Circuit City and the American Dream

An anonymous reader writes "Circuit City said yesterday that it had fired 3,400 of its highest-paid sales staff — 8% of its employees — and will replace them with lower-paid workers. Sign On San Diego called this 'a risky strategy to cut costs that goes beyond the layoffs, buyouts and hiring freezes commonly used by struggling companies.' The fired workers have a chance to apply for lower-paying positions after a 10-week wait, the company said. Quoting a Circuit City spokesman: 'This is no reflection on job performance... We deeply regret the negative impact. Retail is extremely competitive, and if we're going to thrive and operate a successful company... we just have to control costs.' So: work hard, become the best in your field, and get fired so they can offer you a new job 10 weeks later at a lower salary."

You have *got* to be kidding me.

[Skyshadow]

"Work hard, become the best in your field..."

Yeah, sorry -- the folks working at Circuit City don't generally really qualify as being the "best in their field", unless you're defining the "field" as "people who work at Circuit City". Besides, Circuit City's not on commission anymore so you can't even argue that these folks were necessarily their top performers.

But let's accept for a moment the premise of this article. If these folks really are such great salesmen, this is opportunity knockin' at their door -- they can get better jobs at higher-end stores, they can start their own higher-end stores, they can get into selling something that has worthwhile commissions involved with it like software or cars or whatever. I mean, let's face it: Being the best sales associate at Circuit City is along the same lines as being the best cook at McDonald's. If that's where your vision ends, that's almost certainly where you belong.

That aside, what offends me most is that this thread is this horrific notion that we've devolved to a point where the meaning of the term "American dream" has mutated from 'boundless opportunity in the marketplace and the ability to move out of the economic class you were born into' to 'lifetime employment at Circuit City'.

Speaking only for myself, if that really were the case then I'd want no part of it.

The American Dream as I understand it is that when you get laid off from a shitty dead-end job you can go out and find or create something better if you have the drive and/or ability for it. And hey, if your lack the skills or the ambition to go out and work to better your situation, you can always reapply -- I'm sure that red shirt will fit just as well in ten weeks as it does now.

Wrong place to cry ... we all just got out sourced

[guysmilee]

Wrong place to cry ... we all just got out sourced!

Re:So take your business to Best Buy

[voice_of_all_reason]

Turd sandwich... giant douche?

Will Circuit City get

[Recovering Hater]

what they want or what they deserve? I know if I worked there, I would hope I could find a better job before they could fire me and would be praying that hundreds of other employees would be doing the same. The next time you visit Circuit City just remember how they value their employees. If they can't be bothered to spend the money on quality help what does that imply about their attitude towards their cutomers.

Didn't they do this years ago?

[VeriTea]

I read an article several years back about how Circuit City fired all their highest-grossing commissioned salespeople to replace them with hourly workers. It must have been so successful they decided to try again.

Either that or they need the stock boost that comes from indiscriminately firing workers - Wall Street loves that.

The lowest of the low

[Jeffrey Baker]

The truth of the matter is that a Circuit City salesman performs a service to the public which is about on par with picking strawberries or washing cars. People who pick strawberries and wash cars make the minimum wage. These types of jobs are not intended to be long careers, they are supposed to put kids and part-timers to work. The stark truth of economics is that if you want a higher wage you have to do something more valuable. Try machining or engine repair.

It doesn't matter

[dafz1]

Circuit City is on it's last legs.

The CC stores I've been in have lots of empty shelves, especially in the home audio area. The center area is mostly CDs and DVDs. They had a decent selection of TVs, which, supposedly, are low margin items, so they're not going to be much help in keeping CC profitable.

UNIONIZE

[dukerobinson]

This sort of nonsense will continue in retail jobs (and everywhere else) until workers UNITE. There is no sense in taking this sort of abuse. Circuit City employees: your company does not care about you, if you want to receive something like fair compensation for your labor then you have to unite with your fellow employees.

The will become K-Mart

[ehaggis]

Poor employee morale and low pay create the a social petri dish for employee malaise and discontent. Customer service suffers. People stop shopping there. The company continues to lower prices and pay. A vicious cycle ensues. Soon they declare bankruptcy and blame on it everything except poor management decisions driven by short term bottom line numbers.

Re:You have *got* to be kidding me.

[ez76]

Besides, Circuit City's not on commission anymore so you can't even argue that these folks were necessarily their top performers.

Just because they're not paid for their performance doesn't mean their performance is not evaluated on the basis of sales.

The whole "don't worry, I'm not commission" line that Best Buy made famous is just that, a ploy to comfort the mark.

Re:You have *got* to be kidding me.

[petabyte]

Ya know, I'm only 20-something but my vision of the American Dream doesn't ever include getting laid-off - and certainly not by a company trying to reduce costs. How do you know these people views this job as dead end?

It involves working hard, making good money, building a family and a good life for all of us. White-picket fence and all of that (though I hate picket fences - I'll take a split-rail please).

If these people were the highest paid sales staff and they aren't making commission, then I would imagine they earned that salary buy sticking it out and being with the company for a long time (my assumption, could be wrong). So you stay with a company and work you way up and then someone decides to can you so you can start all over again. JibJab's BigBoxMart video is playing in my head.

 

Re:You have *got* to be kidding me.

[HomelessInLaJolla]

work hard, become the best in your field, and get fired so they can offer you a new job 10 weeks later at a lower salary

Once you've been through this cycle more than twice you will begin to see how the game really works [slashdot.org]. Then you resolve yourself to waiting out the bullsh*t until a real opportunity comes along. Unless you're some spoiled rich brat you have two decisions: keep recycling yourself back into the game or become homeless while waiting for providence.

The American Dream is dead!

[Anonymous Coward]

When clueless sales floor personnel cannot expect to work years for one company and retire with a pension.

Re:You have *got* to be kidding me.

[Pharmboy]

Then as a 40 something guy who has rode the rollercoaster of business (and done well) let me offer you one piece of advice: The only security you have is in what you can do. You will face layoffs, you will face hard times. If you keep increasing your skills, learning new skills, and improving yourself, then you are less likely to be the one to get laid off. And if you are, you will find it much easier to get a job.

The "constant layoffs" are not new to 2007, it has been going on for decades. The 80's had a bad reputation for the decade of greed for the same reason. Again, all you have is what you know you can do. No company will ever "give" you security.

Re:Jumping the logical gap.

[Hoi Polloi]

Come on! Everyone knows that CEOs are equal in talent and skill to 400 regular employees. They are irreplaceable geniuses. No one could do their jobs for even a fraction of that. Even when they fail they deserve tens of millions of $. It has nothing to do with boards made up of CEOs from other companies who vote for the compensation packages and scratch each other's backs. Nothing.

Re:You have *got* to be kidding me.

[Skyshadow]

Ya know, I'm only 20-something but my vision of the American Dream doesn't ever include getting laid-off - and certainly not by a company trying to reduce costs. How do you know these people views this job as dead end?

It involves working hard, making good money, building a family and a good life for all of us. White-picket fence and all of that (though I hate picket fences - I'll take a split-rail please).

I'm sorry that your version of the American Dream relies on such a sense of entitlement. Speaking as someone who is almost 30 and entered the job market right before the dotcom bust, I feel that it's my responsibility to point out that you're living in fantasyland.

In short, I think you'll find that nobody owes you jack shit. Your employer is paying you to work because it's a good investment for them -- you make them, or allow them to make, more money than they would without you. This is the way things work. Should this cease to be the case, your "expectations" don't amount to a hill of beans.

I'm sorry if that doesn't seem fair to you, that you feel like showing up to work everyday should earn you the house and the 2.5 kids and all that, but this doesn't change the reality of the situation.

Short Circuit City

[Jeremiah Cornelius]

"In the 1980s capitalism triumphed over communism. In the 1990s it triumphed over democracy."
--David Korten

Circuit City slogan: "We're evil"

[russotto]

It's not so unusual for companies to lay off at the top and hire at the bottom. It IS unusual for them to do it all at once and to come right out and say that's what they're doing. I'm not sure if their honesty is a good thing or a bad thing.

