Leica employees & Stephen K Lee

So, do those who only buy used, have to do our civic duty and "buy something new in Leica" this year?

I'm sure that will be a convincing argument to buy a new M9.

Now, I only need to scrape together about $5K more.

:)

Vick
 
There are other execs that only take $1 in salary and donate the rest of their compensation (including stocks) to foundations.

I'm not looking at it as a 'civic duty' but I'd really like an X1 for purely selfish reasons. :)
 
parsec1 said:
Then its the Illuminati and 'the new order' to come. The peasants( us) have been accumilating too much power from a financial free for all and must be brought down a few pegs to learn who our 'Masters' really are...... So I'm told !
Click to expand...

Its the New Age Servitude, which means you either get raped at work (fired, made redundant), through taxation, or at the gas pumps. This epoch will go down as another feudalistic model.
 
35mmdelux said:
Its the New Age Servitude, which means you either get raped at work (fired, made redundant), through taxation, or at the gas pumps. This epoch will go down as another feudalistic model.
Click to expand...

You sound as if you have been living in Sweden (or Norway, Finland, Denmark etc.) all your life were income taxes are staggering 40%, tax on petrol 65% (costs about 4 - 5 times as much as in USA) 20% VAT - and so on etc etc.

But you don't. You live in USA with a 'handsome & smiling' 21 - 22% income tax, that soon will not be enough even to cover the interest on you governmental debt. Look out for what is coming! Now you are going to pay for a party that most of you never attended.
 
digitalintrigue said:
There are other execs that only take $1 in salary and donate the rest of their compensation (including stocks) to foundations.

I'm not looking at it as a 'civic duty' but I'd really like an X1 for purely selfish reasons. :)
Click to expand...


I'll grant you that there are those kinds of execs around but the exceptions do not prove a rule. I wish I could afford to do my "civic duty" and get an M9.

Bob
 
IMO, retrenchment does not necessarily mean cutting down expenses and improving cash flow. Outsourcing is more expensive but is advantageous if your product has a seasonal character or does not have a consistent turnover. Besides, it eats up your cash when in places like Korea the mandatory restructuring cost per person is at least 1 year salary. Leica has been in trouble the last few years maybe because of their arrogance in thinking more of margins than volume. These 2 does not go together unless it's the only product in the world. Organic growth can never be achieved with the pricing structure of Leica, they should start thinking of merger and acquisition. They can produce parallel products like the CL and CLE before for volume and Leica for the selected few who can afford.
 
What Leica management can do is to treat their employees fairly. Or I am no longer a customer. I felt very much that I did my 'civic duty' when I bought my M8. I wanted to help one of the very few European camera producers that are left.
 
mfunnell said:
Wouldn't that put them at a competitive disadvantage compared to pretty much every other company in the world?

...Mike
Click to expand...

No.

Just take Japanese companies and camera producers. They are legendary for treating their employees fairly. That would be a very easy choice.
 
Olsen said:
What Leica management can do is to treat their employees fairly. Or I am no longer a customer. I felt very much that I did my 'civic duty' when I bought my M8. I wanted to help one of the very few European camera producers that are left.
Click to expand...
A laudable sentiment. But I would prefer if it were applied first to shoes made by child labour in the third world, animal products form countries that were picked as suppliers because animal welfare is not respected as in our part of the world, thus cheap, and many other considerations. Western European workers come a long way down that list in my book. They are well able to speak for themselves.
 
Olsen said:
No.

Just take Japanese companies and camera producers. They are legendary for treating their employees fairly. That would be a very easy choice.
Click to expand...
Perhaps I should confine my cynicism to companies from the English-speaking parts of the world.

And I'm almost certainly reacting to yet another piece of wonderful corporate "HR management" practised on me (travel at no notice; work clacker off for months; save project; thank you!; and BTW you're fired, and we'll pay your outstanding expenses only grudgingly and after months of effort). I have worked for any number of companies that say things like "our employees are our greatest asset" yet behave as if they're the most disposable.

...Mike
 
jaapv said:
A laudable sentiment. But I would prefer if it were applied first to shoes made by child labour in the third world, animal products form countries that were picked as suppliers because animal welfare is not respected as in our part of the world, thus cheap, and many other considerations. Western European workers come a long way down that list in my book. They are well able to speak for themselves.
Click to expand...

But I do! Except for the fact that it is very difficult to find shoes not made under the most appalling circumstances. When it comes to animal wellfare EU is a nightmare. We don't have to import beef, our own is bad enough...

None of these are issues when I am going to buy a camera. Then I choose between highly skilled workers & engineers from either Japan (actually, the highest paid) and Germany.
 
Olsen said:
No.

Just take Japanese companies . . . They are legendary for treating their employees fairly.
Click to expand...

And like most legends, there is apparently only a modest basis in fact. Temporary workers are said to be very poorly treated, and there are lots of them, while the salaryman culture is not what it was: check 'Married to the Company' on http://www.bbc.co.uk/worldservice/people/features/mycentury/wk17.shtml

I don't know much about this (even how true it is overall): perhaps some forum members in Japan could shed further light.

Cheers,

R.
 
Roger Hicks said:
And like most legends, there is apparently only a modest basis in fact. Temporary workers are said to be very poorly treated, and there are lots of them, while the salaryman culture is not what it was: check 'Married to the Company' on http://www.bbc.co.uk/worldservice/people/features/mycentury/wk17.shtml

I don't know much about this (even how true it is overall): perhaps some forum members in Japan could shed further light.

Cheers,

R.
Click to expand...

I don't have RealPlayer. Did they mention any of the camera companies in Japan...? Let me know.
 
johnastovall said:
"fairly" is timing how fast they walk in the halls?
Click to expand...

Tough! Reminds me of the old CEO of Caterpillar, Blackie, who had the escalators removed with faster ones at the head office in Peoria, Ill. Still, I don't see this as unfair treatment of employees. Nor do Japanese nor German companies treat their employers unfairly. Generally. Employment standards are generally good and comparable. - Which is why they are so successful.
 
JSU said:
In 2007 and 2008 more than 25,000 daily newspaper employees in the USA had their jobs closed. I suspect most of them would have gladly taken a cut in pay rather than a total loss of pay.

Since the beginning of 2008 a significant number of newspaper employees in the USA have taken pay cuts, forced furloughs or both.

Leica AG isn't the only company enduring hard times. My hat is off to them for making an effort to persevere and succeed.
Click to expand...

It's a complex situation. Among non-union newspapers, some cuts came without any warning. Some were offered buyouts. And some newspapers simply shut down.

Among union newspapers, there have been two schools of thought with the labor leaders. One says that they'll ride the gravy train until the end. Others have worked with companies to negotiate pay cuts and early retirement or severance packages.

But you're right -- it's been a though road this year.
 
jaapv said:
A laudable sentiment. But I would prefer if it were applied first to shoes made by child labour in the third world, animal products form countries that were picked as suppliers because animal welfare is not respected as in our part of the world, thus cheap, and many other considerations. Western European workers come a long way down that list in my book. They are well able to speak for themselves.
Click to expand...

Not to mention the plain white trucks that turn up at the larger but more remote villages in most countries in Africa during sporting events and hand out free packets of two hundred cigarettes to 10-12 year old children.
I have seen it and am appalled that I should ever have to use my cameras to photograph it but then for me thats one part of what I do and thats what the cameras are for.
It also appears to be part of 'modern life'. So I'm told.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom