6 ms·
This is an odd precedent to set, and I can only imagine it leads to US companies being more reluctant to setup EU officers.
by _dujt 3y ago
This is an odd precedent to set, and I can only imagine it leads to US companies being more reluctant to setup EU officers.
- libertine 3y agoEh, I guess the question is: Is this the type of company you want around your people? Where top executives make miscalculations, and receive great bonuses even if they mess up, to then offload their bad decisions on a workforce that will be at the hands of the state once unemployed, with all the societal issues that generate from that. Why should the workers, and the state, get the sht handed to them, while the top executives and the shareholders get all the good stuff? Maybe they should pursue a different type of working agreement for risky projects and look for contractors, not employees. Or maybe lay off the executive team and bring in ones who make better decisions?
- SuperNinKenDo 3y agoI don't think you understand how uninterested Europeans are in having a bunch of American companies set up shop and violate local labour laws and norms with impunity.
- Ancalagon 3y agoMaybe the US should follow the EU
- lebean 3y agoNah, layoffs are good. Less wasted capital.
- yellowapple 3y agoHere bud, you dropped this: /s