It seems that Circuit City has decided that a more experienced and thus higher-paid salesperson doesn't sell much (if anything) more than a high-school dropout hired right off the street. If that's the case, raises and higher pay simply don't make sense and a switch to a model where they hire people who can't get anything better, never give raises, and accept the resulting high turnover makes business sense. Even if it is pretty much evil.

Shooting oneself in the foot.

[Radon360]

Yet another corporate management that views the bottom-end labor as a pure commodity. Can they get more warm bodies in to replace those displaced? You sure bet. Can the displaced find sales work elsewhere? Most likely so as well. Apparently, someone missed the day in class when they discussed intrinsic value. If you have someone that's experienced and good at what they do, they are very likely worth more because they know how to be more productive at what they do. They likely know how to sell and market a product, in addition to helping customers find the product that best suits their needs and desires.

Having a knowledgeable and competent sales staff is usually considered a cornerstone of having a good store. Get rid of that, and you're probably competing strictly on price and not on value. Hey, if that's their new business model, then they probably made a good move towards achieving that model. But generally, taking the service out of a service industry usually is a risky plan.

If I were Circuit City's direct competition, I'd seriously consider finding a way to talk to these displaced salepeople. It could be a windfall of people that I wouldn't have to spend too much effort in training myself, and still have an opportunity to weed out any undesirables.

Re:You have *got* to be kidding me.

[BalanceOfJudgement]

That aside, what offends me most is that this thread is this horrific notion that we've devolved to a point where the meaning of the term "American dream" has mutated from 'boundless opportunity in the marketplace and the ability to move out of the economic class you were born into' to 'lifetime employment at Circuit City'.

Speaking only for myself, if that really were the case then I'd want no part of it.

The American Dream as I understand it is that when you get laid off from a shitty dead-end job you can go out and find or create something better if you have the drive and/or ability for it. And hey, if your lack the skills or the ambition to go out and work to better your situation, you can always reapply -- I'm sure that red shirt will fit just as well in ten weeks as it does now.
--

While I appreciate your sentiment and agree that the 'American Dream' is MUCH more than lifelong employment at Circuit City, I'd like to offer an opposing view of what is going on here.

My view is basically this: The American Dream, as you defined (and which I think most Americans would agree with) - is crap. And this action on Circuit City's part only confirms that assertion. It's a lie we tell ourselves to take pride in something that is inherently destructive, something that while it seems good in theory, becomes nearly impossible in practice: Capitalism itself.

I have spent the better part of my life attempting to understand the intricacies of human nature, particularly with regard to how they influence our social systems (and thus, what the requirements of those social systems are) - and the one point that has always stuck with me is Capitalism itself.

It seems like such an ideal solution, doesn't it, the economic embodiment of freedom, the nearly boundless promise of free enterprise..

Except that when you make money the motivating factor for why you do things, the things that SHOULD motivate you as a human being in a human culture - cease to function. The RIAA's recent behavior (suing a 10 year old girl.. come on) eloquently demonstrates this assertion.

Oh certainly, money need not be the ONLY motivating factor, and for a long time it wasn't. But over time it becomes harder to justify taking a hit to the bottom line just because you care about your employees, doesn't it? Especially when your shareholders are harping on you to increase the stock's value. Especially when there are, at any given moment, dozens of lawsuits against companies for NOT fulfilling their obligations to shareholders.

And especially, when companies are so richly rewarded for their abuse of the human cultures in which they participate.

What I am getting at is this: Circuit City doesn't care one whit about the success of our civilization, and accordingly, the value of their employees as ANYTHING OTHER than "human resources" is essentially nil. There is no value in seeing them as people, because well, it makes them just slightly less profitable. Can't have that now.

No, society falls to shit, and the money-making business doesn't care.. because if the society fails, there's no need for money anyway, but so long as it exists, those with wealth hold all the cards.

Seeing people as human beings is a liability in a civilization that values wealth as much as we do.

Quoting Heinlein, "a dying culture invariably exhibits personal rudeness. Bad manners. Lack of consideration for others in minor matters. A loss of politeness, of gentle manners, is more significant than a riot."

Re:You have *got* to be kidding me.

[Rosco P. Coltrane]

I read your post, and the first thing that sprang to my mind is that you haven't held a serious job yet.

Your vision of the american dream (the one I had before too) is the stereotypical Horatio Alger story that permeates the entire work culture of the United States, that can be summed up as: if you work hard, you will rise and get a better life. Unfortunately, and this is something that you learn as you get older and have been working for a while for one, more likely several companies, the Horatio Alger dream is just that, a dream. Yes it would be very nice if it was still true, but the reality is that very VERY few better their lives through hard work and perseverance. Very few people start out selling apples and end up millionaires, a-la rockefeller. What happens in reality is that most of the population toils to pays credit, and a sizeable part of the population toils just to make ends meet and stay off the street.

It's my opinion that the so-called american dream is mostly a myth implanted in people's minds early on in their lives to make them work harder for the same wage, constantly hoping for better days. The reality of America today is that the rich get richer, the poor get poorer, and the middle class finds the "middle" slowly drifting to the bottom.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not a "leftist" who complains about social inequalities, I have nothing against people being rich, and I myself work hard to have a better future, but without much hope because unfortunately, the social elevator that would allow people to make their lives better through hard work is mostly out of order: most of America is inside the cabin frantically pushing the buttons, hoping that it will finally start to rise, and it doesn't. I think you'll come to realize this too one day.

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Re:Jumping the logical gap.

[dafz1]

Having been a manager of sales people, the response to "If you want more money, sell more high commission items" is:

"I quit".

I've seen it done, and, unfortunately, did it myself, once. And my best salesman quit.

People determine their value on what they get paid. If they are valuable to your company(high dollar sale people), pay them more to keep them. Don't force them to make it up in more sales. Someone else will pay them the base they're looking for, in addition to the commission. I'd rather pay one person who has great sales 10% more each year, than two people who are little more than warm bodies taking up space.

Re:Will Circuit City get

[MoneyT]

Let's assume that they validly need to cut costs. Doesn't it make sense to cut the highest paid people? Isn't this what we demand that companies do (i.e. stop paying the CEOs and managers so much more than the peons? Furthermore, remember that in order to equal the amount of money saved by cutting our highest paid, you would have to cut many more of your lowest paid. Is it better to fire 100 of your highest paid or 200 of your lowest paid? Circuit city seems to think the former, and I'm not sure they're wrong (i'm not sure they're right either).

Re:You have *got* to be kidding me.

[cayenne8]

"Ya know, I'm only 20-something but my vision of the American Dream doesn't ever include getting laid-off - and certainly not by a company trying to reduce costs. How do you know these people views this job as dead end?

Well, open your eyes, it is a big bad world out there in the 'real world', and it is all business, the dollar is the bottom line, and it isn't even close to being supposedly fair. If you go into it knowing that...it can slide off your back when it happens to you, and you won't waste time feeling bad, and can go to the next gig.

As for the 'view CC job as a dead end?'...well, I think Dennis Miller summed it up best a long time ago: "If you get to be thirty-five and your job still involves wearing a name tag, you've probably made a serious vocational error."

Really...these kinds of jobs really are only for college and HS students...or should be. You should NOT count on this as a career in this day in age.

"So you stay with a company and work you way up and then someone decides to can you so you can start all over again."

Yup..that's the name of the game, especially if you work salaried direct. The days of having a job for life, have been gone for a LONG time. I'd say having a job in one place for 3 years or so is about all you want to do...otherwise you stagnate, and as you age and get more $$ at the same place, your position (unless you progress up the mgmt tree) become less and less tenable...and at some point you will be canned 'cause they can save $$ by replacing you with a noob just outta school. (Heck, think about it...YOU probably replaced and older guy that was canned just before you were hired).

The company of today, does not care about you or the American Dream, it cares about the bottom line. If you can get the mindset, you can work within this paradigm and succeed, but, you have to quit thinking like an 'happy employee for life'.

Re:You have *got* to be kidding me.

