Calls against big CEO pay grow louder

[UpInArms]

Source: Associated Press

NEW YORK - Wall Street's high-rolling CEOs live a lifestyle that would make Hollywood movie stars jealous — penthouse apartments, private jets, and paychecks tipping $60 million a year.

Corporate boards in recent years have rubber-stamped generous bonus packages for an elite set of executives, a reflection of a go-go stock market and soaring profits. Now, as the credit crisis roils Wall Street and decimates stock prices, shareholders are demanding a voice.

Fund managers and individual investors alike are campaigning for a "say on pay" rule giving shareholders a vote on executive compensation at major corporations, especially America's biggest banks. This is the latest salvo in the battle against Wall Street's exorbitance, and this time it appears shareholders might stand a chance.

<snip>

"To us it appears that Wall Street has a severe rash, to which its boards, made up of corporate members, respond 'you scratch my back, and I will scratch yours," said Smith, whose firm owns 65,000 shares of Goldman Sachs.

<snip>

"This isn't just about expressing outrage," Obama said. "It's about changing a system where bad behavior is rewarded so that we can hold CEOs accountable, and make sure they're acting in a way that's good for their company, good for our economy, and good for America, not just good for themselves."

Read more: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080412/ap_on_bi_ge/wall___main?_ylt=A9G_R21dsABIYgYB9Rdv24cA

[Love Bug]

1. Well, it's about time!

God knows my employer holds me to standards I have to meet in order for them to justify the meesly 3-4% raise I get every year.

[Xenotime]

37. Exactly! It's time there be a cap on CEO pay and have the rest..

spread to the workers.

[Hugin]

2. Considering they technically own the company...

I suppose "a say" is in order.

[pokercat999]

3. Is it time?

For the federal gov't to step in? We have a minimum wage law we can certainly have a MAXIMUM wage law!

[Name removed]

4. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Hugin]

6. Are you implying that, say, Halliburton isn't evil?

I agree with most of your thesis, but, the absolutism about the methodology of salvage doesn't
seem to square with reality.

[Rabrrrrrr]

7. Why would you think I am implying that?

:shrug:

What a bizarre world you must live in.

What I am implying is that a company will remain only as "evil" as it's shareholders allow it; and thus, if it has no "morally good" shareholders, it remains "evil".

[Hugin]

10. Ah, thanks for the clairification...

and I do agree.

Corporations in reality are an amoral entity and also, by the way, not people as some would have us believe.
So, are incapable of being 'evil' or any other anthropomorphism thrown at them.

Gaining ownership, (or in some cases, reasserting ownership) does seem to be the shortest path to change.

[harmonicon]

8. Thanks for the threat of physical violence, Rabrrrr - consider it noted!! NT

[Rabrrrrrr]

9. Oh, I'm so fucking scared!

:scared:

:eyes:

[Hugin]

12. Rabrrrrrr seems bitter...

From what I gather it is going around.

[54anickel]

15. Well, that is just the most elitist, condescending comment I've read here on DU today!!!

Bwahahaha! Never miss a beat, do ya Prag? :rofl:

[54anickel]

5. Oh come on now, are they trying to say these cries against excessiveness are

new due to the crisis? The "little guy" shareholder has been complaining about this for a long time. But what did the media hear? "We must offer a competitive package to draw the best talent"...:puke: "Big" shareholders/board members (with the voice in the media) were in on it as well - they'd sit on the board for several of their buddies, get paid for it, and vote for these exorbitant pay and benefit packages. NOW they make it sound like the "little guy" didn't care as long as he was makin' bucks playing the ponies and is only outraged now because his/her retirement nest egg is dwindling. May be true for some, but NOT the majority.

Best talent, my ass! Most of these CEO types moved from company to company, padding their resumes with BS achievements of increased revenues and reduced costs that were basically obtained on the backs of labor by gutting the company (and country) through outsourcing, quality standards reduction, acquiring the competition that dares to provide quality or merging with the highest bidder, freezing if not lowering pay, union busting, etc, etc, etc....all the while chanting "more with less" while the media and trade rags made them out to be heroes. :puke:

This ain't no ordinary, cyclical recession we're entering here folks. Nope, this is the result of the raping and pillaging of the American working class by the current day robber barons.

