And they say it is the unions that are causing HD to lose money. It has been proven time and time again, you can show a loss anytime if you want. GM files bankruptcy just about every year but their stocks are up and they still pay. HD just wanted to put it to their workers so they could make more money. Hey they are back in the black, they can give their workers their pay back! I bet it does not come back.
Wisconsin has it out for union workers. Remember where we were before unions.
"Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it."

 

Which of the other employees caused a turnaround equivalent to over 200 million dollars?

Who exactly are you to determine who gets paid too much in a private company?

 

You mean that unions haven't drained multiple companies, particularly middle-sized companies, dry? I recently heard of yet another company of roughly 400 employees, which closed it's doors because of the employee unions milking it dry. Guess that'll show them silly CEO's that jobless employees are really the ones in charge, huh?

 

He's done a great job, he's the reason Harley-Davidson is still in business. Without making the hard decisions (and getting them implemented), the company would be bankrupt and sold for parts to a hedge fund.

And yes he rides, he took the MSF course and rode to Sturgis when he got the job.

 

Private company? I better check my portfolio again. Thought I had shares. Maybe I am incorrect.

 

lol....WUT?

 

Sorry, by private I meant, "not owned by the government" as with some other large businesses.

 

Selling time. That's what we all do. I sell my time. I sell my time to the people that will pay me the most for it. It's all about selling your time, weather it's 8, 10, or 12 hrs. a day, you have to sell it.

 

I don't begrudge a CEO making a good salary. You also should consider that his stock options aren't worth a dime until he sells them . The next couple of paragraphs is what bothers me most about CEO pay here in the US. To me, the level of CEO pay is way out of kilter. In a public company, the board is responsible to the shareholders, and most boards will set a CEO's pay/compensation package at a level to draw a top performer since they are competing with other similar sized companies.

Another thing we don't know is what type of salaries/bonuses that middle/upper management received. It's gotta be hard for the front-line employees to swallow this kind of news. Looking at the overall numbers his salary/comp package represents less than 5% of the total annual profits.

----------------Source is www.referenceforbusiness.com -------------------------

The pay level of U.S. executives is very high as compared to the pay of executives in other countries, as compared to pay of U.S. executives in the past, and as compared to U.S. employees at lower levels of the organization. Currently, U.S. executives earn about 400 times the pay of the lowest paid workers in their own companies.

In Europe and Asia, the pay of executives is about 10 times that of the lowest paid worker. Additionally, many U.S. executives have generous stock option or severance packages that increase the value of their compensation. The high pay rates of American executives have garnered much media attention, particularly when organizations with high pay rates for CEOs and other top employees have lay-offs or plant closings. Many critics argue that executive pay is far too high, and that these pay rates invite ethical problems.

 

Any chance the jump in profits is based on economic conditioning increasing and would this not have happened regardless of who was at the helm? If so shouild this not be factor into the equation? Was the $55 million in losses in 2009 not at the peak of economic woes?