2016-01-07

The best boss

Yesterday I read an article in a magazine name : Is he the best boss in the world or is he a sham?
Nice headline to an article. 
The new Robin Hood in the world, Dan Price, works for Gravity Payments. This company, located in Seattle, is specialised  in financial services.
One day, Dan decided to increase the salary of all his employees from 50.000$ to 70.000$ for the year 2017. 
To avoid the increase of costs of his company, he decided to reduce his salary in the same way that he increased the salary of all his employees. 
With this action, all his employees would be very happy with their boss but at the same time with the company for which they work for.
Soon, this action was very popular in the country. And Dan has been interviewed for several mass media to explain his action and to advice to the companies with a new way of helping to the welfare of all his employees. 
It is said that Dan earns, 20.000$ for each interview. I suppose that all these incomes go to the result of his company and finally to his pocket. It is said that this new model of management helps to increase the profits of the companies, and the welfare of the employees, because they take part of the management of the company.
But I think that all this story is a nice tale. Not everybody works for this kind of company, not all companies are the same, and obviously, not all companies can afford all these kind of ways of management. I wonder, what is the real message of all this story? I don't know, but sincerelly, I wouldn't mind to work for Gravity Payments.


3 comments:

  1. Yesterday I read an article in a magazine WITH THE TITLE : Is he the best boss in the world or is he a sham?

    Nice headline to an article.

    The new Robin Hood in the world, Dan Price, works for Gravity Payments. This company, located in Seattle, [] specialiseS in financial services.

    One day, Dan decided to increase the salary of all his employees from $50.000 to $70.000 for the year 2017.

    To avoid the increase of costs of his company, he decided to reduce his salary TO COUNTERACT THE increase FOR all his employees.

    With this action, all his employees would be very happy with their boss but at the same time with the company [] which they work for.(1)

    Soon, this action was very popular in the country. And Dan has been interviewed BY several [] media OUTLETS to explain his action and to adviSe [] OTHER companies with a new way of IMPROVING the welfare of all his employees.

    It is said that Dan earnS $20.000 for each interview. I suppose that all thIS incomE goES to [] his company and EVENTUally to his pocket. It is said that this new model of management helps to increase the profits of the companies, and the welfare of the employees, because they take part IN the management of the company.

    But I think that [] this story is a nice tale.(2) Not everybody works for this kind of company, not all companies are the same, and obviously, not all companies can afford all these kindS of ways of management. I wondeR what the real message of [] this story IS. I don't know, but sincerely, I wouldn't mind [] workING for Gravity Payments.


    Well done. I hadn't heard about this.

    (1) options:
    ...the company which they work for
    ...the company for which they work
    (In other words, the "for" goes before or after, but not both.)
    (2) perhaps "just a nice tale"

    ReplyDelete
  2. Matt, some doubts:
    "This company, located in Seattle, [] specialiseS in financial services." I wanted to say: Esta compañía, situada en Seattle, está especializada en servicios financieros: IS SPECIALIDED. Why not?

    What is the difference between: MASS MEDIA and MEDIA OUTLETS? Both have the same meaning.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Good questions. "Is specialised" is certainly grammatically correct and understandable, but we usually use the active form "specialises" instead, when speaking of people or organizations. For inanimate objects, your form is OK. For example: The software is specialised for use in the insurance industry.

    "Mass media" or simply "media" is an uncountable noun, so "several mass media" doesn't sound right. You could have said "several OF the mass media" as another option.

    ReplyDelete

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.