s deserve their paychecks, it is time to examineproblems with the system. It is not perfect, but for that matter, neither is anything else. One major setback is the fact that most wages are not representative of the productivity ofthat employee. Whether a worker is a model employee who is very prolific, or a poorworker who is unproductive, they still are given the same treatment by a companies far aspay is concerned. This can lead to a business losing vast amounts of money, while theCEO fills his pockets with money. For example, Varity Corporation was a business thatwas once one of Canada's biggest and highest profiting companies. However, it struggledgreatly during the eighties, and lost money most years. That did not stop its chairmanVictor Rice from earning "more than $1-million in annual compensation".3 This is clearlyan abuse of power. If an employee is allowed to continuously do a poor job, while stillbenefiting from his job, then there is little reason for them to attempt and do a good job. In the case of Victor Rice, there was obviously no correlation between the quality of hiswork, and the pay that he received. If he did such a bad job though, then how come hestill had a job. This answer to this is one that affects many businesses. Many times itactually costs a company more to get rid of an unwanted employee, than it would to keepthem on as a worker. "When Paul Stern stepped down as CEO of Northern Telecom lastyear, he left with $164,112 for two months of employment, a cash compensation packagetotaling $6 million and another $1.5 million in stock options."4 The reason for this is thatmany times, when a position such as CEO come into play, a contract is written up. Thatmeans that the worker is supposed to be with the company for a certain amount of time. If this time period is cut short, then that is a breach of their contract. By law, they must becompensated for their removal from the company. This may cause a business to hold ...
