Multinationals care
even less
I
am going to use The Dow Chemical Company as an example of how and why multinationals
care even less. I am going to use Dow
because first, I worked for Dow for 25 years and, secondly, I know people who
still work for Dow. My intention is not
to imply that Dow is any worse or any better than other multinational
corporations. It's just that I can give
examples based on what I know.
I
began working for The Dow Chemical Company in 1972. Obviously, communication technology wasn't
what it is today. Consequently, although
Dow had/has sites all over the world, it was broken down into divisions. For example, I worked for Dow Chemical's
Eastern Division site in Connecticut.
I'm not certain whether the CEO ever visited our modest Connecticut
site, but I do know that the Eastern Division Manager visited our site quite
frequently. It was an honor for us to
see this manager up close and personal during those visits and we got to ask
him questions, face to face. Not only
did we get the idea that he was listening to us, but it was obvious that he
was. We met with him and we brainstormed
ideas to improve our plants and our work processes. Some of those ideas were implemented either
on a local plant/site level or on a division level.
Two
facts should be kept in mind about this period of time.
First,
Dow was working hard at shedding unions.
The site at which I was hired in 1972 was still litigating with the
union which had called a wildcat strike in 1971. The union ultimately lost - in the 1980s -
but we employees had settled into the processes that Dow had put into place
following the strike. Many of these
processes were actually employee friendly and many of us workers were naive enough
to question what it was about Dow that the unions didn't like.
Also,
the income ratio between the CEO and those of us who actually made the products
which made the profits was about 42-1.
We didn't even give that ratio a second thought. After all, the CEO had the responsibility to
make profits, keep all of the production facilities in top running condition
and to ensure that the employees were paid well for their efforts. At that time the CEO and his staffs did a
fine job of meeting those responsibilities.
Ronald Reagan was elected president in 1980. Very shortly after that election, Reagan sent a message to the workers of America. The message was that our jobs were incidental to the main goal of making money for shareholders - the top shareholders. He manifested this message by unilaterally firing the striking Air Traffic Controllers and their union. Dow, like most large multinational "American based" corporations, started to see how far that "brave" move by Reagan diminished the importance of the worker and the workers' surroundings.
It was at that time that workers' compensation began to flat
line while income for the CEO and his or her top staff began to skyrocket. By the time Dow "delayered" me (Orwell was a
genius) in 1997, the site at which I worked, which had 500 employees when I
began working there, had 130. The CEO to
worker ratio had gone from 42-1 to over 400-1.
Many of the products that Dow produced began to be produced in nations
in which people were paid anywhere from $.50 per hour to $2 an hour. Dow had never promised these people living
wages or benefits and felt no need to open that can of compensation. However, Dow, like many "American" companies,
was beginning to find "success" in mergers and acquisitions.
In
'72, the year I began at Dow, not only did we hear from our CEO and other
people at the top of the Dow food chain, but the message was that we existed
for the customer. The message was, if we
were falling behind a competitor, we needed to put more effort into improving
the quality of our product. Hard as it
is to believe, Dow even lowered the price of some of those products, even after
the quality was improved. We were told
that this was how Dow was going to become more successful.
Today,
by way of mergers and acquisitions, Dow's philosophy seems to be similar to
that of other companies. It's a sort of
"if you can't beat "em, buy "em" philosophy.
And, in truth, this is one way to stay "competitive". On the one hand, Dow has bought up
competitors while, on the other hand, it has sold most of the businesses it
owned in 1972. It owns very few
businesses in The FUSA which still produce products and which pay workers a
living wage. Most of the jobs once done
by Dow Chemical employees at these sites are now negotiated out to contractors.
The
day to day production technicians that work at these sites still make what
would be considered a living wage, in spite of the fact that their wages have
remained flat for thirty or so years. They've
continued to receive raises, but many of the raises aren't even cost of living raises.
Meanwhile,
Andrew Liveris, CEO of what's left of Dow Chemical, pulled in $19,274,624 in
2011. While the few American
workers' wages have remained flat and while Liveris, who, by the way, is an
Australian, and other CEOs, have attended to the rest of their "labor
situations" by sending that labor to slave labor nations, Liveris has pulled in
over $19 million.
We
have been told that, when a company's profits are in the billions of dollars,
$19 million is but a drop in the bucket.
If that is the case, what "American" global corporations were paying
American workers before sending those workers' jobs to slave labor nations must
have been a drop in the ocean. How could
$30.00 an hour times however many workers these corporations had in The FUSA
hurt competition if $9,134.62 per hour doesn't hurt competition. That's $19 million divided by 52 divided by
40. That's assuming that the CEO works a
forty hour week. I would be surprised if
the CEO worked a forty hour month.
Of
course, with all global corporations, we concentrate on the CEOs compensations. So, of the billions of dollars the company
makes, $19 million doesn't seem like a lot, I guess. I see it differently.
However, the CEO of the corporation isn't the only absurdly compensated officer.
William
Weideman, Dow's CFO, pulled in $7,356,087 in
total compensation.
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).
