Dunkin’ Donuts CEO Who Makes $4,887 an Hour Outraged at $15 Minimum Wage

Simple solution: don't work there.

How the fuck would i know?

But i do know that im a manager, and i get paid more due to having more responsibilities than the people i manage.

So that times a couple million and thats what he is responsible for

Last Edited by 1-2-Follow on 01/24/2019 12:16 AM

Also. Is 67,000 employees accurate? If so we’ve got thousands of those people doing corporate jobs definitely making over $ 15. So you don’t need to factor them into getting a raise.

well that is the common sense logic of normal hardworking people.

who don't understand how organized crime works.

The problem is that you are taking HIS salary and divinding it among his employees. The CEO is NOT the company. The company earns the money and the company pays its agents, employees and CEO. The company has holdings far more than the CEO is given as salary. The CEO can keep his salary and the company can take a hit in its net profit. And btw taking "a hit" is only comparable to previous earnings when the company didn't give a damn about living wages, meaning even if their bank numbers are taking a hit they're ALL still making a profit - no one should complain.

well finally someone makes a valid point

like in the movie office space, if they just round off all the transactions......and steal all the fractions of pennies...they'll make millions

The good CEO, running a company that employs 67,000 people and adds value to shareholders investments, will be well paid. A shitty CEO will mess up and for ex. 10,000 jobs may have to get cut, the company might lose ground to competition and decline in value.

Last Edited by Didyabringyabongalong on 01/24/2019 02:19 AM

I've known some. They mostly play golf DURING workdays. They are out there making the big, tough, decisions and making connections and taking half day lunches. Gimme a break.

Some companies are cash cows and run virtually on autopilot. You would have to try to run it into the ground

The CEO is usually A.) one of the founders or B.) the top sociopath.

Yes that might be the case for some but not likely the majority. Even those cash cows will have had to work hard to get to that position which would have largely been dependent on good management in early years.

Speaking of trying to run it into the ground, we may have witnessed some examples of this recently. Gillette comes to mind. Also Disney investing $4bn in Star Wars and totally cocking that up are just a couple that come to mind. Get woke, go broke.

If the donut cooker cannot produce a product that people will pay to eat the CEO becomes irrelevant. Its the same with a restaurant cook. If his food sucks people will stop coming.

If you get off on socialist bs, your probably going to need to move.

He will probably have to close many stores, rearrange his staff and cut many jobs.

Depends on the definition of decent. The rule of thirds is what governs business. If an employee makes 10 an hour he needs to produce a minimum of 30 dollars an hour production. After you factor in taxes, insurance and workmanship comp a 10 dollar per hour employee actually costs around 13-15 per hour. 15 per hour does not include the cost of resources used to fulfill the role but we will say for a low end 5 bucks per hour in resources. So in reality a 10 dollar employee is really a 20 dollar employee which means the company makes only 10 bucks in one hour if the employee is hitting 30 dollars an hour in production (he's most likely not) realistically he's only hitting 22-25 an hour in productivity.

Ceo's pay is determined by negotiation between him and the board that represent company ownership.

Who do you think owns the shares? Institutional investors represent small people too. Pensioners and alike are the owners. It is up to them, not you.

And besides, any investor big or small, is risking their capital by holding it in the form of those shares, hence they are entitled to make a return. Perhaps they made the capital to invest through hard work and saving? But you're entitled to take it right? So when you work hard and save a bit can I take yours?

OP your politics are those of envy. A dunkin donuts front line job is not meant to be a career and it would be imbecilic to believe it is. It is a stop gap as low end jobs are. Try taking advantage of the incredible upward mobility the statistics prove exist in your country. If you are unable, as some undoubtedly are, consider your insistence upon high taxes on people and your demand that everyone must provide for you at the level you want could be the reason people are not more charitable. If you require the grace of others, humility is the place to start. Insistence and force will just get you told to f off and perpetuate your situation. Americans are happy to help each other get started and get a leg up.. that's what it's all about.

