Commenting on my post about the gold-plated health insurance coverage given to the top brass, a reader says: "Who cares if the top executives pay for their own insurance or not. They have different benefits and responsibilities compared to regular corporate employees. Again, they have 'different responsibilities.' They deserve to have better benefits than us."
Join the debate, in the original post.
Tuesday, April 01, 2008
6 comments:
Jim says: "Proceed with caution; this is a free-for-all comment zone. I try to correct or clarify incorrect information. But I can't catch everything. Please keep your posts focused on Gannett and media-related subjects. Note that I occasionally review comments in advance, to reject inappropriate ones. And I ignore hostile posters, and recommend you do, too."
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Executives do not deserve better benefits.
ReplyDeleteSadly, and it's not just Gannett, the model is inverted. Those who can afford to pay for their benefits, including parking, laundry service, country club memberships, etc., should pay for them out of compensation they receive. But they don't.
Front-line workers who get 1% raises each year for "commendable" or better work - which doesn't offset the annual increase in health care costs - are the employees who have earned free medical or like coverage at a reduced cost.
Gannett, however, looks at health care benefits as another way to help its bottom line instead of doing what's right by its employees. Those whose blood, sweat and tears produce the "daily miracle."
Free health care for all employees at publicly traded companies is not unheard of (UPS as an example). Even Starbucks provides full medical coverage for any employee who works 20 hours a week or more.
I don't know about YOUR Gannett medical coverage, but year by year the quality and quantity of coverage has been deteriorating.
ReplyDeleteThe most recent outrage, in my experience, is the prescription drug provider refusing to fill the Rx my physician prescribes. They want my doctor to recommend generics ... period. Never mind that the name-brand drug seems to be the only one that works well without side effects. The cost is prohibitive, in the company's view.
I'll bet Gannett executives don't have to fight for the right to consume the prescription their doctor believes is best.
"They deserve to have better benefits than us." Are you for real? Do you have on Gannett goggles on to go with the Kool-Aid you drink? Is the little G logo inside the lens blocking your vision? By next year, if there is a next year, you will pay much more for benefits and have a 0.5% raises
ReplyDeleteWhile I disagree with the basic premise that "they deserve to have better benefits than us," that idea is especially wrong-headed in light of the lousy performance of the stock over the past year. Dubow should be paying Gannett, not the other way around. And if McCorkindale wanted ongoing benefits from the company, he should not have retired.
ReplyDeleteThey don't deserve anything, they earned it. Are their benefits out of line with mainstream Fortune 500 companies?
ReplyDeleteToday USA Today wrote about company jets. Aren't there a fleet of jets, hangar and dozens of people working at the airport sp that Gannett exexs can fly around the country? Are they grossing up that like others? If so, and even if in line with competitors, shouldn't they stop it in times like these?
They earned it?
ReplyDeleteNot if you take the performance of the stock - and return to shareholders - over the past 15 months.
The senior executives are actually more at fault than any front-line (hourly) employee.