[dougsyo]

If these people were the highest paid sales staff and they aren't making commission, then I would imagine they earned that salary buy sticking it out and being with the company for a long time (my assumption, could be wrong). So you stay with a company and work you way up and then someone decides to can you so you can start all over again.

This happened to a friend of mine with Best Buy a number of years ago. He had been a store manager for some time (I think close to ten years), and his side of it is that they found a way to get rid of him because he cost too much to keep compared to less-tenured store managers.

"We want cheap rather than good" seems to be the American way right now.

Doug

Re:You have *got* to be kidding me.

[BalanceOfJudgement]

I meant to add this, because it alters the tone of my post somewhat, but of course Slashdot doesn't let you edit posts:

There are features of Capitalism which I do actually really like, and that I still think are workable. But since capitalism is a system we invented, we are consequently responsible for how we run it. The choices we make, the values we hold, influence how we build our civilization. We can choose to be responsible in our pursuit of value, or we can choose to cut every corner, cut every throat, in our grasp for wealth.

Currently, we are increasingly choosing the latter. It doesn't have to be that way. But Capitalism isn't an end in itself, and its purpose can ONLY BE to serve us.. but we have to make it do so. It's hard, to choose to give up wealth for values, but that isn't really a sacrifice, when we consider how much our values actually mean to us.

Unfortunately, we don't seem to be making that choice. Or we are, and what we're choosing really is this destructive.

Re:UNIONIZE

[dcollins]

Fuck companies. No one is *entitled* to slave labor. If you don't like it where you do business, close shop and leave the country. Employees have the right to organize and bargain with the company as equal partners, period.

I do

[SuperKendall]

A union just gives us the ability to say "if you fuck with one of us, you fuck with all of us". Do you have a problem with workers doing that?

I do when you don't have a choice about joining the union or not, which is generally what happens with unions - and they turn that same attitude back on fellow workers they do not like.

A workers union is a slippery slope to a whole other parallel layer of management above you, and that honestly does not do the company or you any good in the long run.

Stupid management never suffers, only employees.

[Futurepower(R)]

"Not that crappy old Circuit City..."

This is just another chapter in an old story. The top management of Circuit City doesn't know what they are doing, so the company has trouble making money, but it is only the employees who suffer.

--
Is U.S. government violence a good in the world, or does violence just cause more violence?

Re:You have *got* to be kidding me.

[Anonymous Coward]

You will face layoffs, you will face hard times.

Sorry, no.

I work for the government. I'm a "civil servant". I make high 5 figures, and I'm not management. I'm a member of a union. I will not be fired / layed off / downsized / whatever.

Have a nice day.

Re:You have *got* to be kidding me.

[corbettw]

You're confusing the American Dream (being your own boss, owning your own home, having a wife that doesn't work and children in private school) with the French dream (lifelong employment at one employer). The two are completely irreconcilable.

Re:Will Circuit City get

[sesshomaru]

Have you never heard the glorious story of Divx, concieved in Hell by executives of Circuit City (not to be confused with the piracy friendly codec)?

Here's an article: DIVX Bites The Dust! [about.com]

"Just think, everytime some kid wants to watch The Little Mermaid, it'll be a payday for us," they chortled...

thats just business!

[freg]

Am I the only person who thinks this action isn't all that horrendous? The executives that make these hard decisions are accountable to their stockholders. If the executives don't make hard decisions to turn problems around fast, they get canned themselves. If stockholders don't get results, they lose money, but that's there right, because they're in control, they put up the money and took the risk to begin with.

If you don't own your own business you are at the mercy of your employer.

I'm a freelance programmer but also work a 40 hour job that could easily kick me out on the street with little or no reasoning (tho I do trust they won't because of their friendly track record). I might would disagree with their decision to can me, but I wouldn't even go as far as to think it immoral or unkind, unless it really were.. ie. based on race or age. I don't think this case with CC is either one of these. That said, I would like to see Circuit City get a brain and try to revamp their sales approach and store layouts so they could actually compete with best buy. Bad PR decisions like this don't always sort out the underlying issues and can make turning around even harder in the long run.

And people wonder...

[danpsmith]

...why you can't get any help that's of any use from retail clerks. The corporate model isn't geared toward customer service and nobody seems to be understanding this. I don't know what the alternative is, but I'll tell you when someone has earned multiple raises to become the highest paid in a store, most of the time (if not always), especially in a place like Circuit City, it's because they are good at what they do. They are probably the knowledgeable staff that actually help you with issues versus the weekend/school workers that are just there to collect enough to pay for the keg of beer. Nowadays you have to spend all day researching most purchases just to insure you aren't getting screwed because the staff at the store know nothing, the people that stock the shelves know nothing and sometimes even the people at the electronics companies know nothing about what they are making or selling. You get what you pay for I suppose.

This country is out of production and manufacturing and is now relying upon sales, research and services for job growth. The simple fact of the matter is that the children of the largest section of the population that lied on factory jobs is waking up to find themselves forced into retail after high school. Certainly there are colleges, education, etc but like it or not some people don't always have these options. When you are forced to get a job out of high school nowadays it's usually at a circuit city or a walmart. Maybe this is why I agree with the Green Party in saying that they should make $10 an hour minimum wage. The simple fact is that it would force companies to pay a decent living wage for these workers they take for granted, play around with, throw everything on top of and then throw out the door once they start advancing their supposed "career." I for one will never shop at Circuit City again.

Re:You have *got* to be kidding me.

[AndersOSU]

I agree with you ... to a point.

I'm in my mid twenties, and am constantly amazed at what people in my age range feel entitled to. I expect to work my way up, and don't expect any particular loyalty from my employer. Pension plan ha - that's a good one - now tell me about social security that cracks me up every time. On the flip side that they expect some long-term loyalty from me is really hilarious.

However, that circuit city feels that they can exercise their lack of loyalty so egregiously is disgusting. As soon as I read about this I decided not to spend another dime there - not that big a loss since the last three times I went in there prepared to throw money at them they made it so frustrating that I drove the extra 15 minutes to Best Buy (not exactly the savior of the little guy I know).

Re:Shooting oneself in the foot.

[Radon360]

I agree with you that online sales have definitely strengthened the aspect of competition on bottom line price alone. However, I do think that there's still a market niche for excellent customer service. This is something that "brick and mortar" stores normally would have a leg-up on their internet competition. The problem is making sure that your stores just don't become the quazi-showroom for your competition. (i.e. "Thanks for the info, I'm going home now to buy it online at the lowest price I can find.")

I think that it would go without saying that virtually everyone on this forum is at least above average when it comes to technical knowledge. That being the case, we rarely need a salesperson to assist us with our tech purchases, thus online buying is a natural fit. There are, however, still a large number of consumers that need the visual, aural and tactile experience first before committing to buy. The trick is to close the sale then and there and not let them walk out empty-handed, yet loaded with knowledge so they can now shop on price alone. That said, a salesperson experienced and adept in making sales becomes all that much more important of an asset to a store.

Re:You have *got* to be kidding me.

[lord_mike]

There once was a time when people living in the richest country in the world had a reasonable expectation that they could share in that wealth as long as they worked hard and played by the rules. It's not an unfair "expectation". After all, the 50's era (a time that conservatives like yourself laud as being the American ideal) was a time where you could get a good job with great security and live well for the rest of your life. You would have health insurance, life inusrance, pension, the whole 9 yards. If someone brought that up today, they would be accused of being a communist, yet this era was considered the capitalist ideal--the idea of the American Dream came from this time period in history.

Even crappy retail jobs that are being derided on this site had these kind of benefits. A retail person COULD own a house, believe it or not... almost impossible today.

Of course, back then we had control over markets, imposed trade barriers, and the population had significant union representation. We also actually manufactured things, as opposed to today. Conservatives who want to go back to the 50's conveniently forget these facts.

But, it is irrelevant... at some point we became so jaded when these ideals were stripped from our society, that we now resent and try to bring down anyone who still has health insurance, union membership, or a pension plan. Instead of demanding more for ourselves, we are demanding less for everyone else--somehow it is better for everyone to be dragged down rather than lifting everyone up.

