Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : ajtj's Post-Lobotomy Market Charts and Thoughts -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Lee Lichterman III who wrote (54694)	3/15/2022 4:04:39 PM
From: Sun Tzu	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 97958

>> For your layoff scenario, I am old school, newest out first as long as job performance is equal. OK, but why? That is very "unAmerican" of you - or at least post-80s-unamerican of you. Read the business literature since mid-80s. Most of them have argued that it is immoral for a CEO to be concerned with anything but maximizing the shareholder value. And here you are saying that business should take a hit with an older person who has served for years rather than dispose of them in favor of a younger person who, let's face it, will be able to put in a ton of hours in the weekends and at nights because he is younger and doesn't have kids. How do you justify this stance of yours?

To: Lee Lichterman III who wrote (54694)	3/15/2022 4:04:56 PM
From: ajtj99	2 Recommendations Recommended By Lee Lichterman III Sun Tzu Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 97958

Back when our business had secretarial/book keeping staff, most started as full time employees, but went to part time after they had kids. They were all women recruited from a local business school. Anyway, they set up a job-sharing system in which the full time positions were covered. Most worked about 20-hours a week. Some additional full time staff were hired, but this situation was steady and worked for years in the 80's and 90's.