Display:
That's usually called profit sharing, and it's something companies like to avoid at all costs. Except among upper management, who - obviously - are the only ones who actually earn their share.

I think if profit sharing were more common, the world would be a better place for everyone. If profits go down, everyone is affected personally and to an extent everyone is in the same boat.

The current system of 'salaries' seems odd. The difference is between earning a fixed amount which can drop to zero without notice, or earning a variable amount that will offers substantial savings potential when things go well to offset lower income when things go badly. As well as direct investment in company performance.

But this assumes an inclusive rather than an adversarial and exploitative relationship between owners and employees. Smaller companies sometimes have that. Larger companies like to pretend they do, but often don't.

by ThatBritGuy (thatbritguy (at) googlemail.com) on Tue Mar 7th, 2006 at 06:36:44 AM EST
[ Parent ]
But in the American system, employees aren't very enthusiastic about profit sharing--except for sales people who like the "thrill of the chase." Most people would rather have a fixed salary (with perhaps a small profit-related bonus) than variable.

In fact, I've worked in organizations where profit sharing time was extremely damaging to morale because everybody got the same share--even the groups that lost money.

by asdf on Tue Mar 7th, 2006 at 11:21:40 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Display:
Login
. Make a new account
. Reset password
Occasional Series