Labor union votes against Steve Jobs' reelection to Disney board - Page 2

That is every bit as short sighted as the labor union's vote. They have a right to vote for people who are going to actively participate in the board. Their objection to Jobs (at least publicly) was that he wasn't attending board meetings. That is a legitimate complaint - whether you agree with it or not.


Wrong. If that's the extent of your understanding of SEC rules, you shouldn't be a market player.

By that silly logic, a person who owns 90% of the shares in a company shouldn't be on the board - the other shareholders could vote him out.


I agree. Board members are expected to participate. If someone is unable to regularly attend board meetings, they aren't doing what they're supposed to be doing. If Jobs is unable to attend board meetings, he should step down. There's nothing stopping him from being an advisor to the board or consultant so that they can still take advantage of his expertise.

I know several grade school classroom teachers in RI with salaries of $75K-80K and most of them seriously consider themselves underpaid. IMO I think most, if not all, are way overpaid.

Actually, I believe this has more to do with their actions than Jobs being on leave of absence. Apple for many years dating back to the 80's has been against the unions. There were attempts to unionize the factory workers when Apple had factors in the US. Apple hire many of those same farm workers which unions helped and they attempted to use their influence with those workers, only to have Apple embarrass the unions publicly. Again in the 90's the unions attempted to make an example out of Apple and had people picking Apple's campuses saying they hired non union workers to clean their buildings and those companies treated their employees badly.

Well Apple turned around and embarrassed the union yet again. When the picking started Apple was in the process of renewing their contract with their cleaning company so Apple opened the bidding up to unionize companies. After all said and done Apple awarded the business back to the original company and also publicized the results of the bid from each company it showed the non-union company paid their employees better, they had better benefits and the list went on of why Apple choose a non-union company over the union based company. Well people began to leave the union company for the non-union one since they could be paid better.

So the unions have it in for Apple and Steve for decades.

you've obviously never taught anybody anything, then.

Perhaps one of the union bosses has a family member interested in the job. Really, who are they going to get who would benefit the company more than Jobs, even with his absenteeism?

I wonder if Steve gives a rat's ass at this point anyway. He already has way too many irons in the fire in my opinion. He needs to take more time for himself, build the house and enjoy his family. With his health problems, simply sustaining his life should be his top priority.

He probably would have the same influence whether he was on the board or not.

First off saying teachers pensions are under funded depends on what state you're in and, seriously, if you think any of us care about then when our "pension" is Social Security you're barking up the wrong tree. Compared to SS those state teacher retirement funds are pure gold.

Second - that's complete crap - you don't need 30 years to be fully vested. I suppose there's an off chance that could be true in your district but most are along the lines of 15-20. That's hardly that much in an industry where people don't move around much...

They don't pay the same tax - they don't pay SS and, to me, that's a tax because there's no way in the world I'm going to get a dime back from it when it's time for me to retire.

Teachers in general aren't causing the problem - the people who represent the teachers and try to strong arm and manipulate our elected officials are the problem. Look, if you work for a non-union company and they aren't profitable guess what's going to happen either 1) there will be layoffs and the people who are the least valued are getting canned (regardless of age), 2) every one is getting a pay cut or 3) both. Compare that with the public school system - people have to fight tooth and nail just to get #2 but they know that next year they are going to have massive protesters out to can them for something that people just accept in the private sector as a way of life.

This is really less to do with money and more to do with benefits - no intelligent person has a problem with paying a teacher 50k. It's the 40k+ in benefits and guaranteed ROI for their pensions that is killing the state budget. How about we pay them 60k and put their benefits in-line with the private sector and the total cost comes down from 90k+ to 75k+ all while putting more money in their pockets and, subsequently, helping the economy since they'll actually have more money to spend...

Boom - recession fixed! /s

What an ignorant and stupid statement. The people who are against the power of the teachers unions are against the UNION entities and that includes the people running those organizations. Any given teacher may be worth 50 or 100 or 150K a year. But ALL teachers are not. And to have ALL the workers be guaranteed a given wage despite the current ecomomy for the rest of their working lives? No. Sorry. Grow up.

If Jobs wanted everyone to be like the Chinese employees at Foxconn there wouldn't be anybody to buy his products. Are you THAT blinded by your class-warfare BS that you can't even form an insult that follows basic logic?

RI happens to pay teachers better than most other states: they're in the top 15%. But even though that's the case, a starting teacher in Rhode Island with a Doctorate degree makes $38,720 a year. Wow..what a big salary. I'm sure those teachers are living in mansions.

If you know teachers in RI making $75-$80K, then they've been teaching forever. "Step 10" (which I assume means teaching at least ten years) pays $67,033 with a bacherlor's degree, $69,388 with a Master's and $70,190 with a Doctorate degree. I think those are pretty sad salaries for such levels of an investment in education. My company pays a starting programmer (with one job behind them) that much and they don't have to deal with bratty and frequently violent kids.