It's a little depressing that Americans have been so beaten down by the system that they are afraid to stand up for themselves. What's even sadder is that posters like yourself seem intent on cutting off your nose to spite your face.

It is no wonder that the United States of America is in such a bad state. It's time for America to rise up and demand the America Dream again. It is our birthright, but only if we stand up for it.

Thanks,

Mike

Re:You have *got* to be kidding me.

[homer_s]

The reality of America today is that the rich get richer, the poor get poorer, and the middle class finds the "middle" slowly drifting to the bottom.

That is simply not true. Did the poor in the 1950s have access to the kind of healthcare that someone on Medicare has to now? Did they drive better cards? Did they have access to the kind of technology ppl have access to today?

Yes, the rich get richer much much faster than the poor do - but it is false to say that the poor get poorer. That is only true in socialist paradises like Zimbabwe and soon Venezuela.

Read this [latimes.com] for some more commentary. There is also a piece by the leader of the communist party of the USA for more 'balanced' coverage.

Re:You have *got* to be kidding me.

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm sorry that your version of the American Dream relies on such a sense of entitlement.

And as a guy who turns 55 next week, I'm sorry that yours doesn't. If you work hard, you SHOULD BE entitled to the fruits of your labors.

If you're lazy, steal from your employer, go to work drunk, act like a total jerk to your fellow employees then you should lose your job. But to lose your job when the fat cat CEO earns five hundred times what you do [finfacts.com] so that the company can hire a replacement for you at a lower pay rate, well, that's just plain damned evil.

And for you, as a worker, to believe that this is in any way fair or equitable, or that your employer doesn't owe you a living for your labor, well, that's just plain retarded. If you believe that, you fucking deserve to lose your job.

It's time to quintuple the minimum wage, and then bring back the unions. Bullshit like Circut City never happened back when 75% of workers were unionized. Now that only 10% of us are in unions, they have us by the balls. And it's idiots like you who think it's the UNIONS that are evil that allow this bullshit to happen! Grow a fucking brain, moron.

Re:You have *got* to be kidding me.

[danpsmith]

But let's accept for a moment the premise of this article. If these folks really are such great salesmen, this is opportunity knockin' at their door -- they can get better jobs at higher-end stores, they can start their own higher-end stores, they can get into selling something that has worthwhile commissions involved with it like software or cars or whatever. I mean, let's face it: Being the best sales associate at Circuit City is along the same lines as being the best cook at McDonald's. If that's where your vision ends, that's almost certainly where you belong.

You've got to be kidding me if you think not only that losing your job is an opportunity but that people at Circuit City get paid enough to start their own stores, or that high end stores won't soon be going out of business in favor of walmart or best buy starting their own "high end sections." Sure, there might room for the 1% of rich people that are too snobby to go to walmart and you can sell to them, but that's not enough to make up a business model in a regular town. Like it or not, salespeople are relegated to this position in the new economy so stop trying to act like Circuit City was doing them a favor by firing them. People have bills to pay, life costs money, firing someone is no favor or opportunity.

Democracy?

[Infonaut]

"In the 1980s capitalism triumphed over communism. In the 1990s it triumphed over democracy."

What do employee/employer relationships at Best Buy have to do with democracy? Nobody has subverted representative government here. One particular corporate entity has made a business decision to cut labor costs by getting rid of some of its more highly-paid employees. There's no violation of contract, no usurpation of rights. There is no right to employment in the United States, and never has been.

Re:You have *got* to be kidding me.

[Anonymous Coward]

And that is what's wrong with American government agencies. There are so many ridiculous protections that people have little motivation to do their jobs well, which is why anything the government does ends up half as good and takes three times as long as the private sector. Oh please, lets do elect Hillary so my healthcare can be run like that!

Re:You have *got* to be kidding me.

[jythie]

>The company of today, does not care about you or the American Dream, it cares about the bottom line. If you can get the mindset, you can >work within this paradigm and succeed, but, you have to quit thinking like an 'happy employee for life'.

I think it is less the companies care more about the bottom line then they did in the past, and more the idea of investing in your employees has fallen out of favor. Even in retail, if someone knows their job and has been doing it for a long time, you generally pay them more for their experience because the company benefits from it. Instead you end up with a flock of 1 year drones who don't know anything about the current (much less legacy) product lines, give terrible customer service (since dealing with customers well _IS_ a skillset) and generally makes a worse customer experience,.. not to mention a less efficiently run store.

So they are trading these people who have built up skills and knowledge that the store and customer benefit from for a short term influx of savings.

I think people in tech and management tend to be a little too quick to undervalue customer facing jobs and how they can affect a company's success.

Re:You have *got* to be kidding me.

[drinkypoo]

In short, I think you'll find that nobody owes you jack shit.

In court, you're right. But to a reasonable person, if I work hard for someone, I deserve and am owed respect and fair treatment. It doesn't mean I'm going to get it, just like having a right to life, liberty, and happiness doesn't prevent the government from doing its level best to interfere with all three.

The most important message is that respect works both ways, but fear only works in one. If you work for an employer who, when they fire someone, always just drops it on them without notice, that has a chilling effect on your loyalty. If you work for an employer who fires people and hires them back at less pay to save money, well, don't you think that has a chilling effect? It's bad for everyone.

Re:You have *got* to be kidding me.

[Viper Daimao]

the 50's era (a time that conservatives like yourself laud as being the American ideal)

Wow, someone sure likes to put words in strawmen's mouthes.

This is why people form unions

[Raisey-raison]

This is why unions exist. I agree with people who say that no-one owes me a job. If they want they can fire my ass just because they want to, to cut costs if they want. They can they agree to rehire me later for less money. However I do not have to work for some company either. I can get together with a bunch other employees and form a union. We can insist on better pay and treatment and insist that we aren't treated like shit. They company doesn't have to listen to us. It can ignore us and fire us all and go out of business if it wants. Then maybe the employees will perhaps get some better health benefits and better pay and contracts that stop the company from abusing its workers. Bottom line: whats good for the goose is good for the gander. If you are gonna insist its a dog eat dog world then sometimes the company get to be bitten too and it too will suffer. So no wining about abusive unions....circuit city asked for this.

Re:You have *got* to be kidding me.

[AndersOSU]

Really I think the beef isn't so much with capitalism as it is with corporatism.

Most of the problems really emerged with widely held companies. Every investor wants a return, and everyone is an investor. The problem is that this is a self-defeating proposition, because to increase profits means to cut costs, and the investor is also an employee. Essentially the investor is urging for his own termination.

Not that there aren't serious problems with private companies, but when only a few people make the decision they can sometimes be convinced that the parts of the business that cost a lot are precisely what makes customers want to buy their wares.

Re:You have *got* to be kidding me.

[melchoir55]

Then as a 40 something guy who has rode the rollercoaster of business (and done well) let me offer you one piece of advice: The only security you have is in what you can do. You will face layoffs, you will face hard times. If you keep increasing your skills, learning new skills, and improving yourself, then you are less likely to be the one to get laid off. And if you are, you will find it much easier to get a job.

The "constant layoffs" are not new to 2007, it has been going on for decades. The 80's had a bad reputation for the decade of greed for the same reason. Again, all you have is what you know you can do. No company will ever "give" you security.

One of the main points in this article is that the people who DID work hard and improve themselves were the ones who got laid off. Saying they [skilled workers] can just go get a better job elsewhere seems shortsighted since, if they could easily go get a better job, one would presume they'd have already done so.

Re:You have *got* to be kidding me.

[petabyte]

I suppose I've had a different experience. I my field, I'm somewhat in demand so people try to keep me. However, I've been seriously working for 3 years and changed jobs almost every year. As openings come up, I climb up the ladder. My employeer has both a "penison" and a 401K - I only have faith in the 401K.

I understand what Circuit City is doing. As a company I'm pretty convinced they're over with. I can't recall the last time I went to one of their stores although I think that was for giftcard or something. They're trying to save money in whatever way they can. I really think they have to change how they do business and the way their stores are setup to compete with BestBuy but I really think it is too late for that. Anyway, I'll probably be buying stuff online.

