a real Open Door policy - anyone can make an appointment with the CEO and WILL be seen, and there is also Employee Advisory Board of employees selected by their peers that brings questions and issues to senior management on a monthly basis.. all part of the program. Family 'Bronze' (70%) healthcare cost about $8K last year. Next year it will be about $10K. Most of the details are in the book mentioned in the original posting (of course a chance to sell the book). Re: Corporate Responsibility: 80 years of profit sharing, 65 years of no layoffs. - max - 12-16-2013 cbelt3 wrote: Black- And government contracts are a major PITA for industrial / commercial manufacturers. They usually don't make much profit on them. Documentation is unbelievable. Far in excess of what is required by, for example, the nuclear power industry. For any normal company government work is that, unless that is your specialty. The only time we will consider it, if there is a third party between us and the government, taking all the brunt and usually upcharging couple hundred percent. We have done some work for NASA this year, the same way, through a third party, for a third party, I still wasted a week on paperwork. We avoid it..... Re: Corporate Responsibility: 80 years of profit sharing, 65 years of no layoffs. - August West - 12-16-2013 If you don't demand performance, the low performers can become a sustained cancer on the organization. I've seen it happen. So the winnowing process at the start means you only hire and keep the performers. People whose personal work ethic matches that of the company. Low performers can be weeded out without the "demand for performance." It's a matter of shaping the culture, very selective hiring, involuntary turnover, etc. For example, SAS touts it's very low turnover, but two out of 3 turnovers are involuntary, and they possess one of the best organizational cultures in existence. Re: Corporate Responsibility: 80 years of profit sharing, 65 years of no layoffs. - Black - 12-17-2013 Were we too easy on Lincoln Electric? Re: Corporate Responsibility: 80 years of profit sharing, 65 years of no layoffs. - max - 12-17-2013 After all the moaning by those who never created one manufacturing job in this country the union summary is quite telling:.... "One of the most interesting comments I remember was in teaching	to a group of our Advanced Management Program alumni out in Milwaukee, for one of their annual meetings, and I said: 'To make it more interesting, why don't you see if you can't get some of your union executives to come?' Well, six of them showed up, and we had this discussion about Lincoln and what's good, what's bad and so on and so forth. None of them said a thing until the very end when finally, what obviously was the senior person, spoke up and said: 'Well, we don't see any need for our union in Lincoln Electric because they are giving their workers much of what we fought for, and sometimes died for, in the 1930(s). Better pay, a share in the profits, job security as best they can. But I'm not worried that unions are going to become irrelevant because most of you are too dumb to run your companies this way!' Re: Corporate Responsibility: 80 years of profit sharing, 65 years of no layoffs. - Sam3 - 12-17-2013 On the other hand, things may not be like they used to, based on this comment: James wrote: I worked at Lincoln in Cleveland for 15 years,The first ten years were great they did exactly as promised I.E.More work equals more pay,The last 5 years when Stropki took over where the worse,He is so far removed from the Lincoln Philosophy that the company now barely resembles it's former self,Now the company is all about taking money from the high performer and giving it to the executive branch,They even have a higher percentage bonus than the workforce,Much higher,We found out that the year that we were paid a 25% bonus management gave them self a 75% bonus. If that is the case, then current management is turning it into a typical bottom-line but greedy-manager company, and isn't doing anymore that which made it successful.

Corporate Responsibility: 80 years of profit sharing, 65 years of no layoffs. - Printable Version

+- MacResource (https://forums.macresource.com)
+-- Forum: My Category (https://forums.macresource.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=1)
+--- Forum: 'Friendly' Political Ranting (https://forums.macresource.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=6)
+--- Thread: Corporate Responsibility: 80 years of profit sharing, 65 years of no layoffs. (/showthread.php?tid=161659)

Pages: 1 2

Re: Corporate Responsibility: 80 years of profit sharing, 65 years of no layoffs. - cbelt3 - 12-16-2013

Lemon Drop wrote:
that's an admirable record, but this company does not pay health benefits, correct? employees are expected to pay them out of the bonus? So in the wake of Obamacare now that they have to provide this benefit will they take it out of the bonus?

And do they allow unions or has it ever been attempted?

Healthcare: The company provides health benefits that comply with Affordable Care Act. Benefits are paid for out of the bonus, pre-tax dollars. Employees are allowed to seek their own healthcare in 2014 if they wish. Employees under spouse's or parent's plans must provide proof of the plan and are then exempt.

