Do you think that these major share holders would want Starbucks to fail???? They would do anything to rescue it, because they have invested hundreds of millions of dollars.
Capital Research and Management Company 21,384,200 5.35 $1,073,059,156 10-Feb-05
TCW Group, Inc. (The) 20,229,790 5.06 $1,015,130,862 10-Feb-05
Jennison Associates LLC 13,551,056 3.39 $679,991,990 10-Feb-05
Barclays Bank Plc 13,193,092 3.3 $662,029,356 10-Feb-05
FMR Corporation (Fidelity Management & Research Corp) 12,481,860 3.12 $626,339,734 10-Feb-05
Sands Capital Management, Inc. 11,695,886 2.92 $586,899,559 10-Feb-05
State Street Corporation 10,886,095 2.72 $546,264,247 10-Feb-05
Axa 10,639,293 2.66 $533,879,722 10-Feb-05
Vanguard Group, Inc. (The) 8,581,236 2.15 $430,606,422 10-Feb-05
Northern Trust Corporation 6,561,758 1.64 $329,269,016 10-Feb-05
Starbucks is OK. Unfortunately, we are experiencing something similar to the low tide of the ocean. But the water will come back for sure!!!! Those millions of clients drinking their Starbucks coffees today (including me) will make sure Starbucks will live and prosper.
One nice thing about ignore though, is that there are so many messages per day now that once you put a couple dozen of the worst bashers in the bin, the number of messages gets cut down severly and it is easier to read through them.
Fire, I'm with you on that. Those types are whiners and complainers usually. If you get hired on in a manager position on salary, you are no longer an employee. You are management, and that means longer hours and more responsibility. That's the way it is. If you don't know that often you will work more than the 40 hour standard, then you have a loose wheel on your wagon and need to stay hourly.
Some can't cut the mustard, and for them, they won't last long.
You can still get to the Ignore List and edit it manually. Once you are logged in, click on "Options" (Upper right hand corcer above the "Help" button) and add baloneyboy's ID manually....
BTW - give up on Whacko... PLEASE!
spaticuss, if you walk, talk and act like an old fart---
then you are most likely an old fart. Stop being so
liberal pc and acting like people don't drop in senility. Your defense sounds like, "you do protest
too much." FF call was right on. Your reply was dismal to say the least.
You are sooo...right, FF. Unions start out touting a
plus for employees yet soon turn into a power hungry organizations. Have been in 3, and each
one slowly crept into corruption. 1. they took their
power and melded it into a political weapon; such
as union supports so and so candidate--union members be dammed. 2. Dues were taken straightaway from paychecks--no dallying around
here. 3. union meetings were controlled by 'plants'
who shouted down any oppostion to union head raises and expenses such as cars etc., 4. When
union elections occurred the 'fighting' became so
dirty that physical fear was a reality. Does this sound in any way like "power corrupts?"
pays due......I meant pay dues........
It is interesting to see what the Florida case does. Obviously it had quite a impact on what SBUX does in CA. It changed everything for them as to managerial and OT from what I read. I guess for Peet's too? CA is a horse of a different color.....the land of fruits and nuts for sure......and not employer friendly. SBUX has well over 500 locations in that state. A huge market for them in the US as it is for Peet's as to company stores.
Wakem said (on the subject of companies fearing unions) > "No, I understand their fear, but the goal should be not to fight the idea of one, but to make sure you give no reason for good loyal employees to want to pays due and join one. Most companies today, larger ones, have the routine reviews and pay raises."
Well put, Wakem. The employment contract seems most often to be a tug of war between employee greediness and employer stinginess. Since SBUX has grown so large, the folks who contributed to this growth either are being compensated relatively well or need to demand that they be compensated well. Sometimes an employee votes with his feet and finds greener pastures (or not). Sometimes an employee goes head to head with an employer and negotiates a better position (or not).
I'll have to admit, as a short fan it would be interesting to see the employee wages rise and take a bite out of the "E" from the P/E equation, although that might not be the just thing to do. On the other hand, the longs seem to be automatically choosing the old "those-guys-should-just-be-happy-they-have-a-job" position as they don't need any more bad news for the stock on top of the recent implosion and the upcoming expensing of options, and that may also not be just.
SBUX will have their day in (or out of) court on this one.
In the end, "fair" and "just" are words in the dictionary, and wage numbers are assigned to best meet their meanings based upon overall economic conditions, the actions of those involved on the paying and receiving ends, the various laws of the lands, and possibly a little luck from time to time as well.
No, I understand their fear, but the goal should be not to fight the idea of one, but to make sure you give no reason for good loyal employees to want to pays due and join one. Most companies today, larger ones, have the routine reviews and pay raises. Of course Wal Mart is undergoing hell as to claims they give males more opportunities for promotion than females. It's litigation that is very expensive. Even without the union's representation, Wal Mart staff has that avenue for justice. Just like Wal Mart, Starbucks will always have an opportunity for a day in court. Usually they just squash it as best they can and settle and pay the piper.