Dear FRONTLINE,
I always enjoy Frontline. This interviewer however didn't present
both sides of the issues. He should have had a CEO or two who
didn't have such a dedication to workers, community and customers.
One such interesting CEO is Albert Dunlap, brought in to save
several companies such as Scott Paper. He brings another view
to the issue that was clearly not present in the program. That is
that business only exists for the benefit of it's shareholders.
They risk the capital that makes all else possible. Although not
a subscriber to his theories in total, it would have provided an
interesting contrast to the CEO's who were portrayed as quite human.
Next time this interviewer should quit playing softball and learn
how to play hardball instead.
Jon Levinson
76077.1203@compuserve.com
Dear FRONTLINE,
I only caught the last half of this segment but was impressed with the contrast that
it presented. Although all will agree that it was not total, I thought it was very
impressive for a 60 minute session.
I fear that people have a slanted view from the outset, and that is the cause of much of the negativity that they feel in response to the CEO's profiled. Fortunately this is not the only view. It seems that many beleive that these large businesses owe their employees something. Although we all would like to have security in our jobs, we must accept that this is not the case. We are marketing our skills in the exact same fashion that these producers are marketing their products. We are all proud of the products that have been represented here, but many of us do not apply the same standards to the work force. If we as workers do not hone and improve our skills we are destined and deserve to fall by the wayside. Some of us may hold an appreciation for a rotary phone, a 286 computer or a tin can; we have to admit that we do not purchase these items and the CEO's of the companies are made them have moved on too. Survival is a part of life and we have to accept it.
My point of view is not an ignorant one. I work in a manufacturing plant, having survived, sweated and been frusterated by lay-offs. The two ingredients that made me survive are (admittedly) luck, and the extra effort. Of the hundred or so inviduals I was hired with in 1992, barely a handful survive. These workers are the ones that would through breaks, and try a little bit harder - not a requirement of the job, but we still have a job. To further, I have been the one that was aware (and still am) that in manufacturing my job just may disappear tomorrow. I am willing to go to school at night, to reinforce my employability, so that I may not be stuck on the out. Once again, an investement that costs me time now, but hopefully something to fall on if the need arises.
My final point is a statement that Robert Reich made. This struck a nerve as being a part of the problem, although not the whole. To paraphrase he stated that business wanted government to stay away as they did when they deregulated the airlines, but ask for government to step in for a tax break. If the government is loosening on taxes isn't that really getting out too ? Isn't this the mentality that built the huge bereaucracy in the first place ?
Once again, kudos to the editor for as objective a viewpoint as possible - given the
format.
Matt Schumacher
matty@communityonline.net
Dear FRONTLINE,
Our parents were the only generation that had the type of jobs & job security
that most of the people you interviewed want. No generation before them or
after had it as they did. So the problem I see with the people that you
interviewed was that they are living in the past. You cannot have jobs with
guarantees and high benefits/pay at the same time. You have to prove that
you are worth what you get, not that you are entitled to it.
D.D
Newburgh, IN
Dear FRONTLINE,
FEAR MONGERING, FEAR MONGERING FEAR MONGERING!!!! What is
guaranteed in this life? Certainly not a job in any one
company, at any one place for ever. Would any of those
"loyal" empployees hesitate to leave their company for
a better job with better pay and benefits at another
company. I think not. But, if a company wants to leave to
benefit itself, it can't because of some social or
individual loyalties??? This country was built by big
businesses, not by big government. Washington is in our
homes and lives on a daily basis. We don't need big
government! Companies are in business to make mony-
government is in business to spend it. We can do well with
govermnment staying in D.C. and allowing business to
compete, until they violate the law. Reisch and the
administration have a lot of room to talk about being loyal
to workers and owing them something. How many ferderal
employees have they displaced, due to "downsizing" or what-
ever else thay want to call it. Businesses do a pretty good
job without government intervention. By the way, Robert and
Bill, how many American businesses do you know of that are
running in the RED? Please, MIND YOUR OWN BUSINESS!
Thank you,
Wil Calvey
Marina, CA
Dear FRONTLINE,
I'd like to say I think you web page is very impressive with
it's appearance and ease of use. I feel you've
created a very good format to help with the exchange
of ideas and communication. Frontline seems to be
the new 60 Minutes.
Nice Going Frontline
L.F.
