What's new
By:
USCHO Fan Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.

Weaving the Strands: Business, Economics, and Tax Policy 2.0

Status
Not open for further replies.
Re: Weaving the Strands: Business, Economics, and Tax Policy 2.0

ScoobyDoo said:
It wouldn't have. It's not about being right it's about doing right. Think I heard that during a Law and Order episode. Unrelated to this issue, but it still works.
Click to expand...

The company made some changes a few years ago in repsonse to institutional investors because Wells Fargo's expense ratio was around 60% of revenue. Most banks have ratios near 50%. Upon learning that, management had no choice other than to meet industry standards or risk being sued by its investors.


ETA: fixing my percentage values.
 
Last edited:
Re: Weaving the Strands: Business, Economics, and Tax Policy 2.0

St. Clown said:
The company made some changes a few years ago in repsonse to institutional investors because Wells Fargo's expense ratio was around 60% of revenue. Most banks have ratios near 60%. Upon learning that, management had no choice other than to meet industry standards or risk being sued by its investors.
Click to expand...

Which is horsecrap, because the law regarding fiduciary duties allows for goals beyond simply "maximizing shareholder value." That only became common place in the 80's.
 
Re: Weaving the Strands: Business, Economics, and Tax Policy 2.0

unofan said:
Which is horsecrap, because the law regarding fiduciary duties allows for goals beyond simply "maximizing shareholder value." That only became common place in the 80's.
Click to expand...

In many ways I think you're right, but when the institutional investors tell you that they're looking for an expense ratio inline with the other big players, executive management is likely to comply rather than run the lawsuit risk. I hear those become expensive.
 
Re: Weaving the Strands: Business, Economics, and Tax Policy 2.0

My favorite line was, "The only responses that have been provided thus far is the bank simply defending its compensation philosophy (with no attempt at compromise), as well as limiting who we can and cannot email within the organization. These are not acceptable responses," Oates wrote in a new letter. "

Lolol. Those are perfectly reasonable responses. Welcome to the real world.

Compromise. Lol.
 
Re: Weaving the Strands: Business, Economics, and Tax Policy 2.0

FlagDUDE08 said:
Don't want what you're getting? Find someone else who will give you what you want. Oh, and if you look while you still have a job with me, I'm citing you for unprofessionalism.
Click to expand...

Yep. They usually have you by the balls. Still, some employees manage to take advantage of their situation. A couple of my co-workers just did that and left me holding the bag. Sucks when your co-workers quite without any notice and they're relied on as part of the team. Still, that's life and that's business.
 
Re: Weaving the Strands: Business, Economics, and Tax Policy 2.0

FlagDUDE08 said:
Don't want what you're getting? Find someone else who will give you what you want. Oh, and if you look while you still have a job with me, I'm citing you for unprofessionalism.
Click to expand...
Are you saying that as an employer you're not willing to negotiate with your employees? And if they're looking at potential new opportunities while at home you're going to punish them for it? What if they're looking for another position within your own company?
 
Re: Weaving the Strands: Business, Economics, and Tax Policy 2.0

St. Clown said:
Are you saying that as an employer you're not willing to negotiate with your employees? And if they're looking at potential new opportunities while at home you're going to punish them for it? What if they're looking for another position within your own company?
Click to expand...

Depends on the employee if I want to negotiate. Labour is an expense in terms of business. Every day, market entities place a monetary value on everything for which a trade is sought. If the bidder feels the price is too high compared to its value, they won't bid.

As for professionalism with regards to one's employment, that's just a matter of culture. In the sports world, coaches have to get permission from their respective board to interview for other jobs, and there are boards that won't allow that.
 
Re: Weaving the Strands: Business, Economics, and Tax Policy 2.0

Just don't expect any loyalty from either capital or labor. And for God's sake not from management.

I really like my current job, but -- I'm always looking, and I always have an eye on resume building and networking when I choose projects. Nobody in management or ownership gives a crap about you and you owe them nothing. The second you become cost sub-optimal they will put a bullet in your head. Just bear that in mind and you'll be fine.

It's nothing personal, Sonny. It's just business.
 
Re: Weaving the Strands: Business, Economics, and Tax Policy 2.0

Kepler said:
Just don't expect any loyalty from either capital or labor. And for God's sake not from management.

I really like my current job, but -- I'm always looking, and I always have an eye on resume building and networking when I choose projects. Nobody in management or ownership gives a crap about you and you owe them nothing. The second you become cost sub-optimal they will put a bullet in your head. Just bear that in mind and you'll be fine.

It's nothing personal, Sonny. It's just business.
Click to expand...

Yep. This whole, "doing what's best for me" is fine as long as employers acknowledge that it goes both ways and don't act butthurt when you give your two weeks because you've found something better.
 
Re: Weaving the Strands: Business, Economics, and Tax Policy 2.0

Kepler said:
Just don't expect any loyalty from either capital or labor. And for God's sake not from management.

I really like my current job, but -- I'm always looking, and I always have an eye on resume building and networking when I choose projects. Nobody in management or ownership gives a crap about you and you owe them nothing. The second you become cost sub-optimal they will put a bullet in your head. Just bear that in mind and you'll be fine.

It's nothing personal, Sonny. It's just business.
Click to expand...

Loyalty is a sin in the millennial's morality code. It implies complacency and a belief that things cannot get better. Anything's possible and things can always get better. The trick is to not cross the line into avarice.
 
Re: Weaving the Strands: Business, Economics, and Tax Policy 2.0

Loyalty begins and ends with every paycheck. Once that's clear, neither party owes the other anything.
 
Re: Weaving the Strands: Business, Economics, and Tax Policy 2.0

I don't know, I'm quite loyal to my company. I also have a CBA, good wage, a pension plan, and good health benefits...
 
Re: Weaving the Strands: Business, Economics, and Tax Policy 2.0

Make yourself invaluable to your employer, and things tend to work out just fine. I don't get the hubbub about what this guy did, and the bank's lack of a response. You want a raise? Make a case for it, based on your accomplishments and contributions to your employer. This guy asked for a raise based on no merit whatsoever, trying to game the system by ensuring the whole world was watching, in a lame attempt to force the hand of his employer. I think it's just great that they didn't even bother to respond.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top