[grey_whiskers]

who are we to judge?

I take it you *are* aware that this phrase is a standard liberal excuse for just about anything.

Also, the FReepers are not engaging in "class envy". They are exhibiting a thirst for *equal treatment*.

If anyone other than a manager or executive screws up, they are summarily fired: even when their errors are too small to affect the bottom line in any significant fashion; often with "under the table" hits to their reputation which make it much harder for them to find another job.

Managers and executives are instead given large payouts, when the problems are often of their own making, and significantly impact the company in a negative fashion. And often they network with other clueless vermin who give them a fast track into *another* highly paid position.

Objecting to this isn't class envy: it is pointing out *theft*.

Nice try, though.

Cheers!

[terryt]

Also, the FReepers are not engaging in "class envy". They are exhibiting a thirst for *equal treatment*.

Who should decide what is equal? None of us know the details of the situation. The company has lost money...whose fault is it? Perhaps the guilty have already been fired, or maybe the market collapsed beneath them through no fault of their own.

Additionally, equal treatment should be based on equivalent circumstances and value. It is a sad fact of life that certain people are of more value to an organization than others. Is it fair that the aging running back gets cut to accommodate the new star? Equal treatment...that won't win the football game. Who gets to judge the value?...those who are paying the bills.

The point is that the board representing the owners(shareholders) are making decisions to close facilities, reduce shifts or whatever and they have decided that it is necessary to give the management and key players the raises that were previously delayed. They most likely didn't do this because they liked one group and wanted to piss on the other. They most likely based their decision on what they thought was best for the company and therefore the owners.

Can you come up with pathological examples to prove your points? Probably...however, there was nothing in this article to indicate that management is corrupt and doing anything other than what is necessary to protect the value of the shareholders.