Cheeky J. Michael Lawrie asks shareholder for a payrise whilst giving years of nil payrises to hardworking employees.
Shareholders, If you want to support J.Michael Lawrie's selfish greed, vote for him a payrise on the 3rd August 2018.
9 replies (most recent on top)
This is why ML is wrong and everyone should know this with resorting to the Cheap PC aguement From Wikipedia
The Golden Rule (which can be considered a law of reciprocity in some religions) is the principle of treating others as one would wish to be treated. It is a maxim that is found in many religions and cultures.[1][2] The maxim may appear as either a positive or negative injunction governing conduct:
One should treat others as one would like others to treat oneself (positive or directive form).
One should not treat others in ways that one would not like to be treated (negative or prohibitive form).[1]
What you wish upon others, you wish upon yourself (empathic or responsive form).[1]
Should have Googled NEO Named Executive Officer
Definition of Proxy NEO. The rules for determining whether a business unit head is an executive officer are set forth in the regulations under Securities Act of 1933 and Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Securities Exchange Act”). .
See http://www.meridiancp.com/insights/thought-leadership/proxy-named-executive-officers-should-business-unit-heads-be-included/
According to Wikipedia this is the definition of Neo:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neo_(The_Matrix)
Neo (born as Thomas A. Anderson, also known as The One, an anagram for Neo) is a fictional character and the main protagonist in The Matrix franchise. He was portrayed as a cybercriminal and computer programmer by Keanu Reeves in The Matrix Trilogy.
The resemblance is uncanny.
@UkyabZ4-gcu to take you laptop analogy further - there are lots of people willing to pay a premium for quality, there's a reason Apple are one of the worlds biggest companies whilst HP Inc aren't.
Likewise, people who don't value quality in a laptop are now buying them from Lenovo - who are able to provide a perfectly usable laptop at a lower price, because they're based offshore and don't have the overheads.
The brands mentioned above don't matter so don't make it about that. It's the principle - you pay a high price for high quality; or you may a low price for low quality. There's no reason to pay a high price for low quality which is exactly what DXC are doing.
I'm sorry, however you don't seem to understand.
IT workers started being treated as a commodity in the early 2000's. This was due to the numbers of IT workers in supply exceeding demand due to globalization (and the realization that you could perform IT work offshore where IT workers were paid significantly less than local workers), Once supply exceeded demand, employers realized they could offer lower salaries and benefits to obtain staff, and then they didn't have to reward them with salary increases or bonuses etc to retain them. Why would you pay more for a laptop than you need too? Why would you provide a salary increase to an employee when you don't need too? You could argue that you have to give the employee an incentive to work more efficiently and to keep their skills up to date and to improve customer service, however when the belief is that you could be replaced with a graduate who hasn't been able to get a job in IT due to the excess of supply over demand, why would they. You either do more and do it better or as with a laptop that can't perform efficiently with the latest OS, you replace with a newer model that has better specs and a lower cost than the laptop being replaced.
Mr Mike is different, he would argue that he is the only person in the whole world who has the ability to execute on the strategy that has been put in place for DXC. He would argue that without him, the company would not be able to execute as well and would not achieve the forecast financial results. Effectively he would be saying that demand for him exceeds supply, that losing him would risk the investment made by shareholders in DXC, and that increasing his remuneration will motivate him to execute even better and achieve even better outcomes. He will improve the outcomes by ensuring his leadership team is laser focused on automating to reduce the need for IT workers, improving the demand and supply ratio so that he can churn the workforce and reduce the cost for workers, and gain new workers who are motivated by a mix of fear and gratitude for retaining/obtaining a job to work longer and more diligently. His exec team may also replace outdated laptops.
Salary increases and bonuses will be provided to a few, so that rumors will circulate that anything is possible, you just need to work harder, longer blah blah blah and you will be rewarded.
Maybe not. :-)
Post ID: @UkyabZ4-ued "Executives should refuse pay increases until the employees receive the pay increases and bonuses they have earned!" would you refuse a pay raise till everyone else gets one, I think NOT.
Well as a MAP/401K Stock holder I voted no on the directors , the auditor and of course on the Executive Compensation package. It won't make a difference, but it felt good anyway.
In the US corporations got a HUGE tax beak and were suppose to be giving employee's raises or bonus, but NO it all goes to ML and his NEO's (what ever NEO in the Proxy statement means).
Sad
Executives should refuse pay increases until the employees receive the pay increases and bonuses they have earned!