Re:You have *got* to be kidding me.

[EastCoastSurfer]

If you work hard, you SHOULD BE entitled to the fruits of your labors.

It's called a paycheck. Unless I missed something these people were paid every week or 2 while they were working.

It's time to quintuple the minimum wage, and then bring back the unions. Bullshit like Circut City never happened back when 75% of workers were unionized. Now that only 10% of us are in unions, they have us by the balls. And it's idiots like you who think it's the UNIONS that are evil that allow this bullshit to happen! Grow a fucking brain, moron.

That's a great idea. Let unions milk another industry and run it into the ground like what happened to the automotive industry.

Re:You have *got* to be kidding me.

[Anonymous Coward]

A dream can be anything that you work towards.

If you limiting it to reality 2.0, then it is no longer a dream - just a goal.

Re:You have *got* to be kidding me.

[HikingStick]

I believe there is a couple key point to the American Dream that you (and many others) inadvertantly miss. First, the American Dream cannot be realized by most people if they are willing to work for someone else. The American Dream--time and again--has been realized by those who, for whatever reason, could not or would not allow themselves to be wage-slaves. They started cottage industries--some failed, and some succeeded. Those who succeeded saw the American Dream fulfilled. Those who did not succeed faced a choice--either try again (to achieve the Dream) or believe that the American Dream is a lie. There is a third choice for those who taste failure. Most accept it as the default option but they typically will not assent to it: the American Dream is real, but they reinvent it as being something different--having a modest wage, access to credit, and some luxuries that fit their preconceptions. For them, that is good enough.

The second point that is often missed when discussing the American Dream is what made it possible: something I will call the "American Spirit"--that we, as a people, are willing to reach out and give others a hand along the way. I, by no means, suggest that this spirit is unique to America, but I do believe that--at one time--the world would have been hard-pressed to find more of it per-capita than anywhere else in the world. Today, sadly, it is in decline. Up-and-comers demonstrated this spirit by giving good jobs to their employees, and by contributing to those in need. Socially responsible corporations, while tending to long-term profitability and short-term objectives, did this by having a sense of loyalty to those who helped build the corporation. If we, in America, have had any failure, it is in this second aspect--a failure of the American Spirit.

What disgusts me most about the Circuit City scenario (which is also played out in many other industries every day) is that these "artificial persons" (for what is a corporation if not a legally recognized entity under law?) have forsaken their responsibility to society in order to worship at the altar of profitability.

Don't get me wrong. I'm not saying that businesses cannot take action to maintain their profitability--my degree is in business management and technology, so I understand the factors--but I would argue that it was a failure of management that brought them to this place. Had the leadership of Circuit City fully exercised their duty to their business, the could have stemmed this time years ago. Yes, I know many of you will scream "armchair quarterback" or "20/20 hindsight," but it was clear (to me, at least) that Circuit City expanded too aggressively, they did little to differentiate from their fierce competitors, and they never looked (successfully, at least) strategically at their industry and market trends. In other words: they should have seen this coming and made a minor course correction before they were thousands of miles at sea.

After reading the article today, and other recent news on Circuit City, I'm just glad I never accepted a position with them back in 1997. The American Dream is not holy writ that allows us each to pursue our interests at the expense of our neighbors. It is objectification of the notion that we all have the opportunity to reach toward a lofty goal--of establishing a place in this world, a good home for our families, adding stability to our communities, and having a (positive) impact on society along the way. Do all achieve this dream? No, but we can be part of it.

Re:You have *got* to be kidding me.

[Anonymous Coward]

Good points on both ends. It is very true that your skills are the only security you really have, but corporate culture really does need a change.
I love how all of the large retail business like this are always stressing "team work" and "family" to employees and expect employees to be devoted to the company when most of these same companies will ruin the lives of their employees the second it is 0.001% more profitable for them to do so.
I particularly love the occasional business article that pops up in which employers have the audacity to complain that new employees show no loyalty to their companies and aren't willing to invest in their jobs. Well, that's because we aren't all morons. Corporate culture set the tone and will now have to live with the results.

Re:You have *got* to be kidding me.

[R2.0]

"It's time to quintuple the minimum wage, and then bring back the unions. Bullshit like Circut City never happened back when 75% of workers were unionized. Now that only 10% of us are in unions, they have us by the balls. And it's idiots like you who think it's the UNIONS that are evil that allow this bullshit to happen! Grow a fucking brain, moron."

Bwahahah - I haven't had a laugh like that in a long time.

"Quintuple the minimum wage". So everyone will make a minimum of $27.25. Cool. So what will a latte at Starbuck cost - $25? See, if you artificially set a floor for wages, ALL wages go up across the board, and so all costs of goods go up. The CEO will still make 500x what you do - it will just be measures in billions instead of millions.

As for unions, look in a mirror. In the 70's, the AFL-CIO decided to concentrate on lobbying in order to protect their position against changing economic conditions. This had some short term effect - the unions still have a power in Washington disproportionate to their representation. But they never figured out that no government mandate could replace organizing efforts, which they totally abandoned through the 70's and 80's. The unions gained their "75%" on their own - why did they feel the need for the Feds to help them keep it?

lying asshole promised reform and got in bed with the Democrats and got kicked out, which brough a HOFFA back in, for God's sake. I also was a member of the USW when I spend 8 hours a day shovelling sand in an iron foundry - the regulars there told me point blank to make sure I went back to school at the end of summer because they knew the job was a total dead end. I work with Union and non union craftsmen in the building trades, and I've even worked with sprinkler fitters that voted to disband their own union because the leadership sat on their asses, collected dues, and didn'y do a damned thing.

"And it's idiots like you who think it's the UNIONS that are evil that allow this bullshit to happen! Grow a fucking brain, moron."

Unions aren't evil - union officials are. And you (and I) voted them in. I did grow a brain - apparently, you've decided to stay a moron.

Re:You have *got* to be kidding me.

[L0rdJedi]

If you're lazy, steal from your employer, go to work drunk, act like a total jerk to your fellow employees then you should lose your job. But to lose your job when the fat cat CEO earns five hundred times what you do so that the company can hire a replacement for you at a lower pay rate, well, that's just plain damned evil.

You're right, it is evil. Hopefully this news will keep people from applying to Circuit City. I know I sure as hell would not want to work somewhere that's going to do something like this. With no one wanting to pickup those jobs, they'll just fall further and further until they've declared bankruptcy and closed down the whole chain. In fact, even if I wasn't one of the ones layed off, I'd definitely be looking for a new job now. Despite the stock price going up, this is going to prove to be disastrous for them. Hell, start a boycott if you want. They may sell some decent stuff, but they treat their employees like shit, so there's no reason to patronize them.

Hopefully people will remember this so that if the mere idea ever creeps into another CEO's head he'll forget about it instantly or risk losing his company.

Re:Democracy?

[utopianfiat]

I assume you're somewhat into Computer Science, can you tell me why the UpHeap algorithm is average constant complexity?
Because generally 50% of the smaller nodes are on the bottom of the tree.
How many sales associates work under each manager? How many managers work under each store manager? How many store managers work under the regional coordinator? They're pruning the bottom of the tree- rather than take a chunk out of the executive money-sink, they'd kill off FIVE THOUSAND TWO HUNDRED EMPLOYEES. They're not offering them a PAY CUT even! They're not changing to a commission system to try to increase competition! They are DOWNSIZING FIVE THOUSAND EMPLOYEES.
The fact of the matter is, taking care of workers is better for the economy because workers CONSUME. Need I remind you that the American economy is held up chiefly by international corporations and massive consumption? In terms of economic health, executive salary fluctuation is nothing, because all executive salaries go to is corporate investment. To actually pull a return on that investment, it would be wiser to put money into the hands of the people who can drive your profits upwards...

Re:You have *got* to be kidding me.

[Lovesquid]

What kills the ideal of Capitalism is the same thing that kills the ideal of Socialism, and it's not going to go away any time soon: human greed.

