• medgremlin@lemmy.sdf.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    119
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    9 months ago

    I once worked at a hospital in the ER where the department director was a union-busting bastard, but the CEO was pretty reasonable. After I left, one of the other ER techs went to the CEO about our pay being messed up and got everyone $5-6/hour raises to actual market rate. Also, there were a few weeks when we were really understaffed that the hospital encouraged admin folks to volunteer as “candystripers” in the ER to do stuff like help clean/turn over rooms, and answer patient call lights for water, blankets, etc. And the CEO was down in the ER for a couple hours every evening helping out most of that time period. It was encouraging to see the CEO of the hospital putting on some gloves and helping us with basic stuff like cleaning and stocking.

      • medgremlin@lemmy.sdf.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        47
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        9 months ago

        It was a legitimately nonprofit hospital and he probably was overpaid, but at least he was a practicing physician at one point and did seem to give a damn about his staff.

      • EmergMemeHologram@startrek.website
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        edit-2
        9 months ago

        Hospitals still need an executive for decision making. Could be a president or ceo. It’s “for profit” that’s going to reverse the incentives and run the whole thing.

      • LemmyKnowsBest@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        11
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        9 months ago

        Good point. He earns exponentially more than anyone else in the hospital yet he can do whatever he wants. If he feels like being a candy-striper today for a few minutes, great. Then he can do whatever he wants after that. He’s not stuck doing one repetitive job day in and day out. He can do whatever he wants and earn exponential amount of money. How did he even get in that position?

      • Encode1307@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        9 months ago

        Is lemmy made up of 15 year olds? You think a hospital can run itself with no one in charge? The comments on this thread are amazing.

        • problematicPanther@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          9 months ago

          Ceo implies it’s a for profit institution. Director, director general, overseer, those are titles appropriately here. CEO is a title of a corporation.

        • ghost_of_faso2@lemmygrad.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          9 months ago

          Why do you think a company without a CEO would be without anyone in charge? Can you only imagine something running if a single person has executive control of an org?

  • paddirn@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    74
    ·
    9 months ago

    Janitor ain’t gonna fire 1000s/10,000s of employees while getting a $20 million bonus or run the company into the ground and get rewarded with a generous golden parachute on his way out. If anything, the janitor usually toils in relative obscurity, only seen in passing or called upon when people need help cleaning their shit.

    • MissJinx@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      18
      ·
      9 months ago

      If the CEO stops going to work for a month nobody cares if the janitor doesn’t go to work for 2 days it’s mayhem. 5 days in and we will be in Lord of the Flies.

  • zak@lemmy.l0l.city
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    43
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    9 months ago

    If all janitors disappeared, you’d notice the dirty facility.

    If all CEOs disappeared you’d get paid better.

    • milicent_bystandr@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      19
      ·
      9 months ago

      Alas, if all CEOs disappeared, the company would fall into ruin and you’d need another job. CEOs are important people too, even if they’re overpaid and over-respected and overalls (wait, that should be the janitor? Or the Germans?)

      • repungnant_canary@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        20
        ·
        9 months ago

        There are actually examples of quite big companies without CEO at all.

        But it really depends on what type of company we’re talking about. In small and medium companies usually (not always unfortunately) CEOs do a terrific job and, depending on the company’s financial condition, might even earn less then some of their employees while bearing a huge responsibility (financial and moral).

        Even in small companies it is sometimes a case that managers do all the work and the CEO is eating profits - there are stories where employees actually prefer the boss to not show up in the office because they only mess everything up.

        Yet if we’re talking about big and huge companies then CEO existence is much harder to defend. If CEO disappeared then by pure inertia the company would work for at least months. Then there’s the Peter Principle and numerous studies how MBAs are actually rather bad boses, in which case if the company keeps existing or even growing then someone else is doing all the management.

        And then, you can’t convince me that someone like Musk, who spends days on posting hateful tweets and attending meetings promoting reproduction, does a meaningful job at all.

        What companies actually need is some decision making body. And that body doesn’t have to be a rich white asshole, but can be for example board representing (proportionally) all the groups in the company, which then can use deliberative democracy to make decisions. Virtually any other solution is better than old rich white sexists CEO.

