PDA

View Full Version : Embarrassed to admit I'm a steelworker.



Reckidecky
01-09-2009, 09:05 AM
I can't seem to comprehend how someone with 30 plus years and can retire anytime can justify turning down this workshare program offer. Have not any of these people been watching the news to know there is extenuating circumstances, namely world economics. And most who voted last night are only a contract away from retiring. Most could have taken a pension and a $20,000 bonus to retire.

Would it not have been sensible to see what, after allowing the executuive to negotiate, what exactly could be attained through negotiations before rejecting it.

I lost over a decade of senority and pension there and do not what to get into an argument about what else was sacrificed through the 90's because I would be the first to admitt that it was not pretty...but that is in the past, let it go for God Sakes!

Who do these expected retirees expect are going to be supporting their retirement and pension. Sure hope they are not going to be looking for more on their pension later. I can't see that the young people, who are the future of this company will forget this vote easily.

Makes no sense to kill something before it is conceived. Guess most older folks there are pro choice...and have been for decades. Ignorrance, greed, spite, or annimosity, pick one.

verotik66
01-09-2009, 09:11 AM
agreed

Anapeg
01-09-2009, 09:15 AM
With some it's called taking care of number one and for others it's screw the other guy 'cause he would do me if he had the chance. Taking care of your brothers and sisters has gone by the boards.

MaO3
01-09-2009, 09:23 AM
I'm not sure if I agree or disagree. I'm really not affected by it as my husband doesn't work for Essar.

I do know that I'm not surprised by the vote, not at all. I knew it wouldn't pass. I know many people who lived through the rough times in the plant before, my dad being one of them. It was hard no doubt about it. I think a lot of the voting members have gone through it and there was little help for them. Many went back to school and changed jobs altogether. Some left the city for greener pastures.

The "piece of the pie is better than no pie at all" mentality is very hard to find in people these days.

D0bb3r
01-09-2009, 09:25 AM
I agree 100% .. the older generation really needs to step aside. They need to remember all they are doing is
pissing off the ones that will be voting on how to uphold the agreements to support its retirees !!
How supportive of the previous generation of workers is the new guy going to be, when his career was put
off by 5 years by that very same generation ??

Super Gram
01-09-2009, 09:59 AM
My son in law is one of the younger ones. I'm sure he voted against it.Remember some yrs ago the older ones gave up a lot of wages to keep the plant running.........before EssarAt the city you have to retire at age 65.....my brother retired at 60.If you don't you are bugged and bugged.

Intangible
01-09-2009, 10:05 AM
On sootoday, it said that 735 members were against and 207 were for. That totals just under 1000 members. Where were the rest?

b&aMom
01-09-2009, 10:30 AM
Couldn't be bothered to vote.

Reckidecky, well said. I'm tired of hearing people say they're just sticking around for profit sharing, when newer workers will lose their jobs. I'm tired of people saying they have kids in university, when I have kids still in elementary school that I have to buy new shoes for every few months because they're still growing. Kids in university are old enough to work on their own for their education, or pay their own way. I can't send my 10 year old out to work.

And finally, I have to wonder how many of these people live in a home with TWO incomes already? Wish I had that luxury, but at this point I am unable to seek work due to family obligations (terminal illness of family).

Peety
01-09-2009, 10:33 AM
I agree 100% .. the older generation really needs to step aside. They need to remember all they are doing is
pissing off the ones that will be voting on how to uphold the agreements to support its retirees !!
How supportive of the previous generation of workers is the new guy going to be, when his career was put
off by 5 years by that very same generation ??

This is a recession the economy is down and will be down for the next 6 months or so.
People have to be patient and realise that when they do come back they are not working for 25%less and will still be able to afford things.
There are few men that are at retirement age they maybe have to work due to reasons we have no clue why?.,,They have the right!
People who are new that have 2-5 years don't have the right to decide how people will work or live! or how the plant will run.

The decisions that are made now are in the younger people's best interests in the long run.

No one wants to open up a can of worms!!! Can you blame the older men they have the experience dealing with the company!

b&aMom
01-09-2009, 10:42 AM
This is a recession the economy is down and will be down for the next 6 months or so.
People have to be patient and realise that when they do come back they are not working for 25%less and will still be able to afford things.
There are few men that are at retirement age they maybe have to work due to reasons we have no clue why?.,,They have the right!
People who are new that have 2-5 years don't have the right to decide how people will work or live! or how the plant will run.