Don't be greedy. Just because you CAN step on another human being and pocket a small percentage of his or her paycheck doesn't mean you SHOULD. And that's exactly what CC is doing, here. Their reward for employee loyalty, for those who've worked at their ridiculously crappy store for the longest, and been foolish enough to have some faith in their employers' morality and endure their crappy job for more than the rest, is that they are fired first when hard times arrive. I know how the system works -- I'm realistic enough to see that. But it doesn't change the fact that it's just plain wrong. These are people they are dealing with here, not just money, and I agree with the parent post. When wealth is the primary, overriding priority, then the system needs to change, as it's horribly broken. Employers DO have a responsibility, morally, to provide their GOOD, LOYAL employees with job security and plain old human compassion commensurate with the work they provide day in and day out.

If CC want's to compete in this market, and they are having problems, then why not provide people with what works -- reasonable prices (CC is NOT doing this -- at all), good service (firing their best people is not an improvement, here, and they are going to completely demoralize the ones who are lucky enough to avoid the axe), and selection (if they HAD what I want, and at a reasonable price, I'd shop there over NewEgg any day) and convenience (walk in, see and hold what you are buying, which is an advantage over online shopping, and walk out with what you want the same day, no shipping, no delays).

Really, people... take what you need, as much as you require to live a happy, enjoyable life and to pay for what you require, throw in a bit of spare money for some reasonable fun now and then, and then be satisfied. We don't all need BMWs to be happy. But all most of us have been taught is 'more, more, more'. Be satisfied.

Flame me for being a care bear all you want, but I still don't think that what CC is doing is right. In fact, it's a perfect example of what is wrong with this country's pseudo-capitalist system. Failed capitalism is, at its worst, just as bad as failed socialism or any other ecomomic model, and we are heading down the wrong road, here.

Re:You have *got* to be kidding me.

[marck]

Wow, what country have you been living in?

All I've seen is that any time someone applies themselves they rise up. Some examples you say? Sure:

* one of my best friends spent summers in college selling cars ... now he owns a chain of profitable dealerships.
* one of the people I first hired for a very low salary in my company was able to take on any task and do it perfectly. He's now a manager at Microsoft with a net worth in the millions.
* a family member who started with your basic Chemical Eng. degree, then got his MBA and a Doctorate from MIT. He worked his way into upper management at Exxon then went into business for himself.
* at 26 years old I was on my second major technology related job and decided to start my own business developing software electric utility companies.

That was 18 years ago and we are still going strong.

I could give you many more examples, the point is simple. If you believe in yourself, work hard, accept nothing but the best from yourself and don't expect help from anyone then you can end up anywhere you want. That's all the America Dream promises, the opportunity, but the rest is up to you.

However, if you think for a second that you are entitled to a handout of any kind, you will fail. If you think someone owes you something, you will fail. If you aren't willing to put in 80 to 100 hour weeks when needed, you will fail. If you think that things should be fair, you will fail. If you think that you can do it without taking risk, you will fail. In other words, if you can look in the mirror and say "everything that happens to me is completely up to me" and you act on it then you have a great shot of making anything you want happen. Otherwise you aren't gonna live the dream without a lot of luck.

As for these guys, look at Circuit City's choices:

1. go under - everyone gets fired
2. do drastic cost cutting moves - some people get fired

Does it suck? yeah! But that's life, these guys just need to find another dead end job. There are lots of them around. If they want something better then that is up to them.

Re:First boycott Best Buy, now Circuit City?

[Anonymous Coward]

It is tempting to believe that a high-paid slashdotter and a walmart greeter are equal. Certainly, in a sense, this is true: in the justice system, they are equal; there is no preference for programmers over greeters. They both receive habeas corpus rights; they both will be read their Miranda rights if arrested. This is also true in terms of political rights: a vote by a programmer is worth as much as a vote from a greeter. I could go on.

However, in an economic sense, individuals are not equal. There are individuals of varying ability that operate in varying fields. Now, suppose that we paid the slashdotter equally to the greeter; what incentive does the slashdotter have to do any more than stand at the door of the company and greet people? What incentive do we provide to the programmer to make him use his domain-specific skills? Could we take the greeter and have him do the programmer's job? Clearly not. So why pay them the same?

As for having a minimum wage that pays enough to do all the things you suggest, the fact is that raising minimum wage raises the price of goods. If you have to pay the greeter $10/hr, then obviously you can't charge the same price as before and make the same profit. The only way that you can have the price of goods stay the same is to fire some of the greeters. So, either we have inflation or we have more unemployment. Inflation would quickly insure that the minimum wage that bought all the things you suggested would no longer do so. Unemployment widens the disparity between those who have jobs and those who don't.

If a college educated person does not make more than a high school dropout, then either the college has not done its job or the student has not done his job. I worked as a bagger in a grocery store four years ago at minimum wage ($5.15/hr, I believe), now I'm walking into a high-paying job ($30+/hr) when I graduate.

Re:Democracy?

[theshowmecanuck]

But there is a right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. The last two are pretty hard when you get fired because some CEO wants to make another $10,000,000 bonus. Liberty: you are only truly free in a capitalist society if you have money. Tough without a job. Happiness: money doesn't buy happiness, but living in a box because you have no job actively contributes to unhappiness.

Economics and Sales

[andersh]

I know you didn't major in Economics! The $30 million they "save" on wages will quickly have a major impact on lost sales and other losses. Those $30 million probably paid for their most experienced workers - and now they'll lose sales capacity, knowledge and experience in one fell swoop. And I am not referring to their technical knowledge alone - but the corporate business routines. The corporate machine will not run as smooth. I appreciate the need to save however this is literally cutting of your arms and legs.

They already did this in 2003 and like the article says: "At the time, the move hurt the company's sales, Whalin said."

It's more like the plumber not getting paid by his employers - they will loose sales and skills.
If you want to earn money - invest time and money.

Re:You have *got* to be kidding me.

[Harry Coin]

It's my opinion that the so-called american dream is mostly a myth implanted in people's minds early on in their lives to make them work harder for the same wage, constantly hoping for better days. The reality of America today is that the rich get richer, the poor get poorer, and the middle class finds the "middle" slowly drifting to the bottom.

The "American Dream"(tm) is both a myth and a branding strategy. Most of the components, a big house, a nice car, fancy clothes, are strictly materialistic. Every corporation that has something to sell desperately wants to have their product be part of your vision of the American Dream. Ford and Chevy trucks have been pulling this for years. The iPod is now de rigeur for Americans who want to be percieved as cool. It is important to the commercial sector that people believe that they can just go out and buy the lifestyle that they want.

Aiding them in this is the banking industry, which has been extending credit to people whether they can pay or not. Need $20k rims for your whip? Just sign here. Why wear generic blue jeans when you can have some Guess jeans? Buy now, pay later! Need a 20 room house to show the neighbors just how much status you have? We'd be happy to loan you the money. And, in the time it takes for you to sign your name, you've just enslaved yourself for the time it will take to repay that loan. Want to travel? You only get a week of vacation (if that). Want to go to school and improve your lot? Can't afford to be away from work for that long. Can your family barely remember your face becuase you're working double shifts? Sorry, that mortgage can't wait. I'm not saying that loans can't be made responsibly, or that they're not a useful tool. I'm saying that if you are going into debt in order to appear wealthy, you're a fool.

My American Dream is to invest enough money for my family's security, then use every other cent to buy back my time and freedom. Your children only grow up once, and if you're not there, you can never get that time back. Relationships need care and maintenance, and this takes time. If you want to control your own life, you have to make careful financial decisions, forego status symbols, avoid debt, and invest in yourself. A paid-off trailer is a castle, a McMansion with a mortgage is the bank's.

Re: The lowest of the low

[WrongMonkey]

The value of an employee in not about how critical their job is to the running of the company, but how easy it is hire and train a replacement. Just about anyone has the skills to pick strawberries or mop floors or run a register, therefore these jobs don't get paid much. Fewer people have the skills to be a developer, as you know it takes time and effort to aquire those skills, therefore you get paid more than the janitor.

Re:Democracy?