Dear FRONTLINE,
I have worked at MASTER LOCK CO.for 30 years. I am proud to
tell FRONTLINE that I am an employee of the MASTER LOCK CO.
I can tell you in all that time the only time I was worried
about my job was during the two strikes 1974 6 weeks 1980
13 weeks. During the the small layoff in the early eighties
that affected only the very latest hired employees. I was
so confident of my job I started a big project in my yard.
Never was I worried about not having a job. I know it sounds
like a Fairy tale but it is true. Its like the american
dream. Start with an employer and retire with the same one which I plan on doing.
This company is here for the long haul. Our 75th year in serving our customers
prove this to be true.Our common goal is to be the Biggest and the Best in this
global economy.
Thank You,
Jack Skok
Muskego Wisconsin
Dear FRONTLINE,
As a business owner and also an employee of several
corporations in the past, I can relate to both sides of
this debate.
I do believe though that large corporations in general are beginning to reap the lack of commitment that is festering below the surface in many employees. A balance needs to be struck. It is fine to make the appreciation of stockholder worth a paramount goal, but having a background on Wall Street, I believe that the street is notoriously short-sited, which short circuits long term investment and growth plans for many corporations.
Finally, on a different front, I am delighted to see the
detail that PBS is providing for background for these
issues, but I think that a more real time vehicle for
discussion and feedback would be helpful. Have you a
follow-up discussion with several of your guests in an
on-line forum with involvement from on-line folks?
Jim Luther
jluther@mediamation.com
Dear FRONTLINE,
Your report on the effects of downsizing and the "new" economic reality painted a
much maligned picture of doom and gloom.
The overriding theme from the displaced workers was "what is the company going to do
for me?". Since when is a corporation
a democracy? Training and upgrading skills are the responsibility of the
individual.
As indicated in the report, the economy is in very good shape in both absolute and
relative terms.
Without the downsizing of corporate America, the U.S. would be in the same boat is
many of the European
ecomonies struggling to get it's bloated costs and social benefits down in order to
compete in the
global economy.
Millions of people from all levels of the socio-economic ladder are taking proactive
measures to improve their standard of
living without the assistance of others. Despite sounding cliche, hard work and
sacrifice still matters.
Sincerely,
Derek P. Pitt
102467.2663@Compuserve.com
Kansas City, MO
Dear FRONTLINE,
Enjoyed your program of 21 May on "Does America Still Work"? It is hard for me to
believe that for America to become competitive in the global economy millions have
had to become unemployed. Isn't there a better way? Aren't the workers who are
laid off consumers too? If millions of our citizens are relegated to minimum wage
employment we as a society are in for big trouble.
Downsizing/reorganizing/reengineering is not the answer. Unless we solve this
problem soon millions of ex-workers will see themselves as having little or no
stake in society.
James Higgins
Dear FRONTLINE,
This segment was somewhat enlightening. However, your softball approach
to questioning these corporate mogals on issues such as
downsizing (firing), employee involvment in decision making
and corporate restructuring was lacking. These individuals
were not pressed on the very issues which are of great concern
to the average (non-millionaire) american. Additionally, questions
concerning corporate crime, government bailouts for greedy
stockholders, and the degradation of the american environment
by corporate interests were not part of the agenda. I am disappointed
that frontline cannot be counted on for a more incisive brand of journalism.
In the interest of fairness to frontline, I will concede that
the corporate and congressional (also corporate) censors are
a powerful force and that there hand is prevasive. For
there to be a future for frontline, one must understand journalism
critical of corporate America is off limits.
Jeff Underwood
junderw@buran.ggy.uga.edu
Athens, GA
Dear FRONTLINE,
I am an economic development specialist for the State of Vermont. I caught your
special by accident last night. I was absolutely delighted with the quality and
insight PBS brought to the screen. To see and hear these production people talk
about their jobs, the quality of their lives, and to hear the CEO's encourage them
to actively acquire new skill sets in order to be prepared for the future......
well, I think you did an excellent job portraying the realities of today's
manufacturing climate. I think we still work, in fact I think we have the edge!
Thanks for the great show!
James Griffiths
jgrizzle@sover.net
Dear FRONTLINE,
The chords struck on last night's Frontline dealing with the loss of high paid jobs
and downsizing during the 80's
in Milwaukee sounded the cry that good workers , good products and the bottom line
go hand in hand.
