Working In These Times

Justice 22 13 Mar 2010
5:28 pm

And exactly what has the IAM done about this blatant betrayal of trust. Have they descended on Mercury Marine with a team of attorneys to implement “work to rule” and make MM sorry for their dispicable behavior? Probably not!
Has the IAM initiated a nationwide campaign to expose this criminal behavior? Probably not! Have they called for a nationwide boycott? Probably not!

My point here, is that the IAM should use every resource available to make this company pay. They should show their membership that they are more than just dues collectors and take this company on with the intent of destroying it. I know 1800 jobs are at stake, but are they really. How can these employees ever deal with this employer again without harboring great disdain.

I believe the time has come for our international Unions to start making examples of these renegade companies. Our international unions should provide temporary financial and medical support for all members negatively impacted by our new aggressive stance. Take the gloves off and do not relent until this company is brought down. Then go to the next renegade company and do the same. If we allow these corporate sociopaths to keep havung their way, why would we want the jobs they offer. Eventually we would be better off working in Mexico.

Please contact the IAM and tell them to stop at nothing in making an example out of this callous company Mercury Marine:

The International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers
9000 Machinists Place
Upper Marlboro, Maryland
20772-2687

Phone: (301)967-4500
Email: .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)

Please call IAM lodge 1947 and offer them words of encouragement to take this battle to the company.

920-921-2164

Enough is Enough!

Chuck Galloway 15 Mar 2010
7:21 am

Nice way to slant a story.  I’m not surprised you had to go back 7 years to get a $1.1B profit.  Of course when they were making money they weren’t asking concessions from the union.  The last 2 years they lost $1.37B and that is when they asked the union for help.  The engine division alone lost $131M last year. 
The CEO may not have done everything exactly right but if you haven’t noticed, the recession hit the hit high dollar items the hardest.  The RV industry is also down 50%.  Brunswick had to downsize and consolidate facilities to continue to exist.  The largest marine competitor to Brunswick (Genmar)went bankrupt last year so not only did their employees lose their jobs, their pensions are at risk.  And if you had happened to look at the 2009 annual report, while the engine division at Brunswick reduced overall employees from 5,439 at the end ot 2008 to 3,683 at the end of 2009, the union employees grew from 1,166 in 2008 ot 1,835 at the end of 2009.  As John Adams said “Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passion, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence.”

Justice 22 15 Mar 2010
3:19 pm

I have been having a difficult time reconciling some of the dollar amounts contained in Brunswick’s 10k.
For instance, when I compared net sales of 2009 with those of 2007 I found sales to be down 51%  ($2.776B vs. $5.671B). I would have expected to see a similar percentage decline with their Selling General and Administrative expenses. What I found was the SG&A expenses dropped by only 24% compared with those of 2007. Selling General and administrative expenses were 22.5% of net sales in 2009 while they were 14.5% of 2007 net sales. I mention this because most of the senior management executive compensation is captured within administrative costs.

Speaking of executive compensation, It is also disclosed in this company’s most recent 10k that expenses for stock appreciation rights were $8.4 million, $8.3 million and
$5.2 million for the three years 2009, 2008 and 2007 respectively. Let’s see, over the last three years we have sales down 51%, SG&A as percent of net sales up 35% and expenses for executive stock appreciation rights (SARs) up 62%.
Everything related to executive compensation seems to have increased at a time when sales were down 51%. To pay for these increases in executive compensation this pitiful example of corporate greed forced their workers to take 30% pay cuts. Once again, those that can least afford it are forced to endure.

Chuck Galloway 16 Mar 2010
1:11 pm

Instead of making wild comments on executive compensation based on your interpretation of SG&A, why don’t you look at the proxy data to get the facts?  I’m sure you will be able to pull out some segment of the compensation to make your point.  Salary between some years or some other segment taken out of context, it’s in there, Overall the executive compensation has been reduced, in the case of the CFO, reduced by 71% from ‘07 ot ‘08.  But all the executive total compensation from 2006-08(last year reported on the last proxy) has gone down.

Stock appreciation rights(SARs) is only the right to buy a stock at a set price.  It is not a gift of $.  The company sets the price of the right and it has an expiration date.  If the stock doesn’t appreciate, the SAR is of no value to the recipient but the company has to accrue the value on the balance sheet for the value of the right when it is issued.  If the stock never reaches the price set by the company, it won’t be exercised and the value is $0 to the greedy executive.
Even if the stock does go up, the person has to buy the stock at the set price and then can sell it for whatever the current price is.  Again he has to buy the stock, it isn’t free, it isn’t given to him.  It may be $8M on the balance sheet but if the price goes down or doesn’t exceed the price set on the right, it is $8M in lost compensation to the executives.

Justice 22 16 Mar 2010
2:29 pm

Chuck:
Thanks for the lesson on SAR’s. Unfortunately, you seem to have gotten stock options confused with stock appreciation rights. Stock appreciation rights are rights, usually granted to an employee, to receive a bonus equal to the appreciation in the company’s stock over a specified period. Like employee stock options, SARs benefit the holder with an increase in stock price; the difference is that the employee is not required to pay the exercise price (as with an employee stock option), but rather just receives the amount of the increase in cash or stock. Please look it up if you are uncertain. Investopedia is a fine resource for learning how to dissect annual reports.

Having established that SAR’s are free money to the holder when the price of the company stock goes up
It is no surprise the GREEDY executives with this company exploited the workforce to lower costs and maximize profits for the sake of their own gain. Combine that with the fact that this company has recently authorized 5.0 million more shares to be used for SARs. All this while the company was supposedly struggling for its survival. Excuse my plagiarism, but I have taken the liberty to use your quote from John Adams. I believe it is appropriate in this case.

As John Adams said “Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passion, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence.”