undefined | Better HN

0 pointslostlogin2y ago0 comments

You look at these crappy companies and the problem you see is unionised staff?

Have you seen the dividends and bonuses at Thames Water, or read the article posted here?

0 comments

Thames Water's CEO has a $1.5 million pay package which is lower than CEOs of corporations of the same size. The funding for public unions in the UK is $233 billion. Great comparison there.

lostloginOP2y ago

> The funding for public unions in the UK is $233 billion

That’s a pretty amazing figure, how was that calculated?

Are you seriously arguing that that the Thames Water CEO was underpaid? They have been mismanaged extraordinarily. Their debts, losses, costs, service and environment records are so poor that nationalisation is being discussed. They have been paying dividends and bonuses throughout.

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2023/jul/10/thames-wate...

1 more reply

arethuza2y ago

CEOs of corporations of the same size quite often have to find and retain customers in competitive markets - which is hardly the case with Thames Water?

dffdsa4322y ago

What is your point? $1.5 million is used to attract a CEO who can manage a large corporation. That is less than many players on second tier English clubs who are riding the pine. That is a rounding error when considering $233 billion paid to unions.

rightbyte2y ago

CEOs have almost no competitive pressure. They are mostly recruited within the upper class.

Paying more won't net you a better one.

1 more reply

DharmaPolice2y ago

"Paid to unions"? Do you mean paid to staff who might be members of unions? And if so why you are comparing money paid to a specific company to money paid to union members across the entire public sector?

youngtaff2y ago

As you were asked before where are the unions paid $233bn?

If the RMT had that amount of money I’ve no doubt Mick Lynch would be using it to buy the railways

smcl2y ago

I don't think you want to point at English football clubs if we're talking about sensible compensation, not least since one of the issues highlighted in the article are the debt load of these English and Welsh water companies.

ClumsyPilot2y ago

What is this number of $233 billion, it sounds preposterous.

Is that the combined salaries of all union members?

lifeonlars2y ago

The 'funding for public unions' is 7% of the economy?

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse

0 comments

dffdsa4322y ago

Thames Water's CEO has a $1.5 million pay package which is lower than CEOs of corporations of the same size. The funding for public unions in the UK is $233 billion. Great comparison there.

lostloginOP2y ago

> The funding for public unions in the UK is $233 billion

That’s a pretty amazing figure, how was that calculated?

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2023/jul/10/thames-wate...

1 more reply

arethuza2y ago

CEOs of corporations of the same size quite often have to find and retain customers in competitive markets - which is hardly the case with Thames Water?

dffdsa4322y ago

rightbyte2y ago

CEOs have almost no competitive pressure. They are mostly recruited within the upper class.

Paying more won't net you a better one.

1 more reply

DharmaPolice2y ago

youngtaff2y ago

As you were asked before where are the unions paid $233bn?

If the RMT had that amount of money I’ve no doubt Mick Lynch would be using it to buy the railways

smcl2y ago

ClumsyPilot2y ago

What is this number of $233 billion, it sounds preposterous.

Is that the combined salaries of all union members?

lifeonlars2y ago

The 'funding for public unions' is 7% of the economy?

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse