Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Top CEO’s pledge social responsibility over profit
#1
Wow. I really hope they mean this and it’s not just lip service. It has been a few decades since stock value/shareholders weren’t the priority of corporations. They used to believe in the social contract and including stakeholders, not just shareholders in company planning/decisions.

“Companies should focus on social responsibilities as well as profits, the Business Roundtable, a group of corporate chief executives that includes the head of the largest U.S. bank and the CEO of the world's largest airline, said on Monday.

The statement of corporate purpose, which shifts from shareholder primacy, was signed by the heads of more than 180 U.S. companies, including the CEOs of Amazon.com Inc (AMZN.O), American Airlines (AAL.O), the largest airline in the world; and JPMorgan Chase & Co (JPM.N), the biggest American bank.”

https://mobile.reuters.com/article/amp/idUSKCN1V91EK
#2
Next weeks story

Top CEO's fired...ruthless CEO's hired!
Song of Solomon 2:15
Take us the foxes, the little foxes, that spoil the vines: for our vines have tender grapes.
#3
Good lip service but it's going to take a lot of effort to turn around. I doubt many of the participants realize the disconnect with mission statements like "growing a better world" and middle managers looking at bonuses by reducing staff, keeping wages flat, cheating employees out of benefits, etc.

Take the POTUS. He catches a lot of grief for his shady dealings and profit over people. But it's doubtful he knows half the stuff his people are doing. At the end of the day, it's his responsibility, but when you have thousands of people making decisions based off making you money, it's hard to know what all those decisions are.
[Image: 4CV0TeR.png]
#4
(08-19-2019, 04:11 PM)Yojimbo Wrote: Wow. I really hope they mean this and it’s not just lip service.


LOL, is that a serious question?  It's not lip service, it's virtue signaling.  Stomp your feet and then blame somebody else - that's how the game is played.

I'd guess 2/3 of the world lives in poverty, by US standards.  Global labor competition means 2/3 of the world is begging, literally, to eat your lunch.

I've seen more than a few companies confront this issue.  It S U C K S.  Either you lay off half your workers, or your bleed for a few years until you have to shut your doors (and then no one has a job).  There's no champagne toasts in the Board Room, it's really tough, awful decisions.  The ugly truth is that unskilled labor can't command $15 per hour in a global economy.
--------------------------------------------------------





#5
American Airlines? Whatever. No other industry treats it’s customers as badly as airlines.
“History teaches that grave threats to liberty often come in times of urgency, when constitutional rights seem too extravagant to endure.”-Thurgood Marshall

[Image: 4CV0TeR.png]
#6
I'd like to know how "social responsibility" is defined. If it means paying workers more and upper management less then I'm all for it.
#7
(08-20-2019, 10:52 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: I'd like to know how "social responsibility" is defined.  If it means paying workers more and upper management less then I'm all for it.

Yeah that was one thing the article left me wondering. Was it the issue you mentioned? Poverty? Environmental impact?
[Image: 4CV0TeR.png]
#8
(08-20-2019, 03:39 AM)JustWinBaby Wrote: I'd guess 2/3 of the world lives in poverty, by US standards. 

I've heard (so not sure on its veracity) that the poorest American is still in like the top 10 or 20% of wealthiest people when you consider the ENTIRE GLOBAL POPULATION.
[Image: giphy.gif]
#9
(08-21-2019, 11:11 AM)PhilHos Wrote: I've heard (so not sure on its veracity) that the poorest American is still in like the top 10 or 20% of wealthiest people when you consider the ENTIRE GLOBAL POPULATION.

I'm guilty of hyperbole.  I don't know the right number, but it's also apples-to-oranges. How do we take care of our poor?  And what should their standard of living be?  

It's not an easy answer, further complicated by illegal immigration.  IMO we maybe could solve it, but we won't because it's a useful wedge issue for elections.

We waste a lot of money on "wedge issues".  And maybe if we had our priorities right, we could actually fix something.  But when is the last time a politician campaigned on having fixed anything?!?
--------------------------------------------------------










Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)