Oh, and speaking of "I got mine, go getch-yer own" corporate heroes...

http://www.jimhightower.com/node/6331

[UpInArms]

11. I wonder what happened to that 2007 SEC inquiry?

“Countrywide CEO Angelo Mozilo Announces Decision to Voluntarily Relinquish Rights to Approximately $37.5 Million in Cash Severance Payments, Consulting Fees and Perquisites,” biz.yahoo.com, January 28, 2008

“Countrywide Chief Is Said to Face S.E.C. Inquiry,” www.nytimes.com, October 18, 2007

what a guy!

:hi:

[Hugin]

13. Well, now that the SEC has no opposition representatives in it...

I'm guessing, GOOSE EGG... ZERO... NADA... NOTHING... ABSOLUTE VACUUM...

[54anickel]

17. Yes, what a guy indeed. $432 million withdrawal over a bit more than 2 years is

pretty damned impressive though. From that nytimes article:

snip>
Countrywide’s chief executive, Angelo R. Mozilo, has come under criticism from shareholders who have questioned the timing of the sales, which allowed him to gain more than $132 million in the months before the price plummeted amid the deepening mortgage crisis.

snip>

Since 2004, Mr. Mozilo has sold shares through prearranged selling programs, known as 10b5-1 plans after an S.E.C. rule. But the pace of the sales, which have generated $300 million in gains for him since 2005, began to increase in October 2006 when he put a new program in place.

Those planned selling programs, which are intended to protect executives against accusations of trading on inside information, have begun to draw the scrutiny of the S.E.C. The director of enforcement at the commission, Linda Chatman Thomsen, said last week that the agency was taking a closer look at the programs to make sure executives were not using them for “illegitimate purposes.”

Since October 2006, Mr. Mozilo has twice raised the number of shares that could be sold under his plans. In December 2006, when Countrywide shares were trading at $40.50, he increased the number of shares to be sold each month to 465,000 from 350,000. Then in February, when shares hit a high of $45.03, he increased the number of shares sold each month to 580,000.



ARTICLES ABOUT ANGELO R. MOZILO for more on our friend Angelo


:hi: backatcha

[AnneD]

29. That guy was/is ....

such a sleaze....:eyes:
He's probably out playing golf with some SEC folks.

[54anickel]

33. All nothing more than symptoms of a deeply ingrained disease - the stench

wafting in the air over the rotting flesh of the great American experiment in democracy. Greed and corruption now pulses rampantly through her veins.

[RainDog]

14. How many Boards for CEOs...

are stacked with their own family members who decide CEO salary compensations? How many boards give raises/set salaries via proxy vote for shareholders to set CEO salaries without consulting shareholders (i.e. the whole reason for proxies.)

Someone with the time and inclination might do some good by finding out who is setting compensation... not only family members, but buddies who get a little kick back for their kindnesses. I remember reading a few years ago that such compensation schemes were fairly common, but I don't have empircal data.

I don't expect any msm source to do that sort of reportage anymore.

[Zynx]

20. Boards tend to be stacked with CEOs of other companies.

They engage in the world's largest circle jerk.

[JerseygirlCT]

38. Less likely family members, but definitely buddies

Company A's board is composed of Mr. X, Ms. Y and Mr. Z. Company A's CEO then also sits on Company B's board - guess who the CEO there is? Mr. Z.

It's all very cozy and insular.

[Lucky Luciano]

16. In all fairness...

"To us it appears that Wall Street has a severe rash, to which its boards, made up of corporate members, respond 'you scratch my back, and I will scratch yours," said Smith, whose firm owns 65,000 shares of Goldman Sachs."

If this dude's fund owns 65,000 shares of Goldman Sachs, then he has little to complain about relative to any other broker. They have had spectacular earnings the last few years...and 2007 was through the roof - earned $24 per share. When others were writing down BILLIONS, they were making the BILLIONS because they placed the opposite bets. That was impressive foresight and no shareholder could really complain about the compensation the CEO and big gun traders got - particularly when you also realize that a huge percentage of the ownership of Goldman Sachs shares is with its very own employees!


Now....Robert Nardelli of Home Depot....that is another story altogether...

[54anickel]

19. Impressive foresight indeed.....

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/15/business/15goldman.html



Friends in high places tends to help a bit too, not implying anything, just sayin'.....

snip>

For decades, one investment bank in Lower Manhattan has churned out a golden list of corporate executives and statesmen, wealthy financiers and nonprofit managers.

In many ways, Goldman Sachs is seen as the financial world’s equivalent of General Electric, the corporate powerhouse, or McKinsey & Company, the management consulting firm. It is a training ground — and finishing school —from which other companies, along with quite a few governments, have frequently plucked their own top leaders.

