Journal sbuckhopper's Journal: Consumer End Industry Woes 2
Eastman Kodak Company just announced 4500 to 6000 cuts by the end of the year in "administrative, staff, research and development, and consumer imaging." They need to reduce their budget by 300 million in order to keep doing business. This is the seventh quarter out of ten that Kodak has done some sort of layoff. Yet Dan Carp (CEO) continues to make 7.6 million a year. Notice also that Antonio Perez has an unreported salary (he is new to this position, so it isn't entirely unexpected).
However there are a large number of companies where the COO makes in the ballpark of the CEO (even half is a lot in this case), sometimes even a lot more, I really hope that it isn't the case here. Here are my references that made me say so: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, and 7.
This is not just a remark of frustration over what the CEO is making, but it is also a mark of frustration over a company that had so many good things going for it and let them all get wasted.
I would have hoped that a better jist to this article would have been, lifetime Kodak employee Dan Carp see value in the company he works for and decides that a broad sweeping upper management paycut is needed. There will still need to be job cuts in the order of 2000 people worldwide, but Kodak has realized that one way to get through this slump and to get management to work for a better increase in profits and corporate momentum would be to cut the top heavey pay of these untouchable managers who know how to legally extort a company for more than they are worth.
I don't think that some of these top employees would think anything about telling the peons that they're not worth what they're getting paid.
Yes I realize that this is in some respects a childish rant, but I think that some of these things still needed to be pointed out.
However there are a large number of companies where the COO makes in the ballpark of the CEO (even half is a lot in this case), sometimes even a lot more, I really hope that it isn't the case here. Here are my references that made me say so: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, and 7.
This is not just a remark of frustration over what the CEO is making, but it is also a mark of frustration over a company that had so many good things going for it and let them all get wasted.
I would have hoped that a better jist to this article would have been, lifetime Kodak employee Dan Carp see value in the company he works for and decides that a broad sweeping upper management paycut is needed. There will still need to be job cuts in the order of 2000 people worldwide, but Kodak has realized that one way to get through this slump and to get management to work for a better increase in profits and corporate momentum would be to cut the top heavey pay of these untouchable managers who know how to legally extort a company for more than they are worth.
I don't think that some of these top employees would think anything about telling the peons that they're not worth what they're getting paid.
Yes I realize that this is in some respects a childish rant, but I think that some of these things still needed to be pointed out.
The other side of the fence (Score:1)
The other notable feather in Sun's cap was going AGAINST the analysists when they said to lay off employees. Scott resisted as long as possible despite harsh criticism. You have to give credit to someone who clings to their ideals under that kind of pressure.
Bottom
Re:The other side of the fence (Score:2)
Scott McNealy is completely different from these CEOs that I'm talking about. Its not only the options, but its the fact that Scott (with a group of others) started that small company formerly known as Stanford University Networks. Anyway in that category diserves wha