      • dangblingus@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        9 months ago

        CEOs aren’t the genius level visionary you’re making them out to be. They’re a legal requirement of having a corporation. Doubly so if the company is publicly traded and has a Board of Directors. Fact is, without a CEO at the helm, there are tons of SVPs and VPs at most companies that know exactly the strategy to increase sales or decrease costs (the root of a CEO’s responsibility). So while executive leadership is important, it’s not thousands of times more important than any given worker at the company. Not by a long shot.

    • baatliwala@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      19
      ·
      9 months ago

      And the company you work for will no longer function, so soon you won’t get paid at all and cry like a bitch. What a lovely world <3

  • Jerb322@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    23
    ·
    9 months ago

    "I am the eyes and ears of this institution, my friends. By the way, that clock is twenty minutes fast. "

  • RizzRustbolt@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    9 months ago

    I respect folks that take the time to learn my. And part of that respect is learning their names as well.

    Thanks for all your hard work, Peeta!

  • UnfortunateShort@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    10
    arrow-down
    19
    ·
    9 months ago

    Tbf there are plenty CEOs who care for their company and their employees. It just so happens that investors don’t appreciate that

    • PorkRoll@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      9 months ago

      “We were just thinking of the shareholders.” You can’t just pass the blame to shareholders. Why do shareholders exist? To create the illusion that everyone can be an “owner” so that the owning class can continue to fuck us all.

    • FuckingQuintana@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      11
      ·
      9 months ago

      I don’t understand the inherent hatred for all CEOs here and on Reddit. It’s just groupthink and ignorance really.

      • Cowbee [he/him]@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        9 months ago

        Lemmy tends to have inherent hatred for CEOs because Lemmy is a leftist platform, in structure and userbase. Leftists tend to hate Capitalists.

          • Cowbee [he/him]@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            9 months ago

            Yes, but most are referring to Capitalist CEOs, rather than Proletarian CEOs, of which there are incredibly few.

            • UnfortunateShort@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              9 months ago

              That’s not true, think of all the small to medium businesses there are. All of them got “CEOs” or whatever you want to call them and in many cases they do regular work besides leading the company.

              I know a quite a few people who are very happy in their respective companies. Heck, I’m employed in the perfect template of a bureaucratic, capitalist megacorp and our CEOs shield us from a lot of bullshit of the group we belong to.

              I think “CEOs = bad” is oversimplifying a lot. We just don’t hear about the good ones, because ragebait sells and capitalist media is something actually fucked up at this point

              • Cowbee [he/him]@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                9 months ago

                It’s 100% true. Just because I may be using terms you may not be quite familiar with doesn’t make me incorrect.

                CEO is a job. It’s a managerial position. Usually, it is tied to some form of ownership, but not always. Choosing to take an active role in managing the company as a business owner does not mean your power does not come from ownership, nor does it mean you must take an active role.

                Capitalists are necessarily exploitative and entirely unnecessary for running a company. You can have a CEO that owns a company just as much as the Janitor does, which entirely changes the source of the power and removes the ability to exploit the laborers. As an individual owner, a CEO can act in some manners that help workers, but will nevertheless be ruthlessly exploiting them in other manners.

                I think reading theory might help you a lot.

            • Encode1307@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              9 months ago

              Wtf is a capitalist or proletarian CEO? A CEO is a CEO. The person running the organization is the chief executive officer.

              • Cowbee [he/him]@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                9 months ago

                If the CEO owns the business, then that’s a Capitalist CEO. If the CEO earns a salary paid by the owner of the business, then he can be considered Proletarian, though the wage is likely high enough to be closer to petite bourgeoisie. The power dynamic changes entirely.

                In Communism, there could not be a Capitalist CEO, for example.

      • Encode1307@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        9 months ago

        It’s like everyone on this platform is a 15 year old. Someone above just said a hospital shouldn’t have a CEO. They’re children that think CEO means “evil person”.

        • emptiestplace@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          9 months ago

          The bottom one is the person who is sharing a meme, I think? I don’t understand the idea of reading their commentary before looking at the image. I know what you are talking about, but I think that’s more when it is replies, isn’t it?