As somebody mentioned in another thread, if the only way you can pay for the acquisition of two companies is by laying off employees, then you are the one who should be laid off for making such stupid decisions. At least in that case, the number of people needed to be laid off would drop drastically because of pay disparity. Win-win.
2 replies (most recent on top)
Matthew 7:15
“Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep's clothing but inwardly are ravenous wolves.
There’s plenty of cash on hand to pay for the companies. The layoffs are to reduce administrative costs...to make the company look more efficient than it actually is. Of course, there aren’t enough people as it is to accomplish the thousands of “priorities” of the floundering CEO.