• RBG@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    1 year ago

    It probably will bankrupt him. But only because he built his business on the basis of exploiting employees. He won’t make money if he doesn’t do that. Which of course means he shouldn’t be in business.

  • ViewSonik@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    If you make $100,000 for 40 years straight that is $4M. This dude made $21M in a single year. Ford’s share buyback program in 2022 totaled $484M. GM’a share buyback program totaled $3.4B in the past twelve months. We live in a fucked up world. Meanwhile, Ford/GM/Stellantis employees cannot afford to even buy the vehicles they make or feed themselves decent food.

  • jpablo68@mujico.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    It’s always one of the two with this companies, it’s either “we’re making millions” or “we’re going under” there’s no inbetween.

  • Lemmywhat@monyet.cc
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Total revolution needed. Workers that do the real thing barely can feed their mouth, while those useless management ceo got huge cut

  • lobut@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    CEOs need to take pay cuts. They earn too much and don’t provide enough value for their pay.

  • Margot Robbie@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    Looks like we found one job that should be automated by AI to save Ford 21 million dollars a year.

    • Snipe_AT@lemmy.atay.dev
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      lol careful. you thought a CEO was heartless, just wait until we put an AI in charge with the ‘goal’ set as profit.

      • jasondj@ttrpg.network
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        Actually, if you can program it to take inputs of anonymized employee satisfaction surveys, and objective employee satisfaction data (attrition, absenteeism, etc), it could work.

        Especially if the AI’s target goals are public information. Nobody would work for a company that set the “employee happiness” and “corporate ethics” dials to 0 and the “improve net profit” dial to 100.

        • Dentzy@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Not only that, it has been proven again and again that treating well workers actually yields positive results, considering the IA would have the best for the Company as a goal instead of the pure greed of current CEO/Stakeholders, there are big chances that IA CEO would treat workers way better than current status.

          The problem is if the IA goal is not the best for the Company, but the best for the Stakeholders short term, then we would be fucked 😅