Unions: US companies have no say in whether an union is 'allowed' or not. But none of the US operations are unionized. Attempts are made every decade or so, but fail. Some non US plants are unionized, as far as I know. (Europe, I think....). Systems differ outside the US, and the bonus and guaranteed employment clauses do not apply in all cases.

Re: Corporate Responsibility: 80 years of profit sharing, 65 years of no layoffs. - Lemon Drop - 12-16-2013

US companies have no say in whether an union is 'allowed' or not.

Many US companies (Walmart being one notorious example) very aggressively thwart employee efforts to unionize and make it known that they don't want their employees in unions. This has been going on for a long time. Whether employees can successfully form unions when they want to has a lot to do with the culture at the business.

If you cover your family of 4, let's say, under this company's health care plan, how much does that cost out of the bonus?

Re: Corporate Responsibility: 80 years of profit sharing, 65 years of no layoffs. - cbelt3 - 12-16-2013

Lemon-

Management discourages unions. They've made it clear that adding a third party to the mix would be detrimental to the business, probably result in the loss of the bonus program, etc. Last go-round (about a decade ago) there were meetings and communication. But management never said "If you elect a union you're all fired" or any of the bad stuff. And employees are full time.. there's none of that deliberate part time nonsense there. Trained and experienced employees are a manufacturing company's lifeblood.

Management also has a real Open Door policy - anyone can make an appointment with the CEO and WILL be seen, and there is also Employee Advisory Board of employees selected by their peers that brings questions and issues to senior management on a monthly basis.. all part of the program.

Family 'Bronze' (70%) healthcare cost about $8K last year. Next year it will be about $10K.

Most of the details are in the book mentioned in the original posting (of course a chance to sell the book).

Re: Corporate Responsibility: 80 years of profit sharing, 65 years of no layoffs. - max - 12-16-2013

cbelt3 wrote:
Black-

And government contracts are a major PITA for industrial / commercial manufacturers. They usually don't make much profit on them. Documentation is unbelievable. Far in excess of what is required by, for example, the nuclear power industry.

For any normal company government work is that, unless that is your specialty.
The only time we will consider it, if there is a third party between us and the government, taking all the brunt and usually upcharging couple hundred percent. We have done some work for NASA this year, the same way, through a third party, for a third party, I still wasted a week on paperwork.
We avoid it.....

Re: Corporate Responsibility: 80 years of profit sharing, 65 years of no layoffs. - August West - 12-16-2013

If you don't demand performance, the low performers can become a sustained cancer on the organization. I've seen it happen. So the winnowing process at the start means you only hire and keep the performers. People whose personal work ethic matches that of the company.

Low performers can be weeded out without the "demand for performance." It's a matter of shaping the culture, very selective hiring, involuntary turnover, etc. For example, SAS touts it's very low turnover, but two out of 3 turnovers are involuntary, and they possess one of the best organizational cultures in existence.

Re: Corporate Responsibility: 80 years of profit sharing, 65 years of no layoffs. - Black - 12-17-2013

Were we too easy on Lincoln Electric?

Re: Corporate Responsibility: 80 years of profit sharing, 65 years of no layoffs. - max - 12-17-2013

After all the moaning by those who never created one manufacturing job in this country the union summary is quite telling:....

"One of the most interesting comments I remember was in teaching

to a group of our Advanced Management Program alumni out in Milwaukee, for one of their annual meetings, and I said: 'To make it more interesting, why don't you see if you can't get some of your union executives to come?'

Well, six of them showed up, and we had this discussion about Lincoln and what's good, what's bad and so on and so forth. None of them said a thing until the very end when finally, what obviously was the senior person, spoke up and said: 'Well, we don't see any need for our union in Lincoln Electric because they are giving their workers much of what we fought for, and sometimes died for, in the 1930(s). Better pay, a share in the profits, job security as best they can. But I'm not worried that unions are going to become irrelevant because most of you are too dumb to run your companies this way!'

Re: Corporate Responsibility: 80 years of profit sharing, 65 years of no layoffs. - Sam3 - 12-17-2013

On the other hand, things may not be like they used to, based on this comment:

James wrote:
I worked at Lincoln in Cleveland for 15 years,The first ten years were great they did exactly as promised I.E.More work equals more pay,The last 5 years when Stropki took over where the worse,He is so far removed from the Lincoln Philosophy that the company now barely resembles it's former self,Now the company is all about taking money from the high performer and giving it to the executive branch,They even have a higher percentage bonus than the workforce,Much higher,We found out that the year that we were paid a 25% bonus management gave them self a 75% bonus.

If that is the case, then current management is turning it into a typical bottom-line but greedy-manager company, and isn't doing anymore that which made it successful.