Harley Davidson, Master Lock and Chrysler prove that skilled workers who love their community and will fight hardship to stay and work there are the best kinds of employees. I'm a financial analyst and an owner of a 94 Harley Dyna Low Rider and I know that my bike was built with pride and workmanship. My disposable income drives this economy and drives American companies that build high quality products. I wouldn't buy anything but Master Locks because I appreciate the quality of the product. Enough of the low end stuff U.S. manufacturers are providing the American consumer. It's a sad commentary when one skims through a Sunday Kmart circular the mediocure products proudly "Made in the USA".
Hell, when I used to live in Madison, WI as young man in my 20's 15 years ago, I was witnessing the end of what were the last days of the manufacturing heyday in Milwaukee. IT took these men and women displaced from their jobs 7 or more years to get back where they were before the massive plant closures. They and their communities lost alot. The American working man and woman's soul was ripped out. The bottom 40% of the American workforce is suffering while the American economic engine and Wall Street continue to soar to new heights. No wonder the rest of the industrialized world pities the US blue collar worker as one who will work for a $7 per hour sub wage rate and two jobs just to make ends meet. These jobs need to continue to be created. With the advent of workfare in Wisconsin and elsewhere, job creation is most critical to the success of these people. Those who have lost skilled jobs have to find new niches where they could then leave the lower paying semiskilled jobs open for new entrants to the workforce, formerly on public assistance.
The evolution must continue. If the American economy does not create the market for
skilled workers, our role in the New World Economy
will elimately fail. Trade is good. Underdeveloped and developing markets must be
created and those markets will produce the lower
cost products. With better incomes, then these consumers will be able to buy better
manufactured, higher quality goods from the Master Locks,
Chryslers and Harley Davidsons made in the USA.
C.A.
Arlington, VA
Dear FRONTLINE,
I found the program very informative. It would appear that we have to deal with the
issue of retraining workers in a far different and better fashion than we have to
this point. It also pointed out that the mind set of many executives in America as
well as the stockholders need to be adjusted. Americans in general need to start
thinking "in the long run", rather than the current quarter bottom line. Get in
make a buck and get out is not the way to sustain our economy. Until we reward
people for "long haul" thinking the economic climate is not likely to change much.
George P. Jones, III
Dear FRONTLINE,
I watched most of your show last night regarding corporate downsizing, rightsizing,
etc. The show in general was very good and balanced as are virtually all your
shows.
I would like to comment on the issue of CEO compensation. CEOs may be somewhat overpaid. Worker's may be underpaid and the gap between seniormost management and worker's may be too great. Nevertheless, I am concerned with the trend towards vilification of CEOs. They do produce products, create jobs, attempt to and often succeed in maintaining or increasing productivity, and they create wealth. While they may deserve less than they make, they much more nearly deserve what they make than do entertainers of all categories (e.g., basketball players, football, actors, etc.).
My greatest concer is that we, as a society, will pay a person 100s of millions of
dollars to entertain us (by stuffing a ball through a hoop, knocking someone
senseless on artificial grass, or acting out violence on the screen) while we will
pay an engineer or biotechnologist who creates health, wealth and well being a wage
that will barely afford a home.
T.W.
San Antonio, Texas
Dear FRONTLINE,
Americans are still trying to work inspite of the attempts
to cut wages and benefiets.Employers for the mostpart have very little sympathy for
raising families or the betterment of society.Take a good look at the car lotts,
Newcars are sitting there with no buyers!This is the proof that the minimum wage
needsto be addressed!No-one should have to work two jobs to make ends meet!
W.T.
Pelahatchie, MS.
Dear FRONTLINE,
Does America Still Work brought up some interesting questions, offered insight into
changes which can and do occur (Harley-Davidson for example), and left me with more
questions than answers. Clearly, there is room and opportunity for change on the
part of both management and labor which can result in the meeting of both parties
needs. Neither one is a bad guy who is solely responsible for the difficulties
which we find ourselves in. Global competition, information technology, a
significantly larger workforce (i.e. the babyboomers) and a number of other factors
have seemingly assaulted the US within the past decade. We are all responsible for
this and we can create better ways of working and living as we go into the next
century. However, we can't do so by falling back on old ways of thinking and doing
business. The principle problem is that our institutions are not equipped or
prepared to address these issues. Business is running as fast as it can to keep up
with technology, global competition, shareholder demands and general complexity
compounded by the rapid speed of change. Government is large, cumbersome and trying
to catch up, but it seems to be overwelmed by the relentless pressures and demands
of simply managing its own affairs before a vocal and demanding public. Education
is without money and seems to have burdens that are intractable. That leaves the
citizenry as a mass of stranded individuals which has no place to turn to. There is
no longer a community meeting to attend where concerns and hopes can be shared.
