[Zatoichi]

Well, closing or not operating on most/all major holidays could help. In every job I've ever worked except one they were all days the businesses always lost money. The cost of running the place was never covered, nor was the cost of paying employees. Simply not being open on those days cuts down on your overhead costs. On top of that it raises employee morale because those are all days that most employees desire to have off.

Increasing morale reaps long term gains. Happier employees tend to work harder, faster, produce higher quality work, and do extra things for no additional pay. They are less likely to quit, which saves on the cost of hiring people to replace them, and train and bring those new people up to speed. Happier employees are also more likely to work harder to ensure that the customer is happy and satisfied with your company's product/service. Happier customers are far more likely to repeat business with your company and will advertise your business/product by word of mouth, which is essentially free. And it makes you more likely to get better reviews in newpapers, magazines, and other news medias. These things eventually bring in more business, which will eventually raise your stock.

Now I'm not saying that the only thing you should do is close on holidays and you'll be all set. But I'm sure that many other low cost or cost free ideas can be thought of to raise employee morale which will eventually reap you more benefits in the end.

[J m HofMarN]

Profit Sharing. While I've got a lot of non-capitalist solutions to this issue, profit sharing is one that any capitalist short of an Objectivist or pure Laisez Faire lunatic would endorse, and that they often will hold up as a shield against socialism. The argument there goes that, in a socialist country, a worker is guaranteed a basic living wage no matter what along with food and healthcare, and therefore has no stake in his success, whereas in capitalism positive production can be better rewarded. The problem with that is that, if you look at the US economy in the past 10 years, production has gone up yearly while net income for workers has been actually dropping, an inverse correlation instead of a positive, or parallel one. Curious.

[civilian_number_two]

Ok here it is: if labour costs remain the same, and if delivery costs remain the same, and if operating efficiency has to become the same, then the only way to cut costs is in management. Management hates the idea of collective bargaining because if it can't keep messing with the workers, it has to cut from its own number.

All anti-labour rhetoric derives from the same source, a fear of losing money for management.

Here's another question: in any labour job you have ever worked, how much work would be lost if the management didn't show up? I will answer that one right away: little to none. Labour knows the work, and management cannot do it. How much work would get done if the labour didn't show up? Answer: all of it.

This post has been edited by civilian_number_two: 01 November 2011 - 01:08 AM