You complain wages have only risen x over the past 40 years. Do you consider that the policies you are advocating, namely further subsidisation and therefore the skewing of natural market forces, have all increased over that timeline. Do you consider that with these suggestions and policies you are perpetuating the problem you are trying to irradicate? Wages increased much faster before the before culture no? Correlation does not equal causation, but given many make an argument that in this case it does, and there seems to be a lot of data driven evidence, not anecdotal, perhaps it does? What say you? What makes you think you are right this time!? Everyone is stupid but you right??

Do you believe rich people are inherently evil or something?

Fyi I am not financial rich.

But I do object to your intention to destroy a system that has lifted millions of people out of poverty. I object to your intention to destroy a system that has given americas poor a far greater quality of life than ever before. That system is lifting everyone all the time. It is the people earning the most that are doing the most of the lifting. The fact that people at the top go even higher and faster, is irrelevant, and is purely their bonus for adding so much value. Work hard, think hard whatever.. You can be one of those top people.. there is equal opportunity to secure those market participants roles. You just have to adjust behaviours.

Just because you cannot see what value people add does not mean it's not there. They hold Cash in the bank .. no value? Incorrect. The bank invests, or securitises it to lend off it.. helping someone else get startedwith a business loan etc. Even cash under the mattress means a small reduction from active money supply therefore applying upward pressure on remaining money circulating. But mostly they invest in new projects.. And who cares if it's to get richer since he is creating opportunities for people further down. He is not the sole beneficiary of his pay packet, and frankly if he grew it like the figures suggest, he added so much value to market participants I.e share.holders and workers, that he deserves it.

Value comes in all sorts of forms. It can simply be a new idea, not just physical labour.

And what about research money? Spend 100 mil researching a drug, only for it to be discovered worthless. But another time it may be a success. Who is going to do things like that, take such huge risks, if they are unable balance the risk with a potential reward? The answer is no one. And the government certainly can't.. imagine your outcry if they lost 100 mil lol. It simply has to come from the private sector.

The rich person spends benefiting others, and pays it on. And they pay all the taxes nearly to provide the services for everyone else. And they still probably give to charity on top even tho they're already forced to give up half their earnings.

You want to help people, quit moaning, work hard, get rich and add the value that helps those people you speak of. You may have good intentions, but currently you are harming them not helping.

You can do it. If you want what others have, find a way to earn it. You do not get to take it, and you do not deserve it for doing nothing. Glazing a donut is not really having the same impact on people's lives as the creation of 20000 jobs is it. That is where the value disparity comes from.

If you get your min wage, the price just goes up on that item and you're in the same position in relative terms. And not just that, you price yourselves out of luxury goods markets such as these.. not the rich people, thus lowering your living standard. Get out of your own way op, you are your own enemy. Wealthier people try to help you, yet you double down on hurting yourself...

You may want to look for a solution instead. The solution is right in front of you and always has been.

Wrote this quick. Apologies if disjointed. Hopefully u get the gist.

And yeh it takes a wall of text sometimes to get through to people, or get them or shut up with helpful comments lol.

But look at all that industrious effort to write that. We call that value. I'm not even asking for anything in return...

There is value in many things aside from.glazing donuts and the physical building or production of a product.

Meant unhelpful comments not helpful loool

On years where there are company losses would you divide that as well and ask all the employees to share in it? Would you hold your own paycheck when you there isnt money in the bank to pay all bills? Would you work hours on end and then have a restless night because of worry? Would you miss family events because of your responsibility?

We have over a 150 employees and idiots like you are a poison and one of the reasons I would love to say “why the hell should I care about providing jobs for others when I could easily chuck it and go work for someone else and make far more money with way less headache.”

Your mentality will keep you at a minimum wage job. By the way that $15 per hour will never be what you imagine because every thing you currently pay for is going to cost you a lot more. It is called trickle down.

I see all the Bernietards are out in force on this post.

You idiots think that the skill set of ringing a cash register should be compared to running a company with 850M in gross sales approx 1200 employees over 19000 stores. Not only that must keep investors happy maintain a profitable business in an economy that is changing at a rapid pace.

But But But...... it aint fair that La Shonda don't make no money and evil white man make so much......

Guess what, if CEO sucks and they lose money La Shonda aint got no job.

So apparently Georgia doesn't need a minimum wage law if fast food joints are already paying above the minimum wage. This is the case in Ohio as well. So if the market has determined its too low to adequately staff then the market is doing its job. Bottom line is Burger flipping at mcdonalds is not designed the be a career. It's a starter and finishing job

ah yes, the all important donut chef. just like the french fry chef at mcdonalds, right?

You no doubt see from my posts I believe capitalism is beneficial and that I vehemently support it. That doesn't mean I don't think a min wage is needed at all, but it's intended to just catch those falling through the net where the market doesn't move fast enough.

We cannot reward bad decisions over and over tho. I feel the min wage is prob too high tbh, and u would have th show data as to why it needed to be so high. My thought is that it is bad habits thatvperpetuate this cycle. U know what mcds a d Dunkins products are? They're luxuries. Yet every time I go, the clientele is seemingly at the poorer end. I can feed a family of five a good meat and and veg meal, sources from a high quality butcher, for the price of a large bug fast meal.

Ops prob is he thinks luxuries are his right and he ignores the opportunity cost that home he made better choices he could save and invest to gain greater income, pay for training or whatever.

Large big tasty meal I meant.. not bug fast as autospelljng correct though..

Ceo's job is to ensure ALL cookers of donuts follow company procedure to produce edible produce to company standard. What the chef (lol) thinks is irrelevant. But the ceo is accountable for all. If he doesn't ensure standards company can get sued in many situations. If company gets sued yet has mandated ceo to act in way yet he isn't and therefore they've been sued, company can fire ceo and sue him. It's called fiduciary responsibility.

Ceo is exposed to huge risk. And is compensated for it, as he should be. Or there will be no ceo's.

U may think you would be different in that situation yet u may change your mind if u got sued don't you think again. U may think u would accept less pay.. do u think ceo pay does not take into account the potential for their lawsuit exposure And how much they could lose financially? Rewards must always offset the risk.

Those stock options are not worth a dime unless he exercises them. If he were to sell them all at once the stock would be worthless. So his 'compensation' is in part an illusion.

However...

Do the math.

Stripping back his 'salary' would add an extra dollar an hour to 4800 employees out of how many thousands?

Dunkin’ Donuts employs approximately 270,000 people world wide. If the CEO made 10.2 million (90% based on stock options from his good/profitable decisions) that means that if he made zero salary or stock options and that money was equally distributed each employee would make an additional 0.72 cents each week.

Stop pretending like CEOs aren’t worth what they make, they make a tiny fraction of a companies earnings and every decision they make has the potential to be ruinous or profitable and they need skin in the game

[link to www.bostonjobsource.com]

Last Edited by Cardiak on 01/24/2019 10:58 AM

Let's make it simple shall we. His 4k+ salary IS fair as it is agreed upon by the two parties - the ceo and his employer. No one else is a party to that contract.

Op seeks to make things unfair, by attempting to co-op the force of law to fight his battle to take what is someone else's. He seeks to prevent someone from making contracts, unless he approves them effectively as king, or someone acting in that manner on his behalf does.. which I believe is unconstitutional and against ones natural and human rights. Can we place limits on what agreements you can make op? Or just everyone else?

Some would liken that to criminal behaviour.

This behaviour is what has resulted in many countries around the world significantly lagging behind the USA in growth and standard of living and the reduction of poverty.

What value is there in attempting to make usa like these other countries that are failing in comparison? Slow the growth and progress down to match those of less developed countries? You need to start trying to raise these other economies if you want things more level. Not smash down what is working better to level it. You may kick and scream, but we will drag u up if needed, in the same manner that a rebellious child is raised.

Spot on. Op doesn't pretend though, he believes it. Hopefully he is getting educated here. Could be life changing for him if he embraces it, or he can double down and continue to wallow in self pity (whilst in denial), bitterness and envy which won't serve him quite so well And in fact have the potential to destroy his life.

We are trying to save you from yourself ok, at the same time as protecting ourselves from your ignorance.