You must log in or register to comment.
The working class people are the only reason the CEO has a title or any money at all. Take the janitor out of the building and it fills up with trash. Take the CEO out of the building and wonder why they were even there in the first place.
I’m reminded of the Irish Bank Strike, where the banks threw a hissy fit about some law and decided to close until it was repealed.
Life went on pretty much as normal, with pub owners becoming the new arbiters of credit worthiness, and eventually the banks had to give up.
That’s actually pretty smart because if someone has no money for booze, then you know they’ve really got no money
Plus, at the time, the pub owners basically knew everybody in town even if they didn’t know each other.
The CEOs are absolutely overpaid for what little they actually do, but I’m not sure I willing to say they do literally nothing. It’s not exactly being a capitalist boot licker to acknowledge that there needs to be somebody steering the ship.
Or are you talking about literally just the building? Because frankly there are a lot of working class people who don’t actually need to be in the building at all and nothing would change if they weren’t there.
Such as?
Coordinating a plan and orchestrating the various parts of the organization towards it. Listen I prefer janitors to CEOs, but I’ve had some really bad executives and I understand that worker owned coops often have management and executives for a reason
The CEO… sorry, ALL the management should answer to the workers first. That or pull the work by themselves without the workers.
Fully agree, though I’m a syndicalist so if course I think that
deleted by creator
Middle class is a subgroup of the working class, since working class is a description of one’s relationship with labor.
Unless you’re talking about petty booj small business owners.
There are rarely working class jobs that would benefit from not being present. There are jobs that can have machines replace them or who are necessary by reason of process inefficiency or even by nature of the individual worker.
But also why do you think I’m taking any stance otherwise? I said that a ceo who answers to the workers can provide benefits to the organization. I didn’t imply we didn’t need janitors. I didn’t say anything about the boots on the ground labor except that I generally happen to like janitors more than executives, which I stand firmly by.
Edit: oh you may not have recognized I’m a different person. I didn’t agree with the whole of the comment of the person you replied to
Sorry, comment withdrawn
deleted by creator
CEOs would literally refuse to come to work if their offices weren’t clean.
The real levels of management knows this which is why unions work otherwise they just fire everyone.
The only person who actually thinks the CEO contributes anything is the CEO themselves. Everyone else knows they’re completely superfluous. Which is why CEOs will be one of the first jobs to get automated because it’s actually easier to automate that than it is to automate the workforce because they actually do complicated stuff.
It depends on the Janitor and CEO in question
I’ve known some nice hardworking nice dedicated janitors.
I’ve known some punks that got there by being miserable to everyone around them.
Come to think of it, the same two conditions apply to various CEO’s I know as well :)
The main difference was probably who their dads were.
How dare you to suggest not all CEOs are exactly the same. Do you have any idea how difficult concept that is to fit into my black and white worldview?
Not all CEOs are the same. All CEOs are less necessary than janitors.
It’s almost like the world isn’t in black and white, just endless shades of grey
😛🥾
The janitor sees what’s in everyone’s rubbish bins. That motherfucker knows things.
He does not understand why I use sugar free sweetener in my coffee to cut down on sugar but eat dangerous amounts of normal sugar black jellybeans. Neither do I.
Try drinking your coffee without sugar and milk. Might take a few weeks, but at some point you will start hating coffee with sugar and start enjoying the real taste of coffee.
(Then you’ll find out how perfect black unsweetened coffee fits to milk chocolate and gain 20kg.)
Or hating coffee. Then return to water
Sorry my friend, but I drink instant coffee. It’s going to taste shit no matter how I have it.
You don’t have to live that way.
It’s too late for me, br¤ther, but you can still save yourself!
Get a handheld milk frother to mix your instant coffee to improve your instant coffee game. (You don’t have to use the Nestle stuff, any good tasting instant coffee is alright.)
I actually enjoy instant coffee, but I use this crazy invention. Sadly it is not made anymore.
Tbh though, I prefer the French press, the Moka pot, the Cezve or the portafilter espresso. But if I am lazy, I actually prefer well prepared instant coffee over fully automatic coffee machines or filter coffee and you can hunt me with this Nespresso shit. Maybe I am weird.
Every time I feel overworked I think about how many additional employees my boss’s excessive salary could pay for.
It’s really fun if you do non-finance work at a finance place.
You’ve got the internal accountants trying to deny a request for $500 a year for a piece of business critical tech/software that you need to support the people who swing around half a mil in investments like it’s nothing.
I really shouldn’t complain. I’m paid quite well for what I do and I have a shit ton of flexibility. But there’s a lot of times that the absurdity is so thick it could be cut with a knife.
The janitor makes sure the building is clean and smells okay and that the toilets don’t look like they’re in a sewer rather than just connected to it.
The CEO… makes themselves richer. Even if the company goes under.
A janitor knows how to clean up a mess.
Listen, every time you work with say 10 or 20 people, people start to disorganize. You can have a Fishing Club or organize a LAN party and it’ll probably happen. And it becomes kind of obvious that it’d be good to have a person that would have general overview of the thing and they’ll focus to keep the thing on the track, resolve conflicts etc. You want to call that person a leader, boss, cheff, CEO, captain, whatever, but at certain group size it becomes kind of necessary.