And it has seeded some of the most successful private investment funds, many of them extending Goldman’s shadow from Greenwich, Conn., to London and beyond.

Goldman claims among its alumni Henry M. Paulson Jr., the current Treasury secretary; Robert E. Rubin, a Treasury secretary under President Bill Clinton and now Citigroup’s chairman; and Mario Draghi, the Bank of Italy’s governor. Jon S. Corzine, New Jersey’s governor, led Goldman for several years. Joshua B. Bolten, the current White House chief of staff, is a Goldman alum.

[mbperrin]

18. Gosh, a non-binding "say" that the board can ignore on a whim. How

about this one? All executive pay and bonuses must be ratified by the shareholders, and if the proposal fails, the execs get $1 a year until some package is approved with no start date for the compensation previous to the date of actual approval.

Shareholders own the company and now set the policy.
Reasonable packages must be proposed or execs work for $1 a year, or they could hit the road.
Unreasonable shareholders will have management leave the company.

Nice balance, and the owners are back in charge.

[AnneD]

21. As a shareholder....

I am partial owner in the company (in theory anyway). Salaries and perks have become so bloated as to now affect the bottom line. And that my friends is why we stock holders should have more say.....as owners-it is eating up OUR money. If you are in a mutual fund or hold stock in any form-YOU are the owner and the CEO is YOUR employee.

A good place to check out the executive pay is:

http://www.aflcio.org/corporatewatch/paywatch/index.cfm

Of course as more folks are becoming active....they have tried to curtail stockholder rights or hide the actual pay via a convoluted bonus system that even an MIT math grad couldn't calculate. My advice-you can always put your money in a better place-even to the point of purchasing individually or into more guaranteed investment. It may make less interest but what's so good about promising you a 10% return if the CEO takes a 3% cut and the fund fees eat up another 4%.

[1776Forever]

23. A very profound and educated reply - You tell the truth and run away CEO pay needs to stop!

Has anyone any idea how much the CEO's of the health care insurance companies make?

Per this article the following was reported:

http://www.commondreams.org/views05/0510-22.htm

William McGuire, of UnitedHealth Group, the nation's leading insurer, was the third-highest-paid CEO on the Forbes list. His pay of $124.8 million could cover the average health-insurance premiums of nearly 34,000 people.

:thumbsup:

[54anickel]

24. No, no, no AnneD. Yes you are a shareholder, they'll allow you that because they

want your money, mutual funds, index funds, etc. those are simple tools to gain what they call "fodder units". We've been herded into these instruments by necessity - a return >= than the 'published" rate of inflation. Of course there's also the "greed and excess is now fashionable" mentality at work as well. So whether it be by need or desire, they've pretty much got hold of your money.

They don't want your opinion, they don't want you to have a voice. Most have an "elitist" attitude - you could not possibly have anything of value (except money) to contribute to the conversation - you're too poor/dumb to understand. You should hear what the chamber of commerce types have to say about the "employee-owned" shops in the area, or what some of the brokerage financial types say about their working-class clients. I hang out at one of these "elitist" breakfast clubs and love to listen in as I make the rounds with the coffee pot. It's all I can do to keep from dumping on their laps sometimes. I'm not saying that all the well-to-do have this attitude, but it seems to especially permeate within the ones in power (public offices).


"I hate as I hate Hell's own gate, that man who hides one thought within him while he speaks another."
--Homer, (words of Akhilleus), Illiad

[AnneD]

26. 54anickle...

I guess I should have hit the sarcasm simile after the in theory remake. We have talked back and forth for so long...you have a pretty good idea of my feelings on THIS topic.

I realize that most of the Chamber of Commerce and CEO see us as nothing more than sheep they can fleece. I have eaten more rubber chicken (actually I tend to lose my appetite) at these dinner where these political wannabes and Captains of Industry start talking about what's best for 'the people'(translation-their pocket).

However, I have enough savvy to know that as I might be a small fish (to change the metaphor), they are but a slightly larger fish. They are far too confident that they head into large unfamiliar waters and themselves fall victims to the same fate from a larger fish. You see it now as some of the wealthy have been suckered into hedge funds or derivatives (and an increase in repos and foreclosures in the wealthier areas of town). There is a great white shark in the water and the tide will soon go out. There will be those that will be eaten or die of exposure. Those that survive are self aware and cautious.

Nothing wrong with a employee owned company, that is a viable survival strategy-not unlike fish swimming in schools. I wish I saw more of it. It offers protection the classic Wall Street raids that have gutted our industries and economy. There is nothing wrong in developing your own business-thats a bit like being a clam or a coral reef-self contained more or less. You have more personal control of your time and earnings.

This is why I offered the alternative idea.....pack up your marbles and go home. You don't have to play their game. Let them try to raise money to pay for their elaborate perks-just don't give them YOUR money. After all, it is YOUR money. If enough folks stop paying into the system-then they will have to change. Let those eCONomic geniuses figure out why contributions have dropped off and maybe we WILL get some real reform.

[54anickel]

27. You mean "pack up your remaining marbles"? Cuz for most of us, those

"marbles" are in 401Ks, Pensions and IRAs - all with few, if any, options that don't entrust your money to the Captains of Industry.

Now to some extent you may be able to stop playing in any future rounds when it comes to IRAs, but you generally have no say when it comes to pensions, and while you can opt out of contributing your own earnings to the 401K, most companies that I know of that offer profit-sharing will only put that money into your 401K account. (That was another little ploy we'd use to get 100% participation rates!!!) So most of us, like it or not, have some sort if vested interest in supporting the markets...it's all by design - we're all stuck in this sinking ship of fools together with the Captains of Industry at the helm.

[AnneD]

28. I recently read that some of these company CEO's

are running into resistance from mutual fund managers and others. I am hoping that as money flows back from hedge funds and derivatives into the markets-there will be more pressure to curtail these excesses. The poor year recently has already force some CEO's to have their salaries cut and little if any bonuses. At the moment it is just a blip on the screen but we can hope.

If your 401K is matched by you company I would only give to the match and no more. That match can offset some of the loss. I have a few 403B's and one 401K that was matched and have rolled these into other investment, but these days I do self directed or indexed things. Because of my age, I like Roth's at the moment. I am big into commodities-like canned good and some metals;)They are keeping up with inflation:rofl:

Believe me, every time Congress meet and passes law, I talk to my CPA and other investment folks and re adjust. You really have to be hyper vigilant in protecting your money from these folks.

[54anickel]

30. Oh absolutely - "You really have to be hyper vigilant in protecting your money from these folks"

and good for you that you fortunate enough to have the extra money to sock away as well as the ear of a CPA.

Most folks I know are just too busy trying to make ends meet to pay much attention to what's going on. They might very well have a 401K, but don't monkey with it a whole lot mainly because they don't quite understand the options they have to begin with. Probably even more-so now with the automatic enrollment feature kicking in.

Then there's the years to retirement factor. I now know more people in their late 40's or older - the supposedly "good earning years" - who have lost their jobs than not, and they are not finding comparable new jobs...not even close. 4 close friends this month alone, all from different employers. Their income has been slashed while their cost of living continues to rise like everyone else. It's one thing if you only have to cut back on the extras to make ends meet on a lower salary, but it's a whole different ball game when the cost of gas, food, healthcare is slamming you at the same time. It's a double wammy for them. I'm not talking about people who were living beyond their means or deep in hock here either. They were maxing out their retirement saving options (four-o-whatevers and Roths) while they could. Now that's all quickly losing value, mostly inaccessible without incurring fees and/or penalties. So the regular rainy day funds are being tapped to make ends meet.

So congrats on staying a step ahead of the game so far, and be sure to count your blessings whilst you pat yourself on the back. It's going to be a long and bumpy ride for most.

[AnneD]

39. I realize every day how lucky and blessed I truly am.....

I went through a severe downturn in the 80's and learned some very hard lessons. I have always been a saver but not to the point that I won't take a well calculated risk now and again. The hardest lesson I had to learn was to ask for help (I am stubbornly independent to a fault).

I was lucky that I experienced that downturn in my mid 30's and could recover by completely re-tooling myself from a geological/geophysical tech (on my way to becoming a geologist) to a Nurse. I was so nerdy in that I actually read future job predictions when I was in high school. I didn't see the oil bust in the mid 1980's coming. I have tried several profession and this finally worked out ok and while not the most lucrative-I can make it to retirement in this vehicle. I have been blessed, made some good choices, and learned from my mistakes.

I have never forgotten how rough those downturns were for me (if I had I'd be a Republican). I remember selling plasma weekly for money to survive, collecting bottles and cans too. I am forever grateful that I did not have my daughter then as I really don't know what I would have done then. And I am forever grateful for friends, family, and kind strangers that helped. As a repayment, I am forever donating to pantries, clinics, and charities because of my experiences (as anonymously as possible-because that is truly giving).

