250 News - Your News, Your Views, Now

October 27, 2017 11:29 pm

CNC Celebrates Corporate Sponsorship

Monday, April 4, 2016 @ 4:06 PM


CNC President Henry Reiser, Finning’s  Cody Broster, Thompson Creek/Mt. Milligan’s Joanna Miller, and CNC Dean of Trades Frank Rossi – photo 250News

Prince George, B.C. – Finning  and Thompson Creek/Mt. Milligan have  each donated $25 thousand dollars to create a special computer lab at the College of New Caledonia.The money  was used to  renovate the lab, purchase 17 computer stations,  a board room table, televisions, a white board and the branding  inside and outside the lab.

“This is a very, very  good reflection of how local industry  is committed to ensuring  our students are successful” says CNC President Henry Reiser.20160404_144248“Your donations will  go a long way to  make sure our heavy duty mechanic students  have access to up to date technology which plays a key role in their skilled trade.”

( at right,  one of the   lab windows displaying an etched  logo)

The donation  is the result of a good  relationships with  local industry  says Dean of Trades Frank Rossi   “It was a mutual  agreement, together with the instructor  who has good contacts in industry, through contacts within our department and our relationship with industry that  made this happen.”

$50 thousand dollars is a significant  infusion for a college and makes one wonder if  corporate sponsorship is the new  “norm” for  post secondary institutions facing funding crunches “I don’t think we have to go this way, ( seeking corporate sponsorship)” says CNC  President Henry Reisser, “But it certainly makes our job that much easier  when we have  responsible industrial spoonsrs  like  we have in Finning and Thompson Creek.”

Thompson Creek’s Joanna Miller says  her company sees “great value” in  supporting  the college programs  “We’re expecting four of our heavy duty mechanic apprentices at CNC to be completing their  4th year provincial red seal requirements.  We’ve also had 8 of our 36 apprentices  at  Mt. Milligan, begin their training by taking foundation  programs  at local campuses in Ft. St. James  and Mackenzie.”   She says the locally trained  employees  are  the best hires “Because  they demonstrate a long term commitment to the area and to our company.”

Reiser  says  the donation from the companies will  pay off  “I am confident  you will see a return   in the form of a highly skilled work force.”



Didn’t Finning just lay off over 400 people in Western Canada? 1,100 people worldwide?

    Yup… and then there are these facts: In 2014 Thompson Creek Metals Co. Inc. President, CEO and Director; Jacques Perron’s compensation was $2.58 Million. ~ Salary.com

    In 2014 L. Scott Thomson; CEO for Finning International Inc. made $5.6 Million.

    www .bcbusiness.ca/industries/who-is-bcs-best-paid-ceo

    Thank you for the $25K each for the computer lab, funding from the Christy Clark government is so meager, I fear our public post-secondary institutions would not be able to operate without private funding such as this.

      Being a CEO is tough work.

      Considering that POTUS gets US$400,000/year, the compensation for such CEO’s is well worth it since the entire well-being of 10,000 people plus or minus a few thousand employees plus their families depends on those hard to make decisions.

      They must get little sleep with all those worries that they have.

      POTUS has such an easy life and decisions he has to make in comparison. ;-)

      How much of what they made did they pay out in taxation? Suppose the CEOs and other upper managers were limited in gross pay to, say, ten times what the lowest paid employee makes? Still too much? Five times? Still excessive? What, then, considering what the job entails? What’s fair? Remember the lowest paid employee, and most of the other better paid employees, still get the same pay whether the company has a profit or a loss. So long as they’re working. The CEO’s salary is probably variable, based on how well the company is doing. If it doesn’t do well enough, he doesn’t just get ‘laid off’. He gets replaced. And if he didn’t perform well enough to get the results desired in the job he had, what are his chances elsewhere?

      For whatever reason, so many in Canada view success as something negative. I’m not sure why that is! Envy perhaps?

      Whatever the reasons are, I am neither defending nor am I criticizing the salaries of CEO’s. Instead, I wonder why more of us don