TheConnection Walls
29 walls

   Main Page
The Lobby
   
    Reload Wall
    Admin Photos
    Members Photos

    Login
 

     Blessings
     Coffee Klatch
     Comments
Suggestions
     Computers
&Tech Issues
     Crafts
     Dogs, Cats
& Critters
     Events
     Faith
     Gardening &
Landscaping
     Health & Diet
     Household Hints
     Jokes
     Movies & Reviews
     Music
     Nostalgia
     Pet Peeves
     Photography
     Politics
     The Range
2nd Amendment
     Recipes
     The Road
Automobilia
     Shopper's Beware
Caveat Emptor
     Sports
     Suggested Reading
     Suggested Viewing/Listening
     Travel
     Veterans' Page
& Militaria
     Weird
But True

Members Photos
3 out of 2170
see all

   

   

   






Main Page
The Lobby


  Lucianne.com



   Ynaught  Who knew there was so much money in working for a union?
   November 18 at 15:51 EST .

   4 people like this.



   Safetydude  Seven VP's ?
November 18 at 16:53 EST .

  5 people like this.



   Bob913  Why they outta but Hostess as they know how to run the union with very high salaries for all.
November 18 at 17:26 EST .

  5 people like this.



   Balogreene  Safetydude the group I work with has 3 managers, 2 leads, 4 full timers, 4 part timers. I've worked with an executive Vice President, Vice President, Senior Director, Director, 6 managers, 1analyst, and 1 production person on a different project. That's how most larger businesses work, or at least most I've worked for in the last 40 years.
November 18 at 18:33 EST .

  3 people like this.



   Bob913  They only have 58 people running the union yet 10 are management and upper management at that. Padded like those no show jobs say at Chicago hospitals like obamas wife had.
November 18 at 18:44 EST .

  4 people like this.



   Balogreene  Bob, according to most companies I've worked for, the Union is bottom-heavy. If you haven't worked for a large company, you have no idea how bad it is.
November 18 at 20:22 EST .

  6 people like this.



   Safetydude  Balogreen,
Bottom-heavy ? Does that mean that the rank and file is the problem ? They won't listen to their union management who, at six figure salaries, are prepared to make any compromise so long as they can maintain their lifestiles ?
As I understand the Hostess shut-down it was a single group of union members who refused to go along with the rest of the employees.
Remember Eastern Airlines?
To me 'bottom heavy' is desirable; the more people we have working, the better the wealthy will do and the more Obama can tax them.
If it weren't for the grunts paying their dues every paycheck the union's would be gone and every state would be a 'free to work' state. So, since union management is only concerned about their job security nothing will change 'till the grunts fire their unions, quit paying the dues, and start looking after themselves.
That's one, of many, answers to our lack of job growth.
November 18 at 21:25 EST .

  3 people like this.



   Pickle1  We had 8 in the family. One matched the dog in the picture. They love sitting on you and/or the sofa or stretching out. They also love hugs and kisses.
November 18 at 22:39 EST .

  5 people like this.



   Bob913  Up is not down... when you have 1 in 6 people as VP's or above that is top heavy. BTW I work at a very large company that employs approx 195,000 worldwide. No way do they have 32,500 vp's or above.

The last company I worked at prior had 1 supervisor per 15 people.
November 18 at 23:29 EST .

  2 people like this.