The decisions that are made now are in the younger people's best interests in the long run.

No one wants to open up a can of worms!!! Can you blame the older men they have the experience dealing with the company!

Peety, sure there are a lot of older workers that NEED to still work. But there are a lot of them shooting off their mouths about how they DON'T need to be there, they're just there for this, that, or something else, all of which are so far from just survival that it's crazy. It's THOSE workers that get people like me peeved off. And dammit all, I'm tired of spending my life trekking across the country just to exist, I've been doing it for the better part of 20 years. And now we have kids to uproot and haul along.

IMHO
01-09-2009, 10:47 AM
I have yet to hear WHY the men voted it down. Is it an actual fact that they were greedy? or...were there other factors we never hear about? Was Essar guaranteeing no more layoffs if they job shared? It seems we are not getting the whole picture. The more I think about this, I don't think it as simple as "the old timers were greedy." Come on...someone spill the beans on what REALLY happened?

lynys
01-09-2009, 10:56 AM
Reckidecky, well said. I'm tired of hearing people say they're just sticking around for profit sharing, when newer workers will lose their jobs. I'm tired of people saying they have kids in university, when I have kids still in elementary school that I have to buy new shoes for every few months because they're still growing. Kids in university are old enough to work on their own for their education, or pay their own way. I can't send my 10 year old out to work.

And finally, I have to wonder how many of these people live in a home with TWO incomes already? Wish I had that luxury, but at this point I am unable to seek work due to family obligations (terminal illness of family).

Why shouldn't parents be allowed to help their children through university? I think whatever they choose to spend their money on is their business.

Perhaps the people who are "sticking around" are still paying off mortgages and debts from the last time they were laid off. My dad was laid off twice. Money was tight. We had to buckle down and grin and bear it. They had children to clothe and feed back then and no doubt had to rely on credit to do so. We had to leave town and head to London for my father to find work. Cost a hell of a lot more to live there then it did here. Then, when we came home to our house, it had been destroyed by the people who were renting it, so they had to pay for repairs and such. Then, when all was said and done, Dad was laid off again. Ended up going back to school, and after completing that was told his best opportunities would come from leaving town... again. He chose to stay and make do as it would have cost more elsewhere.

Yep. The older guys have every right to work if they need/want to IMO.

Ultra54
01-09-2009, 11:01 AM
First of all, I'm not embarassed to be a steel worker and sorry to hear you are. It isn't about greed, its about trying to ram stuff down your throat and opening up the contract. Nobody has the right to judge anyone for their decisions. The vote was cast and thats the result. It isn't the unions fault. The union is the men and they decided. We all make good money in there and have great benefits because of these "greedy" old timers. Suck it up and grow some balls and don't cave in like a *****. Take your lumps and move on. I went through it all, graduating in 1982 wasn't the best time to enter the work force. I have worked for peanuts my whole life like many of you yet I dont feel the need to call these guys greedy.

Sooboy33
01-09-2009, 11:11 AM
Remeber one thing...

We live in a Democratic Country.

You can work till you are 68 in Essar Steel and other places,
Many guys started in the plant in their 20`s, so at age 55 many still have a Mortgage and kids in University.
I spent 30 years there and I know, nobody would go to work there,just for pleasure.
So junior people just have to wait their turn,as it is done in a Democracy.

JMO.

Hans
01-09-2009, 11:18 AM
Work sharing does not mean there will be no layoffs. That's something that seems to be overlooked by those that are in favor of work sharing.

Chester Field
01-09-2009, 11:18 AM
These are the same guys that were working all the overtime they could in the early 90s, which kept about 20-25% of their "brothers" out on the street.

Like "40 year" Eddie told me back in 97, "Why should I retire? I get paid 24 points with A bonus to come in and do pretty much nothing for 12 hours, and enough vacation to do what I want."


That said, majority rules and people will look out for their own immediate best interests.

Peety
01-09-2009, 11:19 AM
No one is working overtime now!!

Ultra54
01-09-2009, 11:27 AM
These are the same guys that were working all the overtime they could in the early 90s, which kept about 20-25% of their "brothers" out on the street.

Like "40 year" Eddie told me back in 97, "Why should I retire? I get paid 24 points with A bonus to come in and do pretty much nothing for 12 hours, and enough vacation to do what I want."


That said, majority rules and people will look out for their own immediate best interests.

