How to Bootstrap a Bossless Organization in 3 Easy Steps. French Engineers and Entrepreneurship: It’s Complicated — Welcome to TheFamily. Rémunérations: les actionnaires enragent, les patrons anglo-saxons engrangent. La rébellion vient parfois des endroits les plus inattendus : en l’occurrence, du monde feutré des assemblées générales (AG).
Depuis deux mois au Royaume-Uni, AG après AG, les grands patrons britanniques se retrouvent cloués au pilori par leurs propres actionnaires. En cause : leurs salaires, sans cesse plus élevés, qui n’ont souvent pas grand-chose à voir avec leurs performances. Le premier mis en cause a été Bob Dudley, le 14 avril. Le directeur général de BP a perçu 17 millions d’euros l’an dernier, tandis que l’entreprise affichait les pires pertes de son histoire. Les actionnaires se sont révoltés, rejetant à 59 % sa rémunération. Le vote n’étant que consultatif, M. 148 fois le salaire moyen de ses employés « Cette rémunération paie la performance de long terme sur plus de trente ans », a-t-il justifié, dans une interview donnée à la BBC.
Aussi spectaculaire soit-elle, la rébellion des actionnaires n’est pas vraiment nouvelle. Endiguer le phénomène. Raising the Floor: How a Universal Basic Income Can Renew Our Economy and Rebuild the American Dream: Andy Stern, Lee Kravitz: 9781610396257: Amazon.com: Books. UNITED STATES: Prominent Trade Unionist to Publish Book on Basic Income. Andy Stern, the former President of the Service Employees International Union (SEIU) and a major voice on unions in America, will publish a book on June 14, 2016, titled Raising the Floor: How a Universal Basic Income Can Renew Our Economy and Rebuild the American Dream. Stern’s book will look at the future relationship of labor markets and technology through interviews with economists, futurists, labor leaders, CEOs, investment bankers, entrepreneurs, and political leaders. Stern believes the foundation for economic prosperity for all Americans starts with a universal basic income, and while the idea may not be mainstream yet, he hopes to create a movement that forces the political establishment to take action on the issue.
This will not be Stern’s first book. A Country That Works called for unions to be dominant vehicles in promoting social reforms and was successful enough to land Stern an appearance on The Colbert Report in 2006 to promote the book. Innovation is overvalued. Maintenance often matters more | Aeon Essays. Innovation is a dominant ideology of our era, embraced in America by Silicon Valley, Wall Street, and the Washington DC political elite. As the pursuit of innovation has inspired technologists and capitalists, it has also provoked critics who suspect that the peddlers of innovation radically overvalue innovation. What happens after innovation, they argue, is more important. Maintenance and repair, the building of infrastructures, the mundane labour that goes into sustaining functioning and efficient infrastructures, simply has more impact on people’s daily lives than the vast majority of technological innovations.
The fates of nations on opposing sides of the Iron Curtain illustrate good reasons that led to the rise of innovation as a buzzword and organising concept. Over the course of the 20th century, open societies that celebrated diversity, novelty, and progress performed better than closed societies that defended uniformity and order. Why do we work so hard? | 1843. When I was young, there was nothing so bad as being asked to work.
Now I find it hard to conjure up that feeling, but I see it in my five-year-old daughter. “Can I please have some water, daddy?” “You can get it yourself, you’re a big girl.” That was me when I was young, rolling on the ground in agony on being asked to clean my room. As a child, I wonderingly observed the hours my father worked. My father had his own accounting firm in Raleigh, North Carolina. At 37, I see my father’s routine with different eyes. Not all work, of course. What is less clear to me, and to so many of my peers, is whether we should do so much of it. Work, in this context, means active, billable labour. When John Maynard Keynes mused in 1930 that, a century hence, society might be so rich that the hours worked by each person could be cut to ten or 15 a week, he was not hallucinating, just extrapolating.
Karl Marx had a different view: that being occupied by good work was living well. Why?