Now
Fair
27°
High
47°
Low
29°
Full Forecast

Jobs

Cars

Homes

Rentals

Alerts

Subscribe
Home > News > Business
Bookmark Us   •   Make Us Your Homepage

Verizon, unions clash at Lincoln shareholder meeting

Comments 23 comment(s)  
E-mail Story E-mail Story
Print Story Print Story
Share  Share
Text Size: 
Tools Sponsor

By MATT OLBERDING/Lincoln Journal Star

Thursday, May 01, 2008 - 02:34:20 pm CDT

Thursday was Theodore Wright’s birthday, and as a present to himself, he took the day off to attend the Verizon annual shareholders meeting at The Cornhusker.

The Lincoln resident and Verizon shareholder even stepped up  to the microphone to ask company CEO Ivan Seidenberg when Lincoln would be getting Verizon’s popular FiOS fiber-optic Internet and cable television service.

That brought a much-needed bit of levity to what was an otherwise tense and terse meeting of Verizon directors and managers with about 200 shareholders and employees.

Story Photo
John DeRosa (left) and and Lee St. Louis of North Andover, Mass., hold a protest sign in front of boxes of proxy votes they were going to deliver to the Verizon annual shareholders meeting at The Cornhusker. (ROBERT BECKER/LINCOLN JOURNAL STAR)

Though Verizon has greatly increased its presence in Nebraska, it’s all on the wireless side of the business, while FiOS is a service for Verizon’s landline customers, who are mostly in the eastern and southeastern U.S.

Verizon’s choice of Lincoln marked the second time in three years that a major Fortune 100 company came to the Capital City for its annual meeting.

And like the Pfizer annual meeting in 2006, this meeting brought controversy.

Verizon officials said they chose Lincoln to showcase the company’s investment in the new Verizon Wireless customer service center, which opened last year and now employs more than 330 people.

Union officials, however, contended the company came out to the Plains to get away from them during a year in which contracts are up for renegotiation.

If that was the case, it didn’t work.

About 50 current and retired members of the Communications Workers of America and the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, some of them Verizon employees and some from as far away as New York and Massachusetts, set up shop outside The Cornhusker before the meeting, posing for photographs and handing out flyers to people entering the Burnham Yates Conference Center.

They also showed off boxes of shareholder proxy votes in favor of a proposal to prohibit the CEO or any other executive officer from being chairman of the board. Both of those positions are currently held by Seidenberg.

Of three shareholder proposals voted on at Thursday’s meeting, that one got the most support, with about 20 percent of votes in favor.

In arguing for the proposal and another that would have eliminated stock options for executives, Bob  Rehm, chief financial officer of the Association of BellTel Retirees, said more incentives were needed to make sure the executives and board of directors are working for shareholders rather than for themselves.

He called Verizon’s executive pay packages “outrageous” and noted that while Verizon’s stock price has declined 45 percent since 1995, executive compensation has more than doubled.

“Something is definitely wrong with all this,” Rehm said.

Seidenberg, whose total 2007 compensation was more than $26.5 million, countered that the company  has been doing well recently.

Its first-quarter earnings, announced earlier this week, were up nearly 10 percent over the same period in 2007. And he said Verizon’s stock price is up 30 percent in the past three years, including a 20 percent increase last year.

He conceded, however, that the company has room for improvement.

“We would admit we’re not perfect,” Seidenberg said. “We have more things we can do.”

Wright, who said he’s happy with Verizon and its stock performance, was unaware of the depth of the disagreements between the company and its unions and said he was surprised — but impressed — with the union turnout in Lincoln.

“The union people made things a little spicier.”

Reach Matt Olberding at 473-2647 or molberding@journalstar.com.


$1 Sunday Delivery - Subscribe Today!
Business > Back to Top of Story

Post Your Comment

Standards and Rules
All posts to JournalStar.com are subject to our Terms and Standards.
Your posted comment will appear after it has been approved.
Frequently asked questions about story commenting.
(optional)
   
Hide Comments Hide Comments   Newest First Newest First  
eric wrote on May 1, 2008 3:12 pm:
" So is Lincoln going to get the cable/internet service from Verizon anytime soon?? "

 Tired wrote on May 1, 2008 4:23 pm:
" Unions are so tired. They served a purpose years ago to correct a lot of dangerous and unfair conditions. But now just drain money from their members for little or no return. They tie the hands of management from being able to quickly change and remain competitive. And they protect deadweight employees who hold back both the company and their fellow employees. "

 AntiUnion wrote on May 1, 2008 5:21 pm:
" So, Verizon left Union rich states (South-Northeast) to come to the midwest to avoid contracts???? Maybe they came here because they saw that to make money, they have to go where there is less cost. That's what the shareholder's want - not to pad the pocket of the unions. At least their call center is in the midwest - and not in India. Let's count our blessings for Verizon's arrival. I know for one we are switching all of our services over to a company that invests in the locals. Unlike Alltel Cellular. Thanks Verizon!!! "

 me wrote on May 1, 2008 7:00 pm:
" I'm pro union. These company execs make millions and cut benifits of people that have given thier whole life to the company. The execs just flow in and out taking the 100 million dollar paycheck with them. It really makes me sick. But you have to give them credit on putting the call center in the US and not India. At least they are keeping some jobs in the US. I just hope they pay those people out at the call center enough to own a home, have health insurance, have retirement account and enough left over to buy the products of the company that they work for. Anyone know what they are paying out there? Is it more than ten bucks an hour without benifits??? "

 Tim wrote on May 1, 2008 7:14 pm:
" Unions are tired? Guess which employees aren't as worried about their jobs right now? As a union member with a hugh nation wide company I sleep well at night knowing that my membership in the union and my seniority means I have a job tomorrow. But I am sure the Bushies and all those people working outsourced jobs would agree completely with you. "

 The Tao of Steve wrote on May 1, 2008 8:52 pm:
" When the court is arrayed in splendor,
The fields are full of weeds,
And the granaries are bare.
Some wear gorgeous clothes,
Carry sharp swords,
And indulge themselves with food and drink;
They have more possessions than they can use.
They are robber barons.
This is certainly not the way of Tao. "

 Really wrote on May 1, 2008 9:30 pm:
" Tim - really, you are proud that your job is secured because of a union? I am proud to say my job is secure because I have worked hard and continue to work hard. I don't collect a pay check and punch a clock because I know my job is here tomorrow.

Whatever happened to ethical behavior? "

 cs wrote on May 1, 2008 9:47 pm:
" People are truly uneducated about how unions work and how they protect working families. I am a proud union member. If it wasnt for my union I wouldnt have the benifits that I have today. The company I work for doesnt give me the benifits I have out of the good of their heart. The top ceo's make millions of dollars off of the employees backs. It is the employees who make the company what it is. All we ask is for a fair share. Its only right. Educate yourself before you make comments. "

 Proud VZW Employee wrote on May 1, 2008 11:10 pm:
" I am very proud to work for the Verizon Call Center and have better benefits that I have ever recevied by any other employer in Lincoln. I have a very fair starting wage (close to $13.00/hr) and received AWESOME benefits day one! I didn't have to wait at all! They are paying for me to go back to school and most important, I really believe they believe in me and think I have potential. What do I enjoy most...they live what they say. I can talk to anyone there and I am heard. No one else speaks for me, I get to that by myself and my opinion is valued. I work hard, and I am very well rewarded. Thank you Verizon Wireless for coming to Lincoln and giving me an opportunity I couldn't have gotten anywhere else in Lincoln! "

 Mat R wrote on May 2, 2008 12:29 am:
" The labor movement has fought hard to empower workers of all kinds.

I thank them for all their struggles to give us the weekend, overtime pay, and countless other benefits enjoyed by workers some of whom don't appreciate what they have.

