Ivan,
"Modern method (The New Capitalism):"
VERY ACCURATE!
Sad part is, been there with a few companies that did pretty much
followed that economic plan!
Bob Wolfe

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Bagotronix Tech Support" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Protel EDA Forum" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Saturday, September 06, 2003 3:14 PM
Subject: Re: [PEDA] OT employer topics WAS: License Legalities


> > Sure, you should work for your employer when he's paying your salary.
> >  But, I have
> > heard of so many cases where a guy who designed aerospace parts, for
> > instance,
> > thinks up an idea for a better fishing reel, on his own time, and ends
> > up having to
> > give all profit to the employer.  (There are, I'm sure, lots of cases
> > that can be
> > found where the employee used some facilities or company time to develop
> > the product, that changes the picture very much.)
>
> It never ceases to amaze me how in so many instances, mandatory overtime
> without pay is never considered as a fair trade for usage of company
> resources.  For example, my father is the Engineering Manager for a
> well-known air compressor company.  For the entire time he has worked
there
> (10+ years now), he has had to put in more than 40 hours per week.  But
> since he is salaried, he only gets paid a fixed amount.  The extent of his
> usage of company resources for personal benefit is:  photocopies, paper,
> pens, scotch tape, occasional shipping of small packages via UPS.  Big
> Whoop.  He doesn't even surf the internet on company time, in fact he
avoids
> use of e-mail because it is only a tool others use to cover their asses
with
> ("Oh, didn't you get my e-mail about that?").  And yet, memos circulate,
> saying that employees are not to take office supplies for personal use.
No
> one has ever confronted him about it, maybe because they realize how
> indefensible their position would be.  So my overworked father uses some
> office supplies for personal use.  Is he justified?  Darn right he is.
>
> In places I worked before I started my own business, I refused to sign
> employment agreements that had language to the effect that any personal
> inventions belong to the company.  As a result, I didn't get too far in
the
> employee world.  I did have jobs, but never achieved much rank, always low
> man on the totem pole, and the first to get axed when times got tough
> (motto:  when the times get tough, the tough get axed).  So I started my
own
> business.  And life is good...
>
> I think it is fair that an employment agreement could have language
> stipulating that the company is entitled to a small portion of the profits
> or shares of any invention the employee creates using company resources.
In
> the example above, if the fishing reel was made using the company's
machine
> shop, and drawings were drawn on the company's CAD system, maybe 5-10
> percent of the profits or shares would be assigned to the company.  But
not
> the whole thing, that's just pure greed!
>
> By the way, I have asked employees to put in overtime only twice in the
past
> 3 years.  Employees should be willing to put in occasional overtime, and
> without pay for those who are salaried.  But to require overtime as SOP
> (Standard Operating Procedure) indicates that something is wrong with an
> organization.  And that something is usually the guy at the top ;-)
>
> Traditional method of business financial management (The Old Capitalism):
> 1) Pay employees
> 2) Pay bills
> 3) What's leftover goes to company owners and stockholders
>
> Modern method (The New Capitalism):
> 1) Pay CEO
> 2) Pay CEO some more
> 3) Pay CEO still more
> 4) Pay into CEO pension fund
> 5) Fire CEO
> 6) Pay CEO termination bonus (golden parachute)
> 7) No money left for payroll, so fire lots of employees
> 8) Restate earnings to avoid SEC investigation
> 9) Sell off company assets to make balance sheet look better
> 10) Outsource workload to cheaper labor markets (India, China, etc.)
> 11) Fire more employees, because of (10)
> 12) Show improved profits, because of (9-11), boosting stock price
> 13) Insiders sell company stock while the boost is in effect
> 14) Tech suckers buy company stock, thinking it will eventually rise to
late
> 90's levels
> 15) Company stock tanks due to market shifts, poor quality of outsourced
> work, and customer dissatisfaction
> 16) Stockholders initiate lawsuit alleging stock fraud
> 17) SEC launches investigation into insider trading
> 18) Hearings held, nothing happens
> 19) Perpetrators (the former company officers) beat the rap
> 20) Perps bask on beach in Cayman Islands while stockholders lost their
> shirts
> 21) Cycle repeats at some other company
>
> Best regards,
> Ivan Baggett
> Bagotronix Inc.
> website:  www.bagotronix.com
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Jon Elson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "Protel EDA Forum" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Friday, September 05, 2003 7:13 PM
> Subject: Re: [PEDA] License Legalities
>
>
>




* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
* To post a message: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
*
* To leave this list visit:
* http://www.techservinc.com/protelusers/leave.html
*
* Contact the list manager:
* mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
*
* Forum Guidelines Rules:
* http://www.techservinc.com/protelusers/forumrules.html
*
* Browse or Search previous postings:
* http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Reply via email to