SpyandSeek Blog

I think when a company proposes or actually takes the action of
laying off 5 – 10% or more of their workers, and describes that action
as an essential element to “save” the company or to be more “cost
effective”, then the person who makes that decision needs to include
themselves in the layoff, which would also then void golden parachutes.

Maybe the adage what’s good for the goose in good for the gander
would impact company decision makers to be better planners and
executives or at least more creative in developing alternative
strategies for recovery; like making or selling products of value that
don’t include lead paint, or cleaning up food processing and serving so
customers don’t die from salmonella, or making factories and stores
accessible for the disabled, or producing more fuel efficient cars that
capture the consumers imagination, or making decisions that add value to
a company rather than artificially pumping up their stock price, or by
just simply doing what is descent and honorable.

Our economy has always been based on the principle of supply and
demand. That is just not true today. Therefore the solution is not in
supply and demand answers. We are in a global economy where hurting the
workers for the sake of gluttonous “industry giants”, not excluding
Mobil Oil or Shell Oil and the like, will destroy all that we have come
to count on as the “American Way”.