We shouldn't be paying teachers less. We should be paying them more so that better teachers are attracted to the profession. I attended a public engineering high school back in the 1960s. Teacher's salaries back then were competitive with industry and we had fantastic teachers: many were book authors. But as public school teacher salaries fell in comparison to average salaries, they almost all eventually left and either returned to industry or taught at the college level instead of the public high school level.

There are definitely a lot of bad teachers out there and the unions should work together with administrations and governments to find a way to get them out. But to make all teachers the villain is absurd - it's part of the anti-intellectualism bent of conservatives in this country. And get real: conservatives want to bust the unions because union workers tend to vote Democratic. There's nothing else to it than that.

In New York City, the mayor wants to end the last-in, first-out rule when teachers are laid off. But you know what's going to happen if he gets his wish: the most experienced, highest paid teachers are the ones who are going to be laid off first, because the city can save the most money by doing so. And that's exactly what unions were designed to protect against in the first place.

I agree that many public workers do receive ridiculous pensions that are no longer viable. But that's not the case for most school teachers because they don't have the ability to clock overtime. But other public workers, such as cops, fire fighters and transit workers play this game where they get to work as much as they want as they approach retirement to raise their pension, sometimes to more than their last annual salary. That's what has to be stopped.

Steve Job's doesn't do much day-to-day stuff at Disney. It's his relationship between Apple and Disney that's important. It's how Apple is able to virtually guarantee Disney and ABC (and related network) content on iTunes.

As far as Pixar, the important creative guy is John Lasseter. When he leaves, Pixar will go down hill. He is to Pixar what Jonathan Ive and Steve Jobs is to Apple.

Absolutely nothing good has come out of labor unions for at least the last two decades. They are in large part responsible for a prolific weakening of innovation and the better qualities of corporate America. What a bunch of junk, hit a guy while he's down. I can see their objective viewpoint, but seriously, Jobs is a visionary that ought not to be voted out in a moment such as this.

Indeed, the important thing is the relationship as well as the work that he did / does with Pixar. I just find it sad to see such sentiments in our world today. I feel that the human factor and humane decisions have just been pushed too far under the rug. I'm sure I'd get condemnation for that, but this lack of care is, in my opinion, a large part of the pining of our once great nation. Just another evidence of the need of a great refresh of values and sentiments.

If I were a shareholder of Apple or Disney, I would be concerned about Jobs' health, and absenteeism at board meetings. However, I would be even more concerned about the influence of these fund holder and union groups influencing the viability of the company. They're the really scary ones.

Yep, Oh wait a minute ....

An excellent summary. I couldn't agree with you more on all points.

Just another reason to hate unions.

The top 20% of America's wealthiest own 85% of America's wealth. The remaining 80% of Americans own 15% of America's wealth.

And yet you consider unions to be leeches. How do you manage that?

You don't get to call them thugs, Steve Jobs doesn't get to call them thugs. Your lack of perspective disgusts me. Do not pretend that the fight against unions is a fight for democracy. The contradiction in terms is appalling.

Without Steve Jobs Jon Ive won't have as much freedom at Apple (or probably won't be hired at all). The same goes for John Lasseter, Steve Jobs is probably one of the few people with enough patience to let people experiment, while Pixar went on year over year without making a single dime.

Pensions are the biggest scam on the planet.

The pensions are underfunded because no matter how the pension is run by the unions the taxpayer is still on the hook.

If your portfolio loses 10% because you decided to George Forman Grills, tough luck.

If union pension fund also loses 10% investing in George Forman Grills they don't actually lose that money because the taxpayer has to make it up.

The biggest joke is on the taxpayers.

Look at California.

The average individual teacher income in $60,000.

The average household income in the state is $50,000.

California teachers are the highest paid teachers in the country.

California has one of the worst public school systems in the country.

Irrelevant.

The middle class controls MORE wealth (when adjusted for inflation) compared to what the middle class controlled 50 years ago.

The rich grew their wealth and this was not at the expense of the middle/lower class.

Let me give you an example you might understand.

Before you were getting 1/2 of a 12OZ soda.
Now you are getting 1/4 of a 64OZ soda.
Are you getting less soda?

Most teachers qualify to retire around 55, not too many private workers even have a pention and our retirement age is in the mid to upper 60's and trending higher. I would call 30 years early. The pensions are underfunded because the teachers in most states contribute very little compared to the "defined" benefit they are guaranteed. Compare that to a private worker who contributes to a 401K or IRA and whose retirement is based on what they contribute and the funds earnings, with no guarantee. We also have a huge problem with public workers retiring from one job, collecting their pension, and then picking up another public sector job and full salary as well. Sickening.



They did not cause the entire problem but they are resisting any effort to fix the problems.