If you don't like what the unions have done, I suggest you try working in Indonesia and see how you like the working conditions. "

 What wrote on May 2, 2008 6:24 am:
" The South is union-rich? The South has always been anti-union and right-to-work. "

 Local Brother wrote on May 2, 2008 6:50 am:
" Tim & cs, thanks for getting it, & to Really, Tired & the rest of the anti-union folk; you can have ethical behavior and belong to a trade union at the same time. I would say most trade union members I know are ethical about both their job and life and it's about the same percentage with the non-union folk I know. I invite anyone to join a trade union and the trade labor work force. Also be careful AntiUnion, I carry both a Verizon & Alltel cellular phones, in my case, I always have better reception with Alltel. I also agree with Mr. Rehm in the article, however I would go a bit farther by saying that the tax structure in this country should be examined more and not lobbied so heavily by those high income executives and board members. "

 DR wrote on May 2, 2008 7:18 am:
" I have never taken the opportunity to work for a company with union employees but as I grow older I see my brother and the union rules his company follows. All around us companies are axing age 50+ employees because they can hire new employees cheaper at "starting wagers". His job is protected as long as he does his job and he cannot lose his paycheck for frivolous reasons. However, I have more security. By some serious trainng and study I chose to make myself a professional salesmen. I am qualified to never be unemployed. USA companies are downsizing and moving overseas even eliminating sales positions but I will walk out the door with all my skills and a lifetime of sales experience. I can have another commissioned sales position in 24 hours, regardless the industry. "

 Doug wrote on May 2, 2008 7:21 am:
" I think all company executives should get stock options. That should be their ONLY compensation (much like what Lee Iocca did with Chrysler back in the 80's.) In that way, when a company prospers the executives prosper. I am really tired of "golden parachutes" for incompetent leadership. "

 Scott - Unions Stifle Progression wrote on May 2, 2008 8:32 am:
" I had the unique opportunity to work for a company that had both union and non-union. It was BellSouth/SBC (Cingular Wireless/AT&T). It was clear which business model was more successful (for customers and employees). That was the non-union side. The union side was riddled with red tape/beauacracy that stiffled innovation and pride for the company. The pride was in the union and it pitted management vs. union leader. I agree with others...it served a purpose in the past...now the free market system dictates a better model as talent will go to the cmopany that offers the best opportunities. I suppose the union is good for 3rd world countries and individuals that need protection from having to be accountable for their quality of work. "

 Dano wrote on May 2, 2008 8:59 am:
" I have issues with unions. To say your job is guaranteed because you are in a union, is pretty bold. I can think of several companies here that had a union work force, and they are no longer in business. The union doesn't guarantee you'll have a job tomorrow, any more than hard work does. I do believe they served a great purpose, but some are just a corrupt and hard to deal with as governement is any more. They can hold back companies and their workers in some sense, because poor employees are harder to deal with when a union is involved. I have seen many cases in other places I have worked, where less than stellar people kept there jobs because of one, where if they worked where I do now, they would have been let go for their behavior.

I also have a problem with CEO salary packages, and it is not becase i don;t get paid like they do. I have to agree with the stock options and other incentives instead of straight monetary pay. Today's CEO's are contract vultures in some sense. Many a good company has been ruined by their behaviors, though Verizon doesn't seem to be headed that way now. I know they run these giant companies, but they win from an economic perspective, wheter the company survives or not. I think that is where the ethical question lies. I am all for getting paid what your worth, but these severance packages and pay packages are extremely absurd, especially if the company spirals downward and you are at the helm. They should suffer the same fate the everage employee does when that happens.
"

 lazybones wrote on May 2, 2008 9:01 am:
" I have to say I agree with Tired. Unions definitely had and still have their place, but while they begin with good and noble intentions of protecting workers from unfair and unsafe practices, they inevitably end up as little more than corrupt extortionists, sucking the life out of companies. I've seen it first-hand: people who have tenure and will just plain REFUSE to do their work because 'they're union'. Their jobs are secure. Such delusions are a large part of the reason why so many blue-collar jobs are now in China. Unions lead people to believe that they're entitled to good pay, entitled to good benefits, entitled to job security. I happen to believe that a person should be happy to have a job, happy to do their job, and happy to have a paycheck. And if they're not, their only 'entitlement' is to find another job. If someone makes more than me, it's usually because they earn it. Quit whining, get off your backside, and get to work! "

