The working class people are the only reason the CEO has a title or any money at all. Take the janitor out of the building and it fills up with trash. Take the CEO out of the building and wonder why they were even there in the first place.
The CEOs are absolutely overpaid for what Little they actually do, but I’m not sure I willing to go as far as to say they do literally nothing. It’s not exactly being a capitalist boot licker to acknowledge that there needs to be somebody steering the ship.
Or are you talking about literally just the building? Because frankly there are a lot of working class people who don’t actually need to be in the building at all and nothing would change if they weren’t there.
Coordinating a plan and orchestrating the various parts of the organization towards it. Listen I prefer janitors to CEOs, but I’ve had some really bad executives and I understand that worker owned coops often have management and executives for a reason
No no, don’t try being obtuse and taking the easy way out. Tell us about the, “working class people who don’t need to be in the building at all and nothing would change if they weren’t there.”
Such as who? What working class jobs are you specifically referring to? Not middle class-- working class.
There are rarely working class jobs that would benefit from not being present. There are jobs that can have machines replace them or who are necessary by reason of process inefficiency or even by nature of the individual worker.
But also why do you think I’m taking any stance otherwise? I said that a ceo who answers to the workers can provide benefits to the organization. I didn’t imply we didn’t need janitors. I didn’t say anything about the boots on the ground labor except that I generally happen to like janitors more than executives, which I stand firmly by.
Edit: oh you may not have recognized I’m a different person. I didn’t agree with the whole of the comment of the person you replied to
The working class people are the only reason the CEO has a title or any money at all. Take the janitor out of the building and it fills up with trash. Take the CEO out of the building and wonder why they were even there in the first place.
I’m reminded of the Irish Bank Strike, where the banks threw a hissy fit about some law and decided to close until it was repealed.
Life went on pretty much as normal, with pub owners becoming the new arbiters of credit worthiness, and eventually the banks had to give up.
That’s actually pretty smart because if someone has no money for booze, then you know they’ve really got no money
Plus, at the time, the pub owners basically knew everybody in town even if they didn’t know each other.
The CEOs are absolutely overpaid for what Little they actually do, but I’m not sure I willing to go as far as to say they do literally nothing. It’s not exactly being a capitalist boot licker to acknowledge that there needs to be somebody steering the ship.
Or are you talking about literally just the building? Because frankly there are a lot of working class people who don’t actually need to be in the building at all and nothing would change if they weren’t there.
Such as?
Coordinating a plan and orchestrating the various parts of the organization towards it. Listen I prefer janitors to CEOs, but I’ve had some really bad executives and I understand that worker owned coops often have management and executives for a reason
No no, don’t try being obtuse and taking the easy way out. Tell us about the, “working class people who don’t need to be in the building at all and nothing would change if they weren’t there.”
Such as who? What working class jobs are you specifically referring to? Not middle class-- working class.
Middle class is a subgroup of the working class, since working class is a description of one’s relationship with labor.
Unless you’re talking about petty booj small business owners.
There are rarely working class jobs that would benefit from not being present. There are jobs that can have machines replace them or who are necessary by reason of process inefficiency or even by nature of the individual worker.
But also why do you think I’m taking any stance otherwise? I said that a ceo who answers to the workers can provide benefits to the organization. I didn’t imply we didn’t need janitors. I didn’t say anything about the boots on the ground labor except that I generally happen to like janitors more than executives, which I stand firmly by.
Edit: oh you may not have recognized I’m a different person. I didn’t agree with the whole of the comment of the person you replied to
The CEO… sorry, ALL the management should answer to the workers first. That or pull the work by themselves without the workers.
Fully agree, though I’m a syndicalist so if course I think that
CEOs would literally refuse to come to work if their offices weren’t clean.