The number of government employees, the cumulative size of the salries and benefits, and the level of service they provide is absolutely atrocious in some states. I live in NY, where there is no doubt that the people with real jobs pay more per person to support public workers than at least 48 other states. The growth in the number of public workers has far outstripped the growth in state population. Their salaries have grown faster than private sector wages, their benefits have grown WAY faster than private sector benefits. They miss almost 4 times as many days of work due to "illness" and "disability" than private industry workers. They often deliver crap service and are rarely held accountible. Not all of them are earning high salaries, but as a group they are costing far far far too much for what they do for us. There is no rational argument to support the high growth in public sector expense in contrast to the low population growth of the state.


You dont understand economics. You can tax a business, you can tax a rich doctor, you can tax a set of products. No matter what you do, the middle class ALWAYS pays the biggest price for it. When states like NY tried to tax the rich, guess what happened? We suddenly have a lot less rich. They either moved or reduced their taxable incomes. The ones that moved did take jobs with them. That is not a theory, it is a fact. That is why our even our DEMOCRATIC governer wants to reverse the tax hikes. Idiots like you who have bought into the years of left wing class warefare rhetoric keep insisting we punish all of our employers, even though it has proven to be a failed policy and is costing our country countless jobs. Tax the rich causes a lot of pain on the poor and middle class but you keep asking for more.

We had a billionaire in our community who used to contribute many millions to local charities. He also invested 10's of millions in local businesses, creating thousands of local jobs and supporting research and education at several local universities. A couple years ago, the state raised his tax rate one too many times and he simply left. Now he lives in another state and another community is now benefiting from his philanthropy, investments and support. And the state no longer collects a penny in taxes from him. We are WINNING with your strategy, just like Charlie Sheen is WINNING.

To answer your last stupid question, there is an optimum tax rate that will maximize tax revenue and economic growth. If taxes go above the optimal rate, collections go down because of reduced economic activity. If they go below, the increase in economic activity is not enough to make up for the lower rate, and tax collections go down. It is not all that hard to set the rates appropriately, except the masses in the US have been duped with an emotional plea to believe we need to use our tax system to punish the rich and coporations and there is no longer any logical discourse on taxation.

Well, I guess it's better late than never that people are starting to figure out that the days of needing unions are (for now anyway) over. Today's unions, especially the mega-unions like the AFL-CIO are just political shils. Money, power and politics. And dirty socks

+1 It's still amazing to me how many people totally misunderstand what is really going on in Wisconsin. I actually had a friend try to tell me collective bargaining was a human right! Puhleze - and just what are unions for public employees trying to protect them from, the evil government? Wait, I thought government was supposed to be our savior, so why do we need unions to protect government workers then?

Tak about f'ed up...

Yup, the whole memo to the employees who are in Japan or have family in Japan was a total PR stunt.

Simply amazing

As a died-in-the-wool Disneyphile, I personally think kicking Jobs off the board would be monumentally stupid.

Jobs is behind the ongoing revamp of the Disney Stores, and pushing Disney to be a leader in new media like iTunes. He's also a Wall Street darling with an apparent midas touch. Just why would we want to lose him?

I have several teachers in my family and I am friends with more. Some of them are very good and worth their pay. Some are not. The problem is they all get paid the same, and there is no reward for working harder or neing better. When there is a layoff because of population change or whatever, the newest ones get axed, even if they are the most motivated and most successful. The lazy old one who hasn't updated their lesson plans since the 80's is perfectly safe.

I have no problem paying a highly succesfull math or science teacher well over 100K if they could get that or more in industry, and if they are able to achieve results with the students that other teachers can not. Education is very important to our future and we should be willing to spend money on it. However, we must demand that our investment is spent wisely and that the money goes to those who achieve results, not those the union has chosen to protect. What every teacher in Wisconson who called in sick to go protest should be reminded when they get their pinkslip is IT IS ALL ABOUT THE CHILDREN NOT THE TEACHERS!

Your entire argument is based on old fashioned right wing math. If you use new math, I am sure you will find the poor middle class families with surburban homes, multiple cars, multiple flat screen TV's, laptops smartphone and other toys are way worse off than the super rich middle class 50-60 years ago.

If you can count on anyone to totally SCREW YOU OVER in your time of need... it's the UNIONS.

They're evil.... and they're trying to destroy our country and every company they can weasel their way into. Think I'm nuts.... listened to the bastards on the audio on this link.

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/reve...-wealth-power/

It's long past due for unions to become DOA. They screw you out of your job, and they screw the companies they get involved with. If you're in one.... GET A DIVORCE BEFORE THEY take away your ability to work.

On average they make twice as much money as you or I would make in a similar private sector job, and then they go off the handle if they have to pay and mere 5-10% towards their retirement and insurance. OMG.... how could anyone ask this? Look into the crap they were pulling in Wisconsin and when I say look into it, I don't mean watch the crap being put out my NBC, CBS, ABC or CNN.