This person needs certain skills to be good at it. Is it more complicated than janitor? Probably yes. Should you respect them more than a janitor? No. Should this person have astronomical sallary? No. Should you guilotine this person? No.
Nobody is complaining about the concept of leadership, it’s that the CEO is responsible to the shareholders, not the workers.
Nor to the customers
Without a competent CEO there’s no workers to be responsible of
You’re missing the point.
A CEO’s competency is measured by how they raise value for the shareholders. This means increasing the rate of exploitation; getting more out of the workers while giving them less.
That is extremely naive and narrow view of the job of a CEO.
Which part are you having trouble with?
Shareholders elect a CEO based on expected effect on dividends and share prices (for spherical capitalists in a vacuum, in reality class consciousness, nepotism, etc play into it)
Profit is a function of revenue minus expenses (such as wages); to increase this, you can either get more out of the labor you’re buying or buy that labor at a lower price.
I’m sure you might be able to find a “better” CEO who fails to prioritize profit at the expense of the owners, but capitalists who only pick losers get out competed by more efficient ones.
A manager is a role precisely like that of a janitor and should get the same respect.
They both keep the workplace clean and operational. They don’t actually make the business any money, but are both necessary for ideal operations.
However, only one of them has delusions of grandeur that they’re irreplaceable and ilis generally willing to maim or kill people indirectly to better their personal station. And it isn’t the Janitor.
Sir, this is Lemmy.
I know, I know and I know Lemmy’s history with far-left and I know this is memes community. But everytime I see such oversimplified thing it becomes kind of scarry to me. I mean the worst human attrocities in the history started with oversimplified “this group of people = BAD! Even worse, they’re daemons! Kill them!”. So I’m just trynig to calm things down and bring some ballance to the force
I don’t disagree.
Lemmy makes me feel like a centrist despite being much more of a democratic socialist on the issues.
But it’s a battle I try not to fight here since people are extremely intolerant to opinions they disagree with, much more so than Reddit was. I haven’t seen a single nuanced conversation about anything deeper than “how is your day going” since joining up with this place.
The fact that even my most heavily downvoted comments usually have some upvotes too tells me that I’m not shouting into a void. If me trying to make sense of things out in the public makes even one person reconsider their position then I see that as a success. The mobbing and ad-hominem attacks haven’t ever made me change my mind about anything so it’s just wasted time on their part. It’s also a good way to lure out the meanest commentors so that I can block them.
My days in Reddit (and by extension, Lemmy) pulls me over from the left side. I remember when r/LSC still seems profound to me.
I’m only here now for funny memes with hierarchical comments.
democratic socialist on the issues
Are you actually a democratic socialist, like Hugo Chavez and Evo Morales? Or are you a social democrat, whose political project consists of begging the capitalist class for more crumbs instead of taking power from them.
Because I never see the former complain about tankies or people going too far left, since we have the same goal, whereas the former become reactionaries the moment anything threatens the structure of capitalism and imperialism.
I am a guy who said he isn’t fighting these battles on lemmy. Smh.
Lefty lemmy, righty reddit
Nobody is questioning leadership, but CEOs ain’t there to lead, they are there for the bottom line.
The CEO is there to do what the board wants, and the board points the company in the direction the shareholders want.
The catch is that all three of these groups have a ton of overlap and all they care about is money.
Yes, but what happens when you have fifteen of these groups? You need a person with the general overview of those groups.
And how about fifteen of those level 2 groups… does the person over those groups have any clue what is done on the actual work level? Should they be guillotined for claiming that without them nothing would be done and therefore they need as much as the cumulative pay under them? (Hint:Yes)
Whom then do I guillotine?
I didnt sharpen this bad boy for nothing.
Fascists
Look, all I’m gonna say is I know which job is easier.
It’s CEO, isn’t it?
9 times outta 10, I am the janitor so of course I respect myself more.
Ofc I respect the janitor more, they provide an actual service, however CEOs are also just workers like the janitor and the rest of us, it’s just that they are paid a tiny bit more to police us, keep in line, and protect the owner class. So yes, still very much in the guillotine conga line.
Why do you keep spelling janitor like progenitor?
Rofl, wtf. Genitor isn’t even that close to janitor.
As to how, I’m having a bit of trouble lately using open sauce HeliBoard (forked from OpenBoard) with closed sauce gesture typing library (‘degoogled’). And not wearing glasses for a bit I guess. All hail the genitor class I guess.
I edited my previous post now, thx.
💯
A moment of silence for our brothers still wasting their lives posting garbage motivational quotes on social media.
Without the CEO neither the janitor or I would have a job
Without you and the janitor the CEO would have no surplus value to steal.
Have your janitor and your CEO take 2 months off and see who’s job is more important
Probably the CEO
Yeah, you’ll be cool with dirty floors, toilets and piles of trash as long as the stock holders are happy hahaha.
At least id have a job lol
If you’re going to make the “capitalists create jobs” argument, at least make it properly. The CEO isn’t the owner nor the investor.
As for the argument you want to make, if there weren’t capitalist investors, we would have a different method to allocate resources and create jobs.
Sure the janitor could have a job. Nationalized custodial jobs could definitely be a thing. Imagine every custodian having good-quality federal government healthcare plans.
CEO, not so much.