Thats the way the cookie crumbles and I don't see a problem with that. I learned a long time ago not to expect my so called "brother" to look after my best interest. I'm capable of doing it on my own thank you.

Evangeline
01-09-2009, 12:20 PM
I am also not really affected by this since my finace doesn't work there, but I think it's ridiculous to think that people should retire when they are not ready to just so younger people can have the jobs, the people that have worked there for so long and have been waiting for this point in there lives where they finally don't have a mortgage to pay for, and don't have kids to support shouldn't be critisized for wanting to make money to do things for themselves. Jobs don't go to who "needs" them more, that's a very old mentality to give a job to someone because they have kids to take care of, ect, and it's illegal to do that now!
It's nobodies business what the people who have been there for years do with their incomes, or if they have two incomes! What does that have anything to do with one person's job if the person they live with does or does not have one? Last time I checked we weren't communists.
It's to bad for the people with young kids and financial responsibilities to take care of, but nobody should be pressured to quit their job when they are not ready just so someone else can have it.

Peety
01-09-2009, 12:30 PM
Well said Evangeline,,
What I don't understand is why young people would buy houses if they only worked at a place a short time? Gamble??
And knows what the place could be like,
And why they think the older people should make way for them?

Evangeline
01-09-2009, 12:32 PM
yeah I have NO idea!

Andre
01-09-2009, 12:42 PM
To the original post.
I don't know. My dad retired in the 80's down turn because he thought he'd let a younger guy keep his job who needed it. He had 28 years in and retired with a pension of just over $800/month thinking his house was payed for and all the kids had moved out and he could get by.

The recent workshare vote was a joke and most member recognized that. That is why there was such a low turn out.

GRUMPY
01-09-2009, 12:46 PM
Well said Evangeline,,
What I don't understand is why young people would buy houses if they only worked at a place a short time? Gamble??
And knows what the place could be like,
And why they think the older people should make way for them?

I can understand them buying houses however it seems that there were a lot who wanted what their parents had,which is normal. But they seemed to forget one main thing which is it took them a lifetime of working and saving to get it. How many raced out and bought monster homes? Maybe this will be a cruel lesson to some but you need to live within your means. As for older people making way for them don't hold your breath because it will never happen not now nor when you are the older ones. If you have anything to be embarrassed about is in thinking that you had it coming to you.

Sunshine19
01-09-2009, 05:43 PM
Why should someone retire when they aren't ready? Just so a younger person can have a job? Why can't they wait a year or two? It's not like they won't get any money at all. When you are low on the totem pole why are you buying big things anyways? Most of the Sault works at the plant. So if you cut everyone's pay cheque then the entire Sault will be affected because no one will have money to buy anything. If you take the 130 people with no seniority it doesn't affect everyone as much. it sucks for the new people and I'm sure everyone feels for the younger people. Plus they would have to open up the contract in order to do it so then they can change anything and everything.

EyelashExtensions
01-09-2009, 07:06 PM
People that have worked for lots of years to pay off mortgages and so on, move on to paying into retirement, and saving so they don't have to work or can live comfortably without depending on other sources. I could understand why a person who has put in 25+ years would want what's best for them.

b&aMom
01-09-2009, 07:20 PM
Well said Evangeline,,
What I don't understand is why young people would buy houses if they only worked at a place a short time? Gamble??

Uh...maybe because houses 6 years ago were cheaper than renting? And you can buy a house if you don't work at the plant.

b&aMom
01-09-2009, 07:23 PM
I can understand them buying houses however it seems that there were a lot who wanted what their parents had,which is normal. But they seemed to forget one main thing which is it took them a lifetime of working and saving to get it. How many raced out and bought monster homes? Maybe this will be a cruel lesson to some but you need to live within your means. As for older people making way for them don't hold your breath because it will never happen not now nor when you are the older ones. If you have anything to be embarrassed about is in thinking that you had it coming to you.

Actually, my parents had more at 30 than I had at 40. I grew up in a 3000 sq ft house, we bought a house just over 800 sq ft...for a family of four. My mom spent more on Christmas in the 70s than I do now, for the same sized family. Be careful what you assume.

GRUMPY
01-09-2009, 09:05 PM
it seems that there were a lot who wanted what their parents had,which is normal.

Now if I had said that everyone rushed out and bought one I'd agree with you how ever that is not what I said if you take the time to reread it. I just find it idiotic for some to say that the senior guys should just set a side in order for the jun ior people to get the jobs. Yes your parents had more because things were booming then which they aren't now, hopefully your kids won't be saying the same thing.

