4 ms·

I can’t get over how much the financial media drumbeats the idea that companies compete with better working conditions. They do not on any appreciable timescal

I can’t get over how much the financial media drumbeats the idea that companies compete with better working conditions. They do not on any appreciable timescale - the best you get is a bigger signing bonus or one time benefit. At the top 1% they compete on perks, but the rest simply do not do anything about the fact they can’t hire, despite their complaints. It’s a particular dissonance that I think must come from MBA and business school cargo culting. The world would be such a nicer place if companies actually competed for labor instead of collectively kept all wages and benefits at their absolute minimum. This of course doesn’t happen, but to hear that it is somehow is extra infuriating.

hellotomyrars 5y ago
One thing looks good on a balance sheet and the other requires thinking beyond the balance sheet. The vast majority of companies and middle/upper management are really only looking to the short term and their own individual resume. If the cows don't come home to roost (oops mixed the metaphor) for a few years and Jim has already moved from Company A to Company C by then, and failed upward three places on the corporate ladder, why should they care? Feels like most huge corporations do an executive shakeup every 5-8 years or so, and they shake some people out, but those people just get picked back up by someone else fresh off their own executive shuffle.