 Wonderful system wrote on May 2, 2008 9:19 am:
" Imagine that you owned a business. Would you want outsiders coming in and preventing you from dealing directly with your employees? Or telling you when, if or how you can discipline an employee who is screwing up? Or that you have to retain an employee who is just mailing it in, is non-productive or disruptive to your business? You have to put up with employees who refuse to do anything more than their little bit of the job, so their union brothers can also only do their little bit of the job? They protect each other so they can screw off and still get paid. Sounds like a wonderful system, doesn’t it? Just ask the good folks who used to work for Goodyear what the union did for them, at least right up until the business was forced to move elsewhere in order to remain competitive. "

 Buy a vowel wrote on May 2, 2008 9:41 am:
" Most would agree that the top executives of big companies are grossly overpaid. But unions have ZERO influence on that issue one way or the other.
Unions do artificially drive up costs. Somehow you have to pay those union officials, lawyers, etc. You have to pay for the donations they make to influence politicians. And of course organized crime has their tentacles in many unions.
Unions prevent management from managing. They prevent the business from quickly reacting to threats or opportunities. They enable to poor performers to thrive - all they need is seniority. I'm not saying that every union worker is a slacker, but the unions allow the slackers to be the weeds among the flowers. They hold back the high performers with their sloth. And management can’t “weed them out” because the union protects them.
People complain about jobs going to Mexico or elsewhere outside the U.S. You don’t suppose a major factor in the decision to send jobs overseas is to avoid union influence and interference?
Look at the U.S. automobile industry if you want to see a case study in the good things that unions are doing for the country.


"

 FUNNY wrote on May 2, 2008 9:51 am:
" This company boasts a 56% annual employee turnover. Ha, that explains much more than work environment "

 Unions - Ha wrote on May 2, 2008 10:32 am:
" Job security! If you are in a union you know full well that there are waiting lists with people sitting at home. If you want job security - be the best at your position - thats it! You will always find a job. But if you want to do the minimum work, maximum breaks, and hold your hand asking for everything you probably dont deserve - Join a union! "

 good for you wrote on May 2, 2008 10:43 am:
" Lazybones: Such delusions are a large part of the reason why so many blue-collar jobs are now in China {With the help of Clinton} "China most favored Nation Status" For WALL*MART. Unions lead people to believe that they're entitled to good pay, entitled to good benefits, entitled to job security. I happen to believe that a person should be happy to have a job.

SO what is wrong with good pay and benefits? I guess I am not with the norm as I do like good pay and benefits. and Job security!. It is nice thinking that you won't come in one day and find out your job is going over seas. Just thank Clinton for that one.

As for company's that are out of business due to being union. Well that is not true it is other way around they were union and got rid of them and so did the company go too. As all their good employees left and so did company.

Unions are not perfect but you definitely better off with one as you have some leverage to stand on when it come time to deal with raises and increased benefits.

When was the last time a nonunion job came too you and said you doing such a good job we are going to increase your pay and increase your pension. union do not cost the company anything so why are they so against them? maybe it all due to cutting cost in salaries and benefits.
More for the CEO's. They love people that are Anti- Union is just makes it easier to give it to them at the end of the year rather than the employees. I know their are exceptions to this as their are great companies out their that are nonunion but they are the exceptions. Rare Birds. "

 Laurie wrote on May 3, 2008 3:19 pm:
" lazybones, perhaps you should print a copy of your response to this story and put it in a drawer somewhere. Twenty, thirty years from now perhaps you should pull it back out and read it, right after you get home from the place where you have worked for forty years. Hardworking and grateful to have that job you undoubtedly still are, you will cringe when you think about how "management" gives you the unpleasant chores and not so subtle hints to find another job if you don't like it or can no longer hack it. Why should your employer continue to employ your loyal grateful butt when he can pay some young person much less to be even MORE grateful and hardworking? Believe me, he does not want to, and he doesn't think you are entitled to your job either, and he would just as soon have you quit. He would fire you in a heartbeat if he could manage to find a reason. Read that post you made years ago very carefully. You will cry, I guarantee it. "

Ads by Yahoo!