4 ms·
He's not blaming two babies, he simply stated that unforeseen events caused the company's healthcare costs to go up unexpectedly.
by gum_ina_package 13y ago
He's not blaming two babies, he simply stated that unforeseen events caused the company's healthcare costs to go up unexpectedly.
- rgrieselhuber 13y agoStill disgusting to parade two specific examples like that.
- 727374 13y agoSounds to me like he's blaming the babies or else he could have left them out of it and said something like 'exceptional events'.
- bilbo0s 13y agoThat's EXACTLY what he should have done. He should have said, "The cost of our medical benefits package was higher than expected." FULL STOP. I can't, for the life of me, see how anyone could possibly think what that man did was appropriate.
- abarringer 13y agoOn a group the size of AOL statistics would clearly imply at least two expensive cases per year. To single those cases out is inexcusable. In 2000 I worked at a relatively small company of 50 employees. One person had a baby that cost millions sic. Being a small group we all knew who it was and anticipated our insurance rates increasing. Our rates went up some but not much, and the company president decided to cover 100% of the increase. I greatly admired the company for doing that and now 14 years later I find myself working with the same team on a new startup. The company president has been able to get back most of the top talent from a decade ago because we all respect and admire his leadership.
- nsxwolf 13y agoHe didn't have to say what those events were. Now everyone in the office knows who is "responsible" for these cuts - two poor parents with sick babies. There was no reason for the CEO to create this kind of resentment for those parents.