True to what was threatened prior to the election, some corporate CEOs and business people are following through with their threats to either cut hours or fire some of their employees if Obama was reelected. Many cite the provisions of ObamaCare as their justification. However, anyone who understands ACA (Affordable Care Act) and economic history realizes that there are other factors involved. Partisan politics, racism, or the fact the companies involved were already in trouble comes to mind. First, let us look at the current headlines:
CEO Keeps Promise to Lay Off Workers If Obama Elected:
http://www.cnbc.com/id/49764441
Robert Murray, the CEO of Murray energy keeps his promise. This is the guy who staged a Mitt Romney event in which he required his employees to act as backdrop for Mitt without pay. He says that Obama is destroying the coal industry. He appears ignorant to the fact that Mitt Romney once pointed to a coal plant in Massachusetts and said they were killing people. He also appears ignorant to the fact that nationwide, 80,000 people are employed in the Coal Industry, more than when the recession started. He also seems ignorant to the fact that the Coal Industry has been losing ground to Natural Gas under provisions enacted by the Bush Administration. You would think there are different factors involved here.
Las Vegas CEO Reportedly Fired 22 Workers Because Of Obama’s Reelection:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/08/david-las-vegas-ceo-fired-workers_n_2093369.html
“David” wouldn’t give his full name or the company in which he fired 22 of his 114 employees because he needed to save the company from the “taxation” that was coming. Who knows if he was legitimate; however, taxes for small businesses have gone down under Obama and he wishes to keep them down if only Congress would agree. If he was a big business and rich guy like Sheldon Adelson, he can expect his personal taxes to go up. However, it has been proven that lower tax rates for large corporations and the 1% have no positive impact on the community or business. It only helps those at top. So, you would think there are different factors involved here.
Papa John’s CEO John Schnatter Says Company Will Reduce Workers’ Hours In Response To ObamaCare:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/09/papa-johns-obamacare-john-schnatter_n_2104202.html
John Schnatter made it clear long before the election that under the guidelines of ObamaCare, his pizzas would increase in price by .11 to .14 cents. Dear Lord! Of course he failed to present the calculations that backed up that claim. But no matter, this early backer of Mitt Romney now says that to avoid having to increase his price of pizzas by less than a quarter, he’ll reduce the hours of his employees so they don’t qualify for healthcare. What a wonderful man working to save late night stoners an extra quarter to buy a lousy pizza by making the lives of those desperate enough to work for him get even less. Even prior to this decision, Papa John’s had bad reviews as a place to work at.
From Jobbite:
http://www.jobbite.com/reviews/papa-johns-pizza/
You would think there are different factors involved here.
People on Social Media are starting to gather the names of other companies planning to or have already laid off employees or cut their benefits in alleged response to Obama’s reelection. This list would be useful, but what to do with it?
Although we avoided a major depression and our economy has improved significantly with a stock market doubled since Obama took control and corporate profits at all time highs, the economy is still fragile. Those working for these people need their jobs and benefits, as meager as they may be. We can call on a boycott, but I would suspect that move would hurt the employees we’re trying to help out more than those CEOs; who are doing better than ever, thank you. Union influence is at record lows for the country following generations of federal and state laws designed to make them ineffectual. Many states are now “Right to Work (for less)” states. This leaves employees little remedy from the Courts when their employers take things out on them en masse.
The best way to address this issue is to take it directly to the CEOs involved. We need to go to the various stockholders and Board of Directors to educate them as to what poor decisions their CEOs are making and how it can seriously impact the profit margin of the corporations involved, and the future dividend checks to the stockholders.
What’s the argument for sticking with Obama and the Democrats? Well that’s simple. An analysis of national economies throughout history clearly indicates that Democratic Presidents and Administrations have always been better for the Stock Market, business and business people than Republicans.
Democrats better for Wall Street than Republicans, research shows:
YouTube Presentation of the above:
Here’s the Stock Market under President Obama:
Although traditionally the Republicans would appear to be more business friendly with less regulations and more pro-business agenda, in reality, the Democrats have always done better for the business community and stock market since 1900. This actually makes perfect sense with the Democrats focusing more on the people, with regulations on business and assisting the working and middle-class, making them a larger and more robust consumer base. The more people with disposable income, the more they are willing to go shopping at the businesses out there. More spending, more money generating in the economy, more economic growth. Supply side never worked because people don’t buy anything because it’s out there, they buy because they can afford to buy. So the focus needs to be on people, not business.
By CEOs laying their employees off, they are in a way, hurting their own businesses. If fewer people have jobs and/or money to buy, they won’t. If no one buys, businesses have nothing to sell and everyone suffers. Henry Ford knew this in the early 20th Century by paying his employees enough money to buy the cars they were manufacturing.
Though the middle-class is doing better than during the Bush administration, they aren’t doing as well as they could be. However, the CEOs who are complaining are doing much better than in any time in history under the Obama administration. Schnatter is certainly doing well.
Here Now, the Utterly Bonkers Manse That Papa John’s Built:
http://curbed.com/archives/2012/08/10/here-now-the-utterly-bonkers-manse-that-papa-johns-built.php
Papa John’s Can’t Afford ObamaCare for his employees, but…:
http://www.politicolnews.com/papa-johns-ceo-cant-afford-obamacare-for-employees-wow/
Nice how underpaying your employees so they can’t even afford the pizzas they make can make you filthy rich.
When you focus on all the money going to a few, everyone suffers including the stockholders. The more business, the better the business environment and profit margins. It’s true that the most expensive aspect of any company is payroll. Employers only hire if they need to in order to maintain production for business. So logically, if there is no business, there is even less need for employees. Of course, then there is no money coming in at all for the stockholders or Board of Directors or CEOs. Hire who you need, but pay them and compensate them fairly so business can continue in a thriving economy.
Colbert comments on Papa John’s and gets it absolutely right:
http://eater.com/archives/2012/08/09/colbert-on-what-americans-will-pay-for-papa-johns.php
AZModerate Rants 