[K'Lyre]

Pursuit of Happiness. Not the Receipt of Happiness. Getting fired does not impinge on your so-called "right" to the "pursuit of happiness" (which is a line from the Declaration of Independence, not the Constitution, and therefore is not binding in any way). It means you're free to pursue your happiness elsewhere.

Re:You have *got* to be kidding me.

[Risen888]

if they could easily go get a better job, one would presume they'd have already done so.

Ain't necessarily so. I have the skills and experience to get a better job than I have. But I don't, and the reason is that I'm too goddamn busy doing my job to even look.

Re:You have *got* to be kidding me.

[pitdingo]

How can you blame unions for the US auto industry failure? Unions did not design the crappy cars coming out of the big three. Unions did not cut out R&D from the budget. Unions did not force the big three to "diversify" rather than reinvest in newer production lines and tools. Unions do not force GM to pay out stock dividends when they should be keeping that money to invest in better designs and quality.

By far, the largest contributor to the failure of the Big Three is due to complete and total mis-management. If you are not designing cars people want to buy, surprise, surprise, no one is going to buy them. If no one is buying your cars, then you are going to have trouble paying the bills. Bills like health-care and pensions.

Re:You have *got* to be kidding me.

[tthomas48]

Oh yeah, it's the unions fault. Is it still the unions fault? Is the fact that every single car GM builds is a fucking ugly piece of crap, with a gigantic plastic dashboard, no safety features, and no standard features the fault of the unions? I can only bear the "unions raise cost" argument so far. At some point GM and Ford have to build cars that people want to buy.
GM may be having problems because of pensions, but remember they made the promises in the first place. They could have invested to make sure they could pay out on those benefits, but instead they followed the modern corporate motto - "If you can no longer compete, buy some random crappy companies and increase your debtload". So they squandered money on investments that in no way made their automobile business more competitive as their market share dwindled. Ditto for Ford. Those are poorly run companies. They ran afoul of the unions and could no longer compete in labor, sure. But that was only one bad business decision among thousands. Having billions of dollars in medical and pension costs is only a problem if you aren't selling cars.

So what's your problem capitalist? Go sell some fucking cars and all your problems will go away.

Re: The lowest of the low

[FirstTimeCaller]

The only reason they get paid less is because the company can get away with it.

Now, now. That's not the only reason. If they decide to replace the janitor, they can train his replacement in a very short time. If they replace a developer, it will take (hopefully) much longer.

It boils down to supply and demand. If there is a line of equally-skilled people willing to take the job, then the value of that job will be less. Simple as that.

Re:Economics and Sales

[jedidiah]

They also just took $30 million out of the consumer buying pool.

That's $30 million that can't go to buy Fords. Similarly, when
Ford pulls the same shenanigan that means that there's
$30 million that can't go to by whatever that Circuit City Sells.

A short term cost savings doesn't always benefit the company in
the longterm. Circuit City as a store probably should focus on
other things, like making a guy like me actually WANT to set foot
in their store.

Treating their employees like trash is not going to solve this
basic problem.

Re:You have *got* to be kidding me.

[Frosty Piss]

I know that this was a huge oversimplification, but the concept remains. *Most* government programs are inefficient due to lack of competition. I want my government small, and to do what government is supposed to do...govern and get rid of these people: "I work for the government. I'm a "civil servant". I make high 5 figures, and I'm not management. I'm a member of a union. I will not be fired / layed off / downsized / whatever."

Why? You think it's conducive to team building and happy productive employees that get paid reasonably good wages to hold the possibility of layoffs a la corporate greed over their heads? I'm the original poster, and I'll tell you this: The agency I work for has very high standards, excellent employees, and is an all-around great place to work. This is good since we fly planes. It would be extremely hard to attract the quality of personnel that we have if we didn't offer an extremely stable employment environment. We rely on the continuity of experienced employees that don't have to worry about keeping an eye on the Help Wanted ads. All jobs should be like this, people would be a lot happier. With happiness comes productivity.

When I hear people bitch about the benefits that government employees enjoy, I think two things: Most wish they had those same benefits, and are jealous that they do not. The fact of the matter is, the reason that most people outside the rarefied air of the executive class don't have these benefits is corporate greed.

Don't blame government employees that they have it so good, blame corporate pigs that they screw their employees.

Re:Democracy?

[wsherman]

What do employee/employer relationships at Best Buy have to do with democracy? Nobody has subverted representative government here.

People mean a lot of different things when they talk about "democracy".

What I tend to think about is the early history of the USA. Basically, you had bunch of monarchies in Europe with the attitude that "what's good for the king is good for the country". Then, some rather enlightened people in what was to become the USA looked at the situation and concluded that if you let the leaders act in their own best interest then they take just about everything for themselves and leave everyone else with very little.

The way I see it, the key realizatoin was that, unless leaders are subjected to oversight and compelled to act in the best interest of everyone, leaders will instead act in their own best interest to the detriment of everyone else. At the time, these ideas were applied to the leaders of governments.

While there are differences between governments and corporations, there are also fundamental similarities. In theory, one can avoid being subjected to either governments or corporations (e.g. buy a house boat and live out on the ocean). In practice, for a normal life, one must be subject to both governments and corporations. While it is the governments that most directly use force (e.g. polie and military), in practice the governments use their force on behalf of the corporations so there is little practical difference.

Re:You have *got* to be kidding me.

[jedidiah]

You've simply been conditioned to low expectations. That's really sad.

People suffered and died for the current working standards in the West.

It's not a sense of entitlement to expect better.

A little civility is what keeps civilization from imploding completely.

People seem eager to forget that.

Re:Democracy?

[Anonymous Coward]

I see that another dumbed-down product of government schools and media has weighed in with the old Bucky Fuller fallacy. "All executive salaries go to is corporate investment"? That's called capital. You must invest capital to design and create products, to design and create factories that produce products, to design and create advertising that informs people about products, to pay people and buy equipment to produce, store, distribute, and sell products to buyers, etc., etc. No capital, no product; no product, no capital.

And there are still no guarantees: if your product sucks, or someone makes a better product for less, or your government decides to regulate you into oblivion...you invest capital and it goes bye-bye. Circuit City salespeople don't have to buy at Circuit City; Circuit City executives don't have to buy Circuit City stock. Your mathematically elegant game theories are based upon one demonstrably false assumption: that you control all the variables and essentially, that people can't choose. We can. We do. Nyah nyah!

Re:Democracy?

[crawling_chaos]

Yeah. That's why the small government heaven of Somalia is paradise on Earth. I wish more of the Randroids would move there.

Re:You have *got* to be kidding me.

[don_bear_wilkinson]

There's a middle ground that is often ignored in order to fuel the ranting and rhetoric.

Let's describe a spectrum of human ambition and another of 'talent'.

Some people will do well in the world because a large amount of talent. Something about them that makes them 'better' at being an artist or a designer or an engineer or whatever. They will tend to rise to the top and be highly employable on the basis of their gift. Some people don't have much talent. Others have a moderate amount while others have none (that they can 'sell', anyway)

Then there's ambition. The desire for certain things out of life and the willingness to 'work your ass off' to get there. Some people have a lot of drive to go for the best. Some have nearly none. Most people have moderate capacities for putting their goals for success in employment/business/etc at the forefront of all things.

The problem I see is that people who are only mildly talented, or whom possess moderate (but substantial) ambition, are told that they do not deserve even a little piece of the pie. That only the talented and the crazed workaholic deserve some prosperity and security.

If you "don't work your ass off", then screw you!

It is not whining to suggest that people are willing to do a good solid amount of work, with modest expectations about how far that will take them down Paycheck Lane or LongTerm Security Road, be treated with some respect and care. You shouldn't have to resort to overworking yourself, forego a social life, neglect your family, become obsessed with gaining every advantage OVER others, etc., in order to have a modest and comfortable life.

We've got more than enough to go around in the US. But, as long as this culture is tuned to selfishness and greed, well... I'll save you the time of reading that rant. :)

Re:So what if it is?

[Bastard of Subhumani]

That's the whole point. If they can make $30 million more by NOT paying you, then guess what? They should fire you! You're not worth the $30 million.

