Posted on 02/06/2010 10:36:25 AM PST by SeekAndFind
On Sept. 12, 2001, there were no commercial flights in the United States. It was uncertain when airlines would be permitted to start flying again—or how many customers would be on them. Airlines faced not only the tragedy of 9/11 but the fact that economy was entering a recession. So almost immediately, all the U.S. airlines, save one, did what so many U.S. corporations are particularly skilled at doing: they began announcing tens of thousands of layoffs. Today the one airline that didn't cut staff, Southwest, still has never had an involuntary layoff in its almost 40-year history. It's now the largest domestic U.S. airline and has a market capitalization bigger than all its domestic competitors combined. As its former head of human resources once told me: "If people are your most important assets, why would you get rid of them?"
It's an attitude that's all too rare in executive suites these days. As the U.S. economy emerges from recession, Americans continue to suffer through the worst labor market in a generation. The unemployment rate dipped in January, from 10 percent to 9.7 percent, but the economy continued to lose jobs. There are currently 14.8 million unemployed, and when you count "discouraged workers" (who've given up on job seeking) and part-time workers who'd prefer a full-time gig, that's another 9.4 million Americans who are "underemployed." While the pink slips are slowing as the economy rebounds, the lack of jobs remains the most visible—and politically troublesome—reminder that despite what the economic indicators may tell us, for much of the population, the Great Recession hasn't really gone away.
Companies have always cut back on workers during economic downturns, but over the last two decades layoffs have become an increasingly common part of corporate life—in good times as well as bad.
(Excerpt) Read more at newsweek.com ...
Have you ever run a business before? Have you ever managed a P&L?
I agree. If there isn’t the business, you gotta cut. But, im my case, the company opened a new Mexico City plant the same year that it shut down ours. It didn’t really save any money because shipping costs and quality were a major part of our product cost, but the shareholders loved the idea for a couple quarters.
Look, the upshot of the whole thing is that we’re talking about companies that are owned by those individuals who have invested in it and the decision to hire or fire rests with that company’s management. If this prof. wants to test his theory let him get elected CEO of a company and put his theories into practice. Unfortunately, we are living in an age where the government has the power, through the courts, to force companies to do the bidding of those who have nothing to lose should the company fail.
Thank you very much.
I’m sorry that your plant was shut down. I don’t know why there is so much of that except maybe healthcare costs. When I retired in 2000 my company paid all of my insurance and it was a factor in why I left. Since then they have started charging retirees and there has also been an increase in my premium with no increase in my pension. It hurt, but what are you going to do? In reality they provided me with a paycheck while I was employed and that is really all one should expect when seeking employment. If you get other bennies, then you should consider yourself blessed, not entitled.
Labor costs are such a high part of total costs that layoffs are inevitable when revenues fall significantly.
He can say anything he wants. The fact remains that companies use layoffs to increase profitability. RE: When the stock market was real it would go up when unemployment rose because the assumption was that companies would become more profitable and more stable. Again I say: If this prof. is so confident of his ideas let him put his money where his mouth is. That’s the American way.
Perhaps a bit off-topic.
Could I trouble you to ask, whether you’ve ever posted on this board under any other handle?
Thanks.
I’ll have to excercise my right to use the fifth amendment on that.
“He can say anything he wants. The fact remains that companies use layoffs to increase profitability. RE: When the stock market was real it would go up when unemployment rose because the assumption was that companies would become more profitable.....”
Err, actually the usual reason the market would go up was higher unemployment would mean that lower interest rates were ahead. Today, they have no way to go but up!
Yes and no. The airline pilots are unionized but in their own separate union from the rest of the pilots. The flight attendants are also unionized. It’s not clear if they too are separate from the other airlines.
Southwest has often been shunned by other major carriers. That’s why you do not see them listed on places like Orbitz and Expedia because the major unions tried to get them to join and Southwest refused.
My point is that the union doesn’t wag the dog at Southwest like it does at American, United, Continental, etc.
The thread is about how layoffs can actually hurt the company. I told a true story about how the threat of layoffs caused a valued employee to find another job and how the company was upset that I had betrayed them by leaving when they really needed me most.
I never felt entitled at all and never feel entitled to my job, but I also know that my set of skills is in high demand, so I don’t want to hear a lot of whining when I move to a new company because the time to show me how valuable I am is not the day I come in to quit. I was happy with my paycheck and benefits and when those were threatened by some corporate decisions, I did what I had to do to protect MY bottom line. The plant’s eventual closing did not affect me the slightest because I had been in my new job for a year by the time they closed the doors.
I was merely agreeing with the author of the article that there may be some costs that aren’t readily apparent when a company decides to lay off part of its work force, and losing the best employees is one of the biggest and most immediate impacts. Once you do a layoff, you lose the trust of your employees for a long time and they’ll all be shopping for a new job. The good ones will be successful. The bad ones will stay with you to the end. This isn’t the recipe for success.
LOL fair enough.
The reason I ask that is, I’m reminded that the actor Carroll O’Connor was actually a liberal, and played the role of Archie Bunker over the top, so as to deliberately create a less than favorable image of a political position he himself was opposed to.
Is all. ;)
As I told Orangehoof, Southwest is not non-union. It has one of the highest union representation amongst its airline employees. It is a myth, but an interesting myth as anti-unionists seem to cling to such confusion.
A better concern is how management is able to proactively interface with their unions (which is what Southwest is pretty good at doing).
I’m not a union guy, but I thought that when one was laid-off it was not liked being fired because when things picked up the laid-offs were called back. I don’t think those employees who were laid-off complained when they were called back. If you seek employment you have to realize that there could come a time when your employer could, for reasons known only to him, tell you that the market just will not allow him to carry you for the time being, but if things turn around, he will repay your loyalty to him by giving you your old job back with no questions asked. I think that’s the fair thing to do
Or the loaves are an inch long and a half inch high, and the milk is mostly water or flavorings.
So you’re saying he never had a real job or worked for a company that had to make a profit to stay in business.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.