This brings me to the main point I wish to raise. As long as the American populace
remains isolated and has no way of coming together to grapple with these issues we
are at the mercy of our institutions to do the work for us, and, as I already
mentioned, those institutions are overwelmed with their own survival. For our
democracy to remain successful it needs to create forums where people can come
together and dialogue about these huge issues in a meaningful way. Such a dialogue
would need to be ongoing, facilitated, and information intensive.
It would be an exploration into
the assumptions and beliefs which constitute our current thinking. We would need to
create an inquiry into values, hopes and dreams. It would need to extend past the
issues of business and employment to include the environment, peoples of all
nations, and more. Unfortunately, there is no institution of any magnitude which is
addressing these issues to the degree needed. New paradigms in thinking and
behavior can evolve proactively or reactively, the choice is ours. Thank you for
the work you are doing. Your contributions are essential.
Brian J. Carroll
brianc@sonic.net
Dear FRONTLINE,
Chrysler Chairman Robert Eaton was truthful in admitting that his salary is tied to
Chrysler's stock performance.
However, a company's stock price tends to rise when layoffs are announced because
investors perceive the layoffs
as short-term cost cutting. Therefore, Mr. Eaton can make a quick bonus by laying
off workers and forcing
them to take unemployment benefits. This really means that the taxpayers contribute
to Mr. Eaton's paycheck by
funding the unemployment and welfare programs which assist these workers. Instead,
it would be better if
unemployment insurance program were funded by premiums charged to the employers.
The premiums could then be set
by the number of workers the employer lays off during a defined period (3 - 5 years,
for example). If a company
has a history of boosting its stock price by announcing layoffs, it would pay a
penalty of higher premiums if
the layoffs were announced during a period of relative profitability.
Allen Jones
Dear FRONTLINE,
U.S. workers, be they blue collar or white collar, have had unrealistic
expectations with regard to job security and their standard of living in
general. Since my Peace Corps experience in 1973-74, in South America, I have
always thought that the difference between our standard of living and theirs,
exists not because we are in some way better than they are, but for various
historical and institutional reasons. Once institutions, such as government by
military dictatorship, disappear and it is economically viable for foreign
workers to perform the same tasks as U.S. workers, and get paid for it, doesn't
it seem logical that the gap between the two would close? Wouldn't the closing
of the gap imply both the improvement of the foreign worker's standard of living
and a lowering of the U.S. worker's standard of living?
People who were born in the United States between 1930 and 1960 were among the
most fortunate people in the history of the world, from a material welfare point
of view, but we're running out of refreshments and the band is packing up to
leave. So let's stop the whining and come to grips with the fact that the party
is over.
B.G.
Greenburgh, N.Y.
Dear FRONTLINE,
America has not worked for me. The American Dream
was dead before I reached the age of eighteen for my family.
My parents are impoverished and skilless, my grandparents
are hounded by the IRS and I have no knowledge, self-esteem
or mental competence. As far as I am concerned, I am dead.
The corporate world is not interested in me due to my ina-
bility to pass urine tests. I have nothing to offer your
society. All through my life, your society certainly re-
frained from offering me any help. Now I am a borderline
psychopath with a gun. The only future I see for me is
prison or death, for there is no longer any help offered
for my kind, the people that fall through the cracks.
There may have been a time I could be helped, but that
time seems past.
When asked about excessive CEO compensation, Robert Eaton of Chrysler, replied that the pay of many CEOs is tied to the performance of the stock -- as if we were to think that some sort of discipline has been applied. Doesn't he realize that that is a large part of the problem? In the casino atmosphere of Wall Street, stock performance may have little or nothing to do with the long-term prospects of a company, with the quality of its product, or with the quality of its management.
E.M.