Oh, FYI, I have a wide circle of friends of varying backgrounds. About all I have every paid my CPA was a cup of coffee and an occasional dinner invitation. Hubby has been the musician at 2 of his daughter's weddings and I get the occasional Nurse question as a quid pro quo. I laugh because I often quote him a paraphrase from Gandhi-'It cost my friends so much to support my poverty'. It is community that makes all the difference in the world. That is a lesson that we all need to re learn.

[1776Forever]

22. It would be hard for the HRC Duo to back this when they sold the Lincoln Bedroom to so many CEOs!!

Among them Vin Gupta -

Largess To Clintons Lands CEO In Lawsuit
Case Is a Window On Couple's Ties

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/05/25/AR2007052502332_pf.html

By Matthew Mosk and John Solomon
Washington Post Staff Writers
Saturday, May 26, 2007; A01

For the past four years, the Clintons have jetted around on Vinod Gupta's corporate plane, to Switzerland, Hawaii, Jamaica, Mexico -- $900,000 worth of travel. The former president secured a $3.3 million consulting deal with Gupta's technology firm. His presidential library got a six-figure gift, too.

Gupta, whose big donations to the Democratic Party earned him a Lincoln Bedroom overnight when Bill Clinton was president, has emerged as a key benefactor of Clinton's post-presidency -- and Hillary Rodham Clinton's presidential candidacy.

Gupta's generosity toward the Clintons has proved so controversial within his firm -- a major provider of database-processing services -- that it prompted a shareholder lawsuit complaining that hiring the former president was a "waste of corporate assets."

The dispute over Gupta's bankrolling of the Clintons offers new detail about how successfully Bill Clinton has leveraged the inner circle of donors he cultivated during his tenure in the White House to his personal financial benefit since he left office. In addition, it suggests the degree to which Hillary Clinton's political career is also benefiting from those connections.

In the lawsuit, filed this year in Delaware, some investors in the company, InfoUSA, challenged Gupta's decision to direct his firm to pay the former president the consulting fees for the "extremely vague purpose" of providing his "strategic growth and business judgment."

The Clintons are not parties to the lawsuit, nor are they accused of any wrongdoing. In fact, the lawsuit refers only to a "former high-ranking government official" and his wife. But company officials, shareholders and aides to the Clintons confirmed that they are the couple in question.

The jet travel for the Clintons was charged to the company as "business development" expenses, the lawsuit said. The company jet took them to vacation spots, whisked the former president to an international conference in Geneva and to a commemorative speech in Oklahoma City, and shuttled Hillary Clinton to a campaign fundraiser in New Mexico.

The Clintons complied at the time with federal law by reimbursing Gupta for a portion of the costs for the flights Hillary Clinton took to political and other events. The Clintons do not have to reimburse InfoUSA for any of Bill Clinton's travel, and they had to pay only the equivalent of first-class airfare for her travel, a fraction of the actual cost.

Jay Carson, a spokesman for the former president, declined to discuss the consulting arrangement (reported elsewhere to be 3.3 Million dollar payment to Bill Clinton). Carson described Gupta as a "longtime friend and supporter."

Stormy Dean, InfoUSA's chief financial officer, confirmed the flights and that payments went to Bill Clinton but said that the company believes the shareholder complaints are without merit. "Our position is that these expenses are legitimate business expenses," he said. Gupta, who was traveling and could not be reached for comment, defended his company's use of its corporate jet in a 2005 letter to the board of directors. "Every flight and its business reason are documented," he wrote.

Gupta is a well-known figure in the high-tech world in India who met Bill Clinton in the mid-1990s and quickly became a generous patron. He and his company donated at least $1 million to help underwrite a lavish millennium New Year's Eve celebration at the White House and on the Mall, and he paid the former president $200,000 to deliver a speech to InfoUSA executives in Papillion, Neb.

Gupta also gave a six-figure gift to the Clinton Presidential Library in Little Rock, $250,000 to the former president's global charity, and more than $220,000 to the Democratic Party during Hillary Clinton's 2000 Senate campaign. In December, Gupta gave the maximum $5,000 to the senator's political action committee, which was helping to lay the groundwork for her 2008 presidential bid.

Gupta has enjoyed his own benefits from his relationship with the Clintons. Bill Clinton offered him two diplomatic posts -- as U.S. counsel general to Bermuda and as U.S. ambassador to Fiji -- that he did not take. The president appointed him to the prestigious John F. Kennedy Center Board of Trustees during his last week in office.

...............

More at:

Strange Bedfellows
Fame, Fortune Or Friendship Could Buy You A Night In The Lincoln Bedroom. Inside The Clinton Money Machine.
NEWSWEEK
Updated: 11:03 PM ET Jan 17, 2008

http://www.newsweek.com/id/95458/output/print

But in the spring of 1995, Bill Clinton and his aides were busy turning the White House into the biggest fund-raising attraction this side of the Jerry Lewis telethon. There had already been six "coffees" on the premises (one was scheduled for the day after the memo was distributed). There would be 92 more by Election Day. Plans were also underway to turn the Lincoln Bedroom, where the gregarious Clintons were already housing celebrities and old friends, into a door prize for big donors (list on bottom of the page).

[54anickel]

25. Oh please, that's just business - and damned good business if you're in the

business of raising funds. The entire system is a farce, a democracy in name only, corrupt to its very root. It's going to take a heck of a lot more than what's within the realm of the US presidency to fix, assuming we ever get one that is so inclined.

[toopers]

31. Of course, this is coming from a group of people that . . .

vote on their own pay raises. Pot, meet kettle!

[lonestarnot]

32. Oh what now! Concern is slipping into the right area! All of you people who

recommended this thread should be locked up and never see the light of day! :sarcasm:

[defendandprotect]

34. Recommend ---

In the case of banks, shouldn't they also ban drug money laundering --- ???

[Johnny Harpo]

35. It’s the Golden Parachutes That Piss Me Off…..

some 'golden boy' gets hired to lead a major corporation with a mega-bucks salary and all of the other perks that go with it, runs the company into the ground, gets fired (for ‘bad performance), and walks away with his 'salary' for the balance of his contract along with millions in stock options (that can now be cashed in) and no one thinks this is a bad deal. Then this same ‘golden boy’ get hired by some other corporation

I'm an IT Consultant. Many of the contracts IT consultants work are 3 to 6 months in duration and many of us have been screwed multiple times in the middle of a contract by the client 'wanting to go in a different direction' so I'm out a paycheck.

I've tried more then once to have a 'parachute clause' inserted in my 'contract' that says if the client cancels the contract for any reason other then performance (note here: if its bad performance on my part, I'll eat it), that I be paid for the remainder of the contracts original term. No mega-money, just my regular salary and benefits.

After all, I’m making a good faith commitment, for the term of the contract, to my consulting firm and the client to do a good job, not screw it up. Believe me, ‘bad performance can haunt an IT consultant for months, sometimes years.

When I suggest a parachute clause, the consulting firms look at me like I'm some kind of lunatic, and God forbid that I ask to see the actual contract.

I guess I'm just not a 'fat enough cat'.

So who are the lunatics then?

[AnneD]

40. I'll never forget....

we walked out of a meeting in which Chevron took over the larger Gulf Oil. The management basically cut a golden parachute deal for themselves and the workers got the golden screw. As we were walking out of the meeting-I leaned over to my friend and said 'Someone owes me a kiss' and she said 'Why's that?' and I replied 'Because, I always like to be kissed after I've been screwed'.

One of our ace geologist overheard me and cracked up. He subsequently hire me and kept me busy for 2 rounds of layoffs (an additional year). He always said it was my honesty, humour, and work ethic that got me pulled from the pool.

God forbid you should fashion your own contract. That is the reason they don't want unions because with them you have a contract. They want to negotiate with you one to one-but then they pull the shifting contract on you. We need to have more unionism. It is the workers only protection.

[tom_paine]

36. Unfortunately, the Imperial Subjcets have ZERO say about how our rulers live.

Maybe less than the Chinese. Certainly no more.

They would pile our corpses up by the thousands if we actually got anywhere near indicting Bushie Criminalities or trying to turn the clock back to old Free America, the one that died in late 2000.

Express all the outrage you want, if you want to fight the Bushies use..."harsh language".

Literally, nothing else will suffice. If we haven't reached that point yet, we are damned close. Though actually, I think the time when the Imperial Subjects of Amerika could make ourselves be listened to about antything (except occasionally for when the Bushies pretend to listen to their Mindless Followers about thing like the sale of the ports to Dubai, and that only long enough until they forget...I'll bet Dubai Ports owns our ports now through other means) has lon been passed by at least ten years.

[raccoon]

41. Kick. Tried to rec this but too late. nt