Andre
01-09-2009, 09:16 PM
My dad spent two tours in Korea(6year) in the 1950's.
Those lucky *******s who served in ww2 didn't deserved a job at all.
Booo....to the old folks

Peety
01-09-2009, 11:03 PM
Uh...maybe because houses 6 years ago were cheaper than renting? And you can buy a house if you don't work at the plant.

Then every one can still afford the homes they bought,,
So it should not be a problem!

bohd
01-09-2009, 11:05 PM
I am also not really affected by this since my finace doesn't work there, but I think it's ridiculous to think that people should retire when they are not ready to just so younger people can have the jobs, the people that have worked there for so long and have been waiting for this point in there lives where they finally don't have a mortgage to pay for, and don't have kids to support shouldn't be critisized for wanting to make money to do things for themselves. Jobs don't go to who "needs" them more, that's a very old mentality to give a job to someone because they have kids to take care of, ect, and it's illegal to do that now!
It's nobodies business what the people who have been there for years do with their incomes, or if they have two incomes! What does that have anything to do with one person's job if the person they live with does or does not have one? Last time I checked we weren't communists.
It's to bad for the people with young kids and financial responsibilities to take care of, but nobody should be pressured to quit their job when they are not ready just so someone else can have it.

excellent evangeline...bottom line is its nobodies business but your own,,,
i work at the plant and am PROUD of it....it was my choice years ago...(30) to work there...picked up a trade and carried on. unfortunately things did get rough in the 80's and set backs occured. layed off on numerous occasions but somehow muddled through. 90's rolled around and at the age of 37 i was told there would not be a job for me at algoma.
back to school at 38. very stressfull and in the end the job market was poor. fortunately i was able to go back to algoma and i was very happy. we suffered some more but thank goodness for the steel boom. finally some good fortune. many of us stuck with it because we believed that some day it would be good for us. the funny thing was when we were prospering a lot of the people who sneered and did not want to work at essar wanted to (work there) . i see and work with some of these same people. am i supposed to sacrifice some more for them?? many of these "new hires" are in their 30's, 40's and even 50's. they did not want to work through the tough times but when profit sharing arrived essar became a "GREAT " place to work...
i do not want anybody to get laid off, but in such grievous times it is a necessary evil. lets just hope it wont be a long one.

GRUMPY
01-09-2009, 11:22 PM
very well said by both you and Evangeline.

Ultra54
01-10-2009, 12:13 AM
am i supposed to sacrifice some more for them?? many of these "new hires" are in their 30's, 40's and even 50's. they did not want to work through the tough times but when profit sharing arrived essar became a "GREAT " place to work...
i do not want anybody to get laid off, but in such grievous times it is a necessary evil. lets just hope it wont be a long one.
But sir you forget that many of us went through the same dam tuff times as you without ever being able to get a job there. For us people in their 40's now, graduating in the early 80's wasn't good. No work or low paying jobs all the way until Algoma finally began to hire again in 2004. You sir have had it better than many people did. I dont expect anything from anybody including sympathy or sacrifice but you are wrong about those turning their noses up.

yoda
01-10-2009, 12:52 AM
I think that the majority of older workers would retire if they were able to. There are many that are short of pension credits from having to endure previous layoffs or they may have children that are still in school. The bottom line is that it is their decision to make and no one else's.

These men have already given up a lot for the company in the past but many are still paying in the form of their health. A lot of the men have various cancers or respiratory conditions that are probably directly related to their working environment. The younger men have no idea what it is like to work under the conditions that a lot of older men had to, working on the lids of the coke ovens with ill fitting masks and suits for extended periods of time, or going home covered in coke dust that you couldn't get out of your pores, blowing red particulate out of your nose a week after leaving the cinder plant.

So what if they want to try to obtain the best pension that they can, many will be lucky to see retirement.

givememore
01-10-2009, 01:01 AM
This will continue to be a heated debate, as this will continue to be to each their own. Would you freely give up SAY 30% of your food intake, 30% of your clothing costs, heating costs, gas, vehicle, etc for someone else to work?? By your i mean your entire family for a work share???? No, most people wouldn't. The economy and its state is nothing that one person can control, and if I have worked somewhere for 20, 30 or more years you're darn tootin that I am looking out for myself. Seniority is just that, respect your elders.

bohd
01-10-2009, 01:40 AM
But sir you forget that many of us went through the same dam tuff times as you without ever being able to get a job there. For us people in their 40's now, graduating in the early 80's wasn't good. No work or low paying jobs all the way until Algoma finally began to hire again in 2004. You sir have had it better than many people did. I dont expect anything from anybody including sympathy or sacrifice but you are wrong about those turning their noses up.

i am not turning my nose up at those that might be laid off, i just do not think work sharing will accomplish anything if this recession goes on for a long time. as i had said before without the windfall of profit sharing how many would have even wanted to work at essar?
besides essar had already announced layoffs before there were any results from local 2251 regarding work sharing. big business is is not employee friendly and it will do what ever is necessary to cut the bottom line..