Franklin, NY
Dear FRONTLINE,
The legacy of a corporate America that throws away its dedicated workers is a
society that loses all respect for employers.
The "Downsizing" mentality, while defended by those who would accept a multi-million
dollar salary and stock options, is nothing more than the loss of allegiance to the
workforce that made the corporation great and the nation that allowed it to set up
shop and prosper. Corporate America has little allegiance to workers and even less
patriotic sentiment. More times than not they could care less whether the United
States sinks or swims so long as they can point to gargantuan profits.
It is refreshing to see a Corporate Executive from Harley Davidson extol the virtues
of caring for the employees who make the Harley Davidson enterprise so great. He
is to be commended and others should follow his lead.
Duane Lugdon
Concord New Hampshire
Dear FRONTLINE,
Once again another program on this subject that misses the mark. Each time I
see one of these programs I am struck by how hopeless everyone views the
situation. In order to understand the solution we must understand the history
that delivered us here. At one time we lived in a vacuum. We produced goods
and in turn consumed the goods we produced. One of the problems was, that
after a time we produced garbage. (As a consumer, if given the choice between
higer priced low quality, and lower priced low quality, which would you
purchase). When the Asian based manufacturers first introduced their products
here they were not of top quality, but they were inexpensive. The consumer
went for lowest price possible price.( A trend still active today) If
American companies & American workers want good jobs at decent wages. Build
high quality products, and then purcahse the products you produce. The
competition can only survive if you buy their product. The public needs to
stop going for the lowest prices, and the companies need to stop looking for
the cheapest labor. If this trend continues each group will produce its own
extinction. It has nothing to do with this so called "Global Economy". Its
time we stopped crying in our beer and started using our minds.
E. C Bielfelt Jr.
Redlands, CA
Dear FRONTLINE,
I found this program very well done and presented but provocative and disturbing in
a variety of ways:wo points seem to me to be worth making:
First this was one of the best arguments for reforming and making universal our
health care system. Specifically it makes the case for abandoning the present
system which ties health insurance to employment, because life-time (or even
long-term) employment can no longer be counted on. The need is for a truly
national system, whether an extension of Medicare or some other mechanism. It
really makes no sense for people to be forced into making decisions on taking jobs
on the basis of the availability of insurance.
Second, the program highlighted the growing pursuit of greed at the highest
levels of American corporate business. How many employees of big corporations
could be given additional benefits (and even "golden parachutes" in the event their
jobs were downsized) if the power structure of these companies was restrained in
their lust for wealth. There needs to be some measure of social control here,
perhaps through the tax system.
J D Darroch
Dear FRONTLINE,
I'd like to say I think your web page is very impressive with
it's appearance and ease of use. I feel you've
created a very good format to help with the exchange
of ideas and communication. Frontline seems to be
the new 60 Minutes. Nice Going Frontline.
L.F.
Dear FRONTLINE,
Something does seem a bit out of balance when CEO's are
making millions and the front line workers can no longer
make enough to raise families.
However, it is going to be impossible to compete against workers making $1/hr or less in the rest of the world. Americans are going to have to start learning how to do what we've been best at -- improvising.
The most important thing is that the educational system
must be revitalized or scrapped if necessary. In the
company I work for (an Information Services Staffing
Company), I can tell you that we would LOVE to be able
to take part of our tax liability and put it into
training programs. Only those who are on the cutting
edge will know where the jobs are and what skills
are needed.
John S. Kennedy
axinar@one.net
Dear FRONTLINE,
Thank you for returning to report on the progress of those who have lost their jobs
and thus their livelihood. Too often we forget the profound events of the past to
repeat them in the near future. Today we face an uncertain future as to our job
security and it's effects upon our families and communities. America cannot break
the short term gains for long term stability in business as in politics. How far up
the ladder do we need to go before we all realize that no one is immune to
disruption in their profession.
Sincerely,
Jody Allan Dobis
jdobis4067@aol.com
,br>
Dear FRONTLINE,
I just couldn't believe the same old tired rhetoric about
how terrible the corporations are. First of all it shouldn't
be anyone's business how much CEO's make.I doubt the average
employee realizes how much is involved with their jobs.It's rather
surprising that nothing is said about the network anchors
making seven or more million a year or hollywood liberals
who make tens of millions a year. Also, I rather think the
unions have brought a lot of this on themselves.It is said
many times over that the Company isn't loyal to the people.