I guess the encouraging thing here is that they probably own less stock than Steve Jobs does.

Unions = COMMIES..... educate yourself people!
They destroy everything they touch.

Z

First off I'd have to say on my personal dislikeometer unions rank right up there with politicians -- they completely serve themselves. They're kind of an amalgam between career politicians and the mafia. That having been said I think the AFL-CIO's real problem is they're pissed Steve Jobs has more shares than they do.

If there's one thing unions hate it's when anyone threatens their influence ...

You might as well throw out "Hitler" with this kind of rhetoric. I don't think anyone will begrudge the average, hard working teacher for their salary or what they do to contribute to the well being of society.


Another great straw-man and a good start a good 'ol fashioned class warfare. "Hey, don't look at these problems here, we have these fat cats over here that are easy pickings" - really? Are we ever going to be able to move beyond the same, tired ad hominem attacks and have intelligent discussions?

I think most people who are fed up with unions for public employees are angry with are the complete inability to get rid of the teachers that do need to be gotten rid of. Just look at what is going on in Washington, DC, for example. They finally did shut down the "Rubber Rooms" in New York, but that's just the tip of the iceberg.

Here's a simple question for you - who are the teachers unions "in it" for? The students? Or the teachers? Or the real answer, the politicians they buy via huge campaign contributions?

Where are the criticisms of the Union leadership salaries? Or is it only "fair" to go after the man?

Those are the kinds of questions I'd like to see more of. Then again, it's far easier to pass off the same old tire rhetoric and paint those who disagree with you with a broad brush


Really? Based on what? I dare you to be specific and cite real references or examples instead of more fellow tin-foil-hat wearing cronies spewing like-minded crap with no basis...

Jobs should not have put himself forward for reelection given his current health and inability to add value to the boards meetings. That doesn't mean he can't be part of Pixar or Disney, simply that it might make sense to allow for someone who can be more active, even if it's a temporary proxy.

See, here is where your inexperience with government is showing.

In business, you aren't going to have too much dead-weight because it's bad for the bottom line. If there are unproductive members of the team, that eventually gets held against someone so... they either produce or they are gone.

With no real need to be competitive, government is completely different. I'm always amazed, having come from private industry where in doing project management Salary was just as important if not the most important aspect of a project since it's by and large your greatest expense.

Not so in government - salary is often viewed as that magical pot of money that just keeps re-appearing without question each year. It's slowly changing, but for decades project management in government (state, local, federal - they are all very similar) is done without really factoring in the overhead of salary. Want to understand why government costs tend to ballon out of control? Bingo! Here's your answer.

So the same thing for schools. We are pumping in 20x per student than when I was coming up through public school, yet we have lower scores (against already lowered standards!) than ever before. Now, I don't believe it's wholly an issue of teachers, salary and a high proportion of dead-weight or bad teachers - we also have a wonderful witches-brew of PC crap like "No child left behind" and not wanting to hold kids back in order to not harm their self esteem and a total lack of desire to hold kids accountable in any way as far as discipline. Or the social will to back school administrations against idiot parents who threaten to sue at the drop of a hat. Idiotic policies such as zero tolerance are a direct reflection of the outrageous abuses of the court system and highlight an urgent need for sincere tort reform...

But to get back to the topic (ha!) at hand, when you get right down to it, the public unions are directly working against the best interests of the students and the taxpayer. That's whats so ridiculous about it! That's a huge problem, even before you start to look deeper into how the unions, who are mandatory and force the collection of dues from the members where they are, then turn around and make huge donations to the politicians who negotiate with them for their members "benefits" - ad nauseum...

"The wheels on the bus go round and round..."

Why do public employees need collective bargaining rights?

Who's interests are they negotiating against?

Depends. If they are teaching Jr. Higher's I would argue they are underpaid!

I didn't say that they did or didn't. The facts are that the current Governor of the State of Wisconsin, Scott Walker stripped most public employees of their collective bargaining rights, except for the police and fireman who negotiated an eleventh hour back-room deal. It was in all the papers


By "They", are you referring to public employees?


I couldn't agree more.

It is just breathtakingly stupid for these two groups to oppose Job's membership in the Disney board. The primary function of the board is to represent the stockholders' interests. In fact one of the biggest problems in corporate America is that too often the board looks after management's interests rather than the stockholders'.

So if you own Disney stock, you should want Disney's largest stockholder on the board because you know he's got skin in the game. And better yet, not only is Jobs the largest stockholder, but his Disney stock constitutes most of his personal wealth. So you know he's not going to take his board duties lightly. He may not be present at all the board meetings but is anyone going to assert that Jobs is not interested enough to pay adequate attention to Disney?