Reckidecky
01-10-2009, 11:45 AM
It isn't about greed, its about trying to ram stuff down your throat and opening up the contract. I have worked for peanuts my whole life like many of you yet I dont feel the need to call these guys greedy.

Ultra...First of all nothing was rammed down our throat we were able to vote. Secondly, I am not sure if you went to the meeting to vote but it was explicitly mentioned it was not opening up the contract and would have been a temporary agreement meant to circumvent layoffs. In other words...No deal with anyone layed off. And Third, obviously I am making a general statement and by no means am suggesting all the people that are eligible to retire are greedy resulting in this offer being turned down, (I also mentioned ignorant), but lets face it, the information offered was from the company, the union had stipulations before being willing to negotiate, and may have been able to add to what was being offered...why turn it down before exploring all possibilities.

To be fair I think the employee HR relationship has been extremely bad over the past several years and now, with new owners everyone is quite leary about the motives, and rightfully so it has been very strained relationship...The last 2 decades have, for the most part, not been pretty.

And lastly I have heard many a veteran say screw them, we took our lumps, and no one helped us...that is a falacy...anyone remember the extended ui and cystec years. The negative attitudes need to be cleaned up. Start with employee relations and it will get alot better.

The layoffs will not likely affect me, but I would have liked to have seen a more intelligent desicion from the membership

Personally I think we should be thankful for how well Essar has run the place and it will get better. But negativity bears a negative enviroment.

Chakra
01-10-2009, 11:54 AM
You're suggesting that people didn't want to work for Essar until profit sharing? That's just crazy my friend. I'm sure most people reading this would love to make steelworker wages with or without profit sharing.

Working for Essar is the best job I've had even if it was for only 10 dollars an hour. Older people in Essar have forgotten how terrible it can be outside those golden gates. To suggest that people wouldn't want to work for 25 to 35 dollars an hour is madness.

GRUMPY
01-10-2009, 11:58 AM
very true as I stated before it would be nice to see all the info laid out in front of you so that you could make an educated choice on it.Until you know what is going on in somebody's life you have no business name calling or saying they should do this or that. Years ago I worked with a guy who had well over 40 years in there and was closing in on 50 years and I happened to mention to another guy that I worked with that he should retire and make room for us younger guys. Well thats when I learned my lesson, they gut had raised all his kids and was getting ready to retire when saddly he inherited his sisters very young girls and ended up working far longer than he ever wanted to but family is family and you do what you have to. I know it was a rare thing however if you don't know another's reasons keep quiet.

Reckidecky
01-10-2009, 12:07 PM
I did'nt say anyone should or must retire. But now that it is brought up, how much more do you really think you are earning working, compared to a pension w/ 35 plus years of service. Not much.

Benefits maybe...

35 years of frugile spending doesn't help though, if you have a mortgage after 35 years of working you did something wrong! Obviously there could be individual circumstances though...several ex wives...etc. lol


Don't want to debate this really, everyone has the right to retire to their deathbed or whenever the want.

GRUMPY
01-10-2009, 12:21 PM
well the last few years I made over 100 grand plus benefits now compare this to a pension. I know there was OT involved however there was a world of difference.

Wrangler35
01-11-2009, 02:44 PM
I like the debate and or comments made on this subject..a touchy one at that..Have a Nice Day!

The 6th Member Of AC/DC
01-11-2009, 02:57 PM
Anyone that agrees to work for Essar understands the entire concept on how the steel industry works. There is always a chance of layoff and sometimes it can take several years to move up the ladder and attain a permanent position. I can feel for the younger workers but I work at Essar for my family and myself. To assume that we should all chip in is a little presumptuous. To assume that people that have worked there for 20 or 30 years are wealthy and greedy is ridiculous. The concept of work sharing and some of its details in my opinion is better left alone, thus it being turned down. Once you enter negotiations with the company the union stands to lose, maybe not a lot, but still lose..

kodak57
01-11-2009, 08:13 PM
and to add....the company anounced layoffs before our meeting,and in no way would we in the union have agreed to 32 hr week and layoffs.

WingNut
01-11-2009, 09:49 PM
well the last few years I made over 100 grand plus benefits now compare this to a pension. I know there was OT involved however there was a world of difference.

Just think what you could've made if you didn't book off so many shifts! :tMoney:

Reckidecky
01-12-2009, 11:54 AM
OK...to be honest, I was and am still mself questioning the motives behind this program.

Essar has been more than reasonable though because if it were a couple of years ago (and in the past) there would have been layoffs a long time ago. But from the companies perspective, and the workers, (because of the profit sharing) I sure hope we are able to keep alot of these new employees in the Soo and bring them back to the jobs the were trained on soon. The cost of training has to be incredible and I am thinking that with all the workers eligible to retire, that quite possibly they were hoping to retain these workers and keep them working, opposed to the possibility of laying them off and losing some of them. Don't think it will be hard to find people to replace them if they do leave but certainly more cost effective.

I also want to mention I didn't want to come off harsh in the original post, speaking about the veterans being greedy. Most I think are not however there are those people that are. I think it is more ignorance, and that ignorance is breed by the propaganda and bad HR situation that has lingered for years. Maybe skeptisism instills ignorance, that the company is looking out for the employees best interest in conjuction with its own.

GRUMPY
01-12-2009, 01:12 PM
Just think what you could've made if you didn't book off so many shifts! :tMoney:

HEY, I got three words for you !!!

Hows it go now work 2 extra take 3 off ???

GRUMPY
01-12-2009, 01:16 PM
OK...to be honest, I was and am still mself questioning the motives behind this program.

Essar has been more than reasonable though because if it were a couple of years ago (and in the past) there would have been layoffs a long time ago. But from the companies perspective, and the workers, (because of the profit sharing) I sure hope we are able to keep alot of these new employees in the Soo and bring them back to the jobs the were trained on soon. The cost of training has to be incredible and I am thinking that with all the workers eligible to retire, that quite possibly they were hoping to retain these workers and keep them working, opposed to the possibility of laying them off and losing some of them. Don't think it will be hard to find people to replace them if they do leave but certainly more cost effective.

I also want to mention I didn't want to come off harsh in the original post, speaking about the veterans being greedy. Most I think are not however there are those people that are. I think it is more ignorance, and that ignorance is breed by the propaganda and bad HR situation that has lingered for years. Maybe skeptisism instills ignorance, that the company is looking out for the employees best interest in conjuction with its own.


You have to remember that these same ignorant senior workers were once the ignorant junior worker. No age group has the market cornered when it comes to ignorance.

PS. I've a feeling though we will soon be getting some form of diatribe because we didn't use the word "ignorant" the way a certain member feels it should be used.

Limitations
01-12-2009, 01:24 PM
[QUOTE=Reckidecky]

I can't seem to comprehend how someone with 30 plus years and can retire anytime can justify turning down this workshare program offer. Have not any of these people been watching the news to know there is extenuating circumstances, namely world economics. And most who voted last night are only a contract away from retiring. Most could have taken a pension and a $20,000 bonus to retire.

Would it not have been sensible to see what, after allowing the executuive to negotiate, what exactly could be attained through negotiations before rejecting it.

I lost over a decade of senority and pension there and do not what to get into an argument about what else was sacrificed through the 90's because I would be the first to admitt that it was not pretty...but that is in the past, let it go for God Sakes!

Who do these expected retirees expect are going to be supporting their retirement and pension. Sure hope they are not going to be looking for more on their pension later. I can't see that the young people, who are the future of this company will forget this vote easily.

Makes no sense to kill something before it is conceived. Guess most older folks there are pro choice...and have been for decades. Ignorrance, greed, spite, or annimosity, pick one.

[QUOTE]


By Ms. Marisa Belsito

I would have preferred to have seen more talking for the purpose of trying to determine how money could have been saved before coming to the conclusion that it was time to lay off anyone.

That means in respect to eliminating unnecessary expenses.

I am sure that all that could have been done has not been done in respect to that need.

Monday, January 12, 2009

Limitations
01-12-2009, 01:30 PM
Frugal, prudent or thrifty Business Management is about mature enough Administrative ways.