Well how about the unions going on strike numerous times when
they don't get everything they want.People should realize exactly
how much it really costs an employer to hire someone. Why
doesn't Frontline do programs as that, instead of having
such an extreme Socialist as Reich.
Finally, after seeing these kind of programs on PBS I look
forward to the day when the Congress finally cuts off all
of my tax money to you.
G.J.
Olathe, KS
Dear FRONTLINE,
America does work: The work ethic is very much alive, but it has been
beaten nearly to death by the new managerial class that has taken control
of America's seats of power. The managerial class believes greed is
good and believes that the individual is the only meaningful unit of
society and the quarterly report is the only meaningful time frame.
Therefore selfish greed and immediate reward drive all decisions of this
managerial class. They pay only lip service to labor and the greater
needs of society and posterity. The elevation of the managerial class
has driven the decline of the middle class, the decline of organized
labor, and the rape and decline of American society.
T.S.
Dear FRONTLINE,
Does America still work? Yes, mostly for smaller companies not included in your
Frontline piece.
By focusing on the evils of big companies and pandering to paycheck envy with the
constant refrain over wage gaps, you produced a narrow report unworthy of the scope
suggested by the title.
By letting Secretary Reich present his views without mentioning the recent study ã
conducted by the Clinton administration ã that showed that layed-off workers are
finding other work relatively quickly and for nearly the same pay, you've presented
a one-sided picture of the state of the economy.
Scott McKim
THRScott@primenet.com
Dear FRONTLINE,
You deserve full marks for an excellent documentary. Companies
like Harley-Davidson and Master Lock should and could be a
blueprint for all companies in my country and yours. Their
involvement in the community and their employee relations are
to be commended. This show just how much these companies are
a part of the national fabric. If they are healthy then the
community at large will be prosperous. After all, we have to work
learn to work together. If we don't, the consequences for
the future are not good.
Keep up the good work!
Robin Bodnaruk
obin@nanaimo.ark.com
Ladysmith, BC CANADA
Dear FRONTLINE,
I thought your segment tackled a tough issue. I have somewhat
mixed feelings on how the show came off. I think it is
important to tackle the tough issues like this, and that
by looking at a single community made the problem of presenting
it more manageable, but I felt somewhat 'hollow' after
watching it. I am not exactly sure why, I think it is from
the lack of proposed solutions that were presented. Although
the companies who had representatives on the show realized
that it was important to consider the employees and environment,
there seemed a lack of a bigger picture. I think I liked the
Harley-Davidson's CEO view of the 6 stakeholders, and thought
that further exploring the relationship of the six would have
been interesting.
As for my personal views I think that corporate america is
becoming less sensitive to people and more concerned with
short term gain. In a previous workplace that I saw that
workplace transform from a customer service orientation
to a customer sales orientation. The structure of the jobs
there changed, and the main office became less friendly to
the employees. Resultantly, stress rose and the workplace
environment was (IMHO) seriously diminished.
Although I realize that corporations need to constantly
innovate to survive and thrive, I hope that businesses
gain a conscience. Although corporations are considered
persons before the law, it seems that they do not have
the same social tendencies that have made us a success
as a species. Hopefully this is just a phase.....
Delbert Hart
hart@cs.wustl.edu
Dear FRONTLINE,
Despite your observations that most laid-off workers would not be rehired in the
industries you showcased, you focussed on two "success stories". Why weren't those
who were not fortunate enough to be re-hired to good paying jobs profiled?
Bob Manrodt
bobby@prolog.net
Dear FRONTLINE,
It seems to me that you did not ask the obivious question. If these workers are
unnecessary why were they hired in the first place. If I were a stockholder of a
downsizing company I would not reward management earlier bad decisions that they
are trying to fix now. Management at Chrysler needed to downsize because management
feel asleep and lost any competitive advantage they may have had. Yet, the
stockholders reward management for failed policies of the past with high salaries
and stock options. Management should take responsibility for their past failures
and admit to their short comings.
The future of the American (or anywere in the world) corporation belongs to those
companies that work in a partnership type of arrangement with their workers. You
don't fire your partner. We, as workers, also have a responsibility to be as
productive as possible. I would be anxious to hear the views of any else on this
matter.
Robert Herries
s725810@umslvma.umsl.edu