But the CEO & his cronies who'll pocket that as a bonus are worth every penny!

Don't take me for a communist - there was a time when big bosses only got the big bucks when they built a successful firm. Successful in the long term, not just the next quarter. Or am I being nostalgic?

Re:Democracy?

[MBGMorden]

Money only has ANYTHING to do with happiness (well maybe life too, but welfare programs will keep most people from flat out starving to death). You can be as poor as you want and you're still free, unless somehow our vision of "free" has been warped into having HDTV's and iPods.

As to happiness, all that you have the right to is the PURSUIT of it. Doesn't mean you're ever going to obtain it. These guys were pursuing happiness and their horse just broke it's leg. They better shoot the damn thing and go get another job/horse or they can be content to sit there crying while that happiness gallops into the sunset.

Re:Democracy?

[Hognoxious]

Basically, you had bunch of monarchies in Europe with the attitude that "what's good for the king is good for the country". Then, some rather enlightened people in what was to become the USA looked at the situation and concluded that if you let the leaders act in their own best interest then they take just about everything for themselves and leave everyone else with very little.

How ironic that the country ruled by the second King George in close sucession is West of the Atlantic this time. Seriously, the USA is turning into a bad version of Olde Englande and nobody's noticing. The American dream is becoming just that - a dream. Best way to end up rich? Be born that way.

Re:Bah.

[don_bear_wilkinson]

But moaning that the CEO makes too much is just scapegoating.

I disagree.

I think there's a very reasonable objection to having your CEO make millions while others makes thousands. The lowly sales drone on the showroom floor is not as skilled or educated as the Boss, nor is he putting in as many hours, nor did he pay his dues by years in college going without sleep and fun to get where he is, etc., but they are both contributing. They are both spending most of their waking hours working at the Company. I think they both deserve a little respect.

The problem here is that the labor isn't always looking for a better-paying job.

Some people don't want to constantly run on the treadmill. Some people don't have endless greed^H^H^H^H^Hambition. Some people have priorities outside of work. Some people want to be able to give 100% for 40 hours a week and receive some stability and long-term value for the commitment and effort they give.

An average person, with modest needs and simple aspirations, who is willing to do the work they are being paid to do, does not deserve to be mistreated.

Re:You have *got* to be kidding me.

[UbuntuDupe]

Partially right. To be as succinct as possible (please read to the end to make sure I don't address the response you have in mind):

1) Yes, pension/health care obligations cause bad cars. When you have a large, unproductive expense [wait, wait, wait to the end], that your competitors do not have, your best people will be bid away to work for them.
2) Yes, GM should have (Heaven forbid!) funded the obligations in advance, unlike, say, Social Security.
3) On the other hand, when it's the union that asked for the benefit in the first place, don't they have some kind of obligation to educate themselves on where the money is coming from? A pension is deferred compensation. Workers are senior to bondholders in who gets paid first. (and bondholders are in turn senior to stockholders) So, credit agencies should have counted the obligations as debt senior to GM bonds. The union should have made sure the pension obligations were rated along with the rest of GM's debt, but like today's SS proponents, they have a hard time understanding that a promise to pay a pension *is* a debt.

The whole wretched scheme was based on the fantasy that GM would remain perpetually more profitable than other companies so they could fund legacy obligations. Management took advantage of unions' incompetence, but the reverse happened too!

Re:You have *got* to be kidding me.

[Maxo-Texas]

Really it's this.

The strongly religious folks got into an unholy union with the rich and corporations because they hoped to overturn abortion and gay rights.

Consider some points:
The "conservative" party has been remapped from "small government/pro business" to "anti-abortion/pro corporation". (i.e. small businesses are struggling under some of these laws).

The rich have had the rules changed so now the top 360,000 make as much as the bottom 150 million COMBINED.

Corporations have extended their rights to the point where "conservative" governments support taking people's property for use by other private citizens.

The business ruling class has gone from earning 20 times the average workers pay to earning over 300 TIMES the average workers pay in a single generation.

---

I spoke to a major democratic lawyer on a flight last year and he said privately that he wished the republicans would finish packing the court and overturn abortion so that we could get on with the fact that the business class is basically raping the country and now appears to be preparing to leave it entirely once it is drained. The unions have had many of their strike rights taken away so they business has all the power right now.

---

I HOPE AND PRAY that we slam back a 50% tax on everyone making over $300 grand a year and similarly lower the taxes on anyone earning under $44,000 a year (the "average" wage + 10%). I think business CEO's and so on should be taxed at 90% for everything over 20x the average salary (so currently about 800,000).

---

These are not unreasonable dreams. With 220 million of us getting the shaft from an increasingly small portion of the populace (now down to under 1%), at some point we must wake up and say, "Wait a minute. Screw ME? SCREW YOU BUDDY".

Re:You have *got* to be kidding me.

[StikyPad]

Don't worry. First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they.. uh oh.. RUN!

Re:an ideal world

[bnenning]

When you have a machine do the job of a human, you take away somethng from the human.

So the pinnacle of humanity was when we were living in caves? From the printing press to industrial robots, machines have eliminated countless jobs that humans used to do. And yet, the human race survives.

Re:You have *got* to be kidding me.

[bnenning]

These actions would have been illegal were I come from

I don't know where you're from, but I'd bet it has a higher unemployment rate than the US. If businesses can't fire employees, they're going to be very reluctant to hire anybody in the first place.

Exactly how long should a company be obligated to provide charity to workers that are producing less value than they cost in wages and benefits?

Re:You've got a VW. Ha Ha!

[falconwolf]

Enjoy taking you car to the dealer to get the spark plugs changed or the transmission fluid topped off.

Haha, funny. It's not just VWs you have to take into the dealer or other service center to have fluid level checked or tuneups done. Cars made by US manufacturers are the same today. As a "shade tree mechanic" I have worked on my own as well as others' cars. I've even rebuilt the engine and tranmission in one of my cars, the only thing I had to take something into a shop for was when I rebuilt the engine for a '78 Monte Carlo I had to take the engine block into a machineshop to have the cylinders bored out. However I have to take my 2000 Saturn, a GM company, in for tuneups and fluid changes. Special tools are required are needed to do this and there's only one use for the tool, which costs a lot if you can find one. Then you have to have the right diagnostic computer as well. On serviceability that old Monte Carlo puts to shame any Detroit car made today.

Falcon

Re:You have *got* to be kidding me.

[lord_mike]

Congratulations, ChemGeek on your successful entrepeneurship... Don't forget that for every successful, entrepeneur, thousands others have failed.. also, do not forget that you are only a lawsuit or an illness (individual health insurance is very hard to get and afford) away from bankruptcy.

Your success can vanish in an instant. Do not assume that you are any more secure than the rest of us, because you've done reasonably well for yourself. We are all in the same boat, and the tide is falling, not rising.

Thanks,

Mike

Assumptions

[andersh]

Looks like we actually agree on something! From what you wrote in your post I thought you didn't grasp the logic described in your reply. Of course, if those people did not produce any value they should be fired. But let's take a closer look at that.

I believe you are still missing the point here; those salaries represent far greater sales than $30 million - they have to in order to pay them! Those salaries probably produced several times over their value in sales (gross). They are losing more income than just the money needed to pay for those salaries. They are just looking at increasing profitability per employee and sale.

So now what they are looking at is hiring slightly cheaper, inexperienced sales people that will not sell for an equal amount - but still cost almost as much. You don't fire the productive and profitable workers! You find the dead weight. Non profitable stores get closed. A pay cut might have been better - but would still impact their sales (motivation).

Sure the company is taking the loss, no dispute. And you know what? Those losses that will accumulate, will have an even greater impact on the very problem they are trying to solve. Now, not only will they have less sales, efficiency and profit - they have just lost their greatest assets. And bad press to boot!

Re:Democracy?

[Anonymous Coward]

Too bad that currently it's usually necessary for both husband and wife to work in order to afford this so-called "wealth". Too bad also the idea of being able to work at a company for 20+ years and retire is almost extinct. They had to cut those benefits long ago because it's a "cut-throat" economy. These guys are just taking that idea one step further.