Post Reply
1-8 of 8
alternate view, this cycle need to cut n cut staffs down to max d profit, may not be as companies can even go bust even after cutting as there isin't any business for consumer to spend as people's get less pay, less money, less job, less work, less to borrow, less any even thing we do....all of us are going to visit recession as Us will prolong it longer as usual...Very UsUsUal situation here for gobal economy to be vitalize it vitality.
It all started some time in 1Q/2Q of year 2007 when Bearstearn goes bust and housing loan start defaulting on rackless leanding..now bank got no business to lend to weaker bank, so there isin't any money to borrow as well even for the rich Arab oil px starting to fall, where got more $$$ to give due credit to borrower (Bankers).
teeth53 ( Date: 18-Nov-2008 19:24) Posted:
|
Retrenchment, retraining , redeployment, second careers,etc are all part and parcel of life. We need to get use to it. Retrenchments is not much of a strategy. It is sometimes borne out of necessity. Lose afew to save many. Would it better to save many jobs and lose afew or lose all of them at some point?
If CEO's dun reduce headcount in bust cycles, they are answerable to shareholders. As shareholders we would demand profit maximization and we expect CEO's to deliver. Unfortunately the first and fastest cure would be to downsize. It may or may not be a panacea to all problems but at least it would bring cost of business down to a more sustainable value.
Last but not least, forget that rubbish about loyalty to your company. MONEY talks!
pasttime ( Date: 15-Nov-2008 23:50) Posted:
|
singaporegal ( Date: 16-Nov-2008 16:08) Posted:
|
| scotty ( Date: 15-Nov-2008 21:51) Posted: |
Unfortunately, these are extraordinary times and not just a cyclical downturn. I am not surprised that some companies (even in Singapore) may feel that it is better to be kiasu and cut jobs first because they foresee things will get worse next year when the full impact of the recession hits us.
I'm not condoning what they did.... but rather, I understand why they do it.
ceo who adopt retrench strategy on first sign of trouble. are they consider good ?
if one is looking for employment and you know your ceo retrench people to save own skin you want to follow them? think again.
so those who follow such ceo, quite likely they are short term thinking. cause there is no trust being build up.
one can said is this the root cause of the some country numerous problems.
because people who work for such a company will only think.
1. i must perform else got cut. don;t care what i have contribute before.
2. so i must also take care of my own skin. no loyaty to talk about. one must be silly to think about loyalty. one is ony like a horse. when here is no food kill the horse for food. so beware.
3. when all working in a company is short term. the company may enjoy bloom in the short term but doom in the medium longer term.
but unfortuntely such ceo thinking is fashionable. because each time when profit did not meet budget or analyst expectation, the headcount cut is always very satisfying to the analyst or speculator. don;t know about the long term investor. surely one can see price going up.
if one believe in long term performance of a company must be one who is build on solid ground then go sell such co who take easy pain killer of cutting headcount. sell them to tell them positively that such an action is no good for the company. especially within a year it is likely such a company will employ back the same number if not more. so as to get ready for cut the next time they did not meet budget.
think about it.
In the list are UBS, HSBC and Morgan Stanley, Dell, Motorola, HP, Sun Microsystems, Ford, GM and Citigroup.
I wonder how many Singapore employees will be affected.