After reading the article, the Panera guy is actually saying it doesn’t make sense to expect store level employees to care about shareholders and that execs should recognize that most employees are just trying to make enough money for themselves.
Not saying he is better/worse than other CEOs, but the article title is misleading in that he is speaking out against other CEOs that have this opinion.
So… We’re supposed to like the shareholders who keep expecting unrealistic growth forever and voting to pay the greedy CEOs more and more while ensuring maximum efficiency by “streamlining” the business, paying the least possible to any non-C-level and automating anyone they can out of a job?
Sorry for the run-on sentence, but give me a break.
Well the clickbait certainly worked. Here is the actual article, and this is what the CEO has to say.
No employee ever wakes up and says, ‘I’m so excited. I made another penny a share today for Panera’s shareholders.’ Nobody cares. You don’t care whether your CEO comes or goes.
I don’t know whether he is a good or a bad CEO, but this article is just rage baiting and you all fell for it.
I did, too. Its pretty telling of the social climate and the general feeling towards executives and wealthy people. Its almost like most people are suffering and to most of us it feels like nothing is being done.
I really feel that nothing is changing because the people that have been in power for many decades set up a system the works really really well for them. Not you, not me but them.
Well, if these people had even an ounce of self-awareness, they’d realize that there’s no system that works well for them and only them and no one else that is sustainable. That’s how people lose their heads. So, to answer your question, they would and should change it because, if they don’t, their power doesn’t last.
The actual quote isn’t as bad as the headline, at least
“No employee ever wakes up and says, ‘I’m so excited. I made another penny a share today for Panera’s shareholders,’” Shaich told Business Insider in an interview. “Nobody cares. You don’t care whether your CEO comes or goes.”
Doesn’t seem like he’s trying to imply you’re supposed to care
Well firstly Mr. Founder, your employees mostly AREN'T SHAREHOLDERS! Why would they care about other people's profits? They work at Panera, not as part of some start-up. Their individual work isn't going to meaningfully impact on whether or not Panera closes their stores and they lose their jobs. So why should they give a shit? Do YOU care about how viable their wages are? Maybe you should make all your employees shareholders and they've have some incentive to want the stock to rise?
“Panera Bread founder not motivated to share profits with employees is mystified by the fact that employees aren’t motivated to make and share profits for other people.”
This guy’s a CEO, a capitalist and founder of a major brand and corporation. He’s fully aware of, practices and preaches the “virtues” of profit-driven capitalism. Capitalism is, at it’s most basic level, the philosophy of “what’s in it for me”? Why do they think that the same thing is not true for their employees?
People can and do perform work that is not profit/money motivated. People work for passion, for community, for family, for creativity, etc. They generally do not perform such works at a fucking Panera Bread. And they sure as shit do not do it to further line the pockets of their fucking shareholders.
Because we can’t afford shit ourselves. I can’t wait til these idiots tip the scale so fucken far it makes no sense to work. Then they’ll piss and moan like the fucken asshats they are that we are just robbing them. Well fucken good, you’ve been robbing us for 50 years.
It's a problem of motivation, all right? Now if I work my ass off and Initech ships a few extra units, I don't see another dime; so where's the motivation?
Yup, literally just found out we’re RTOing in February last week. As of this morning, my boss didn’t have any answers to many very basic questions. How we’re supposed to collaborate in office when our teams currently occupy half a dozen states and 3± countries? What are the long term expectations for those too remote to come into an office, move your family or get fired? What is going to happen with the jobs of those who don’t even live in or near the US, get a visa and move your family or get fired? Won’t we have the constant issue with in-person conversations and brain storming leaving non-local team members out of the loop? Are we who were hired in as remote employees, who were told to expect to remain remote, who are now being asked to dramatically change the terms of our employment in very significantly negative terms, who will suddenly have additional costs to time, travel, child care, office clothing purchase and maintenance, food, etc., just expected to eat those costs and negative terms without any additional compensation or benefits? We’ve all had about 5 days to come to terms with this news, and as of today, apparently, it’s time to “stop complaining” per my boss.
I’m going to stop complaining all the way to interviewing with other employers who are remaining remote and, judging by the job listings, getting a huge pay raise at the same time, so…
At the moment, I’m sitting right and watching because I’ve already kicked the hornets nest quite a bit both by publicly asking management very tough questions and by suggesting to my team that if enough of us don’t show up there isn’t much they can do about it.
Yeah, more than a few have been pushing back pretty hard. I’ve seen that sentiment floated in one of the meetings recently, so if we are at the same company, I might have a guess as to who you are, but I’ll keep that to myself for obvious reasons. I’ve been trying not to give them a reason to fire me by doing or saying anything that could be seen as insubordination or something like that. I don’t want to be fired without another position lined up and be disqualified from unemployment. But I’m pretty sure if they were to fire any of us for simply not returning to the office, or coercing us to quit or lose benefits or something, I’m pretty sure we’d still qualify for unemployment. If the reason for termination was due to a negative change in the terms of employment that wasn’t agreed upon at hiring, I believe that’s not disqualifying. Just a thought.
I have some family obligations that make needing to go to office, especially this Spring, a big problem. I might be able to do it for a little while, but it’s not worth sticking around anymore. They’re not doing anything to compensate us at all for these new costs they’re placing on us. And all for a policy change they can’t even reasonably justify. I had been pretty happy to stick with them for the foreseeable future, even at a lower pay rate than I could get elsewhere, just for the stability and flexibility I’ve had. But they’re pulling that rug out from underneath me now, so… I’m out ASAP.
This has always been the way I think about it but it has been pretty satisfying watching most others come around over the last decade or so. Why would I want to work extra hard so someone else can make more money?
Historically companies have tried to incentivize workers to perform better through bonuses, profit sharing, extra time off, things like that, but now those things are either nonexistent or so meager that they might as well be. I’m not going to work an extra 10 hours every week just so I can get $500 at the end of the year. That’s not worth the effort. Boss man can call it quiet quitting and try to shame me for it all he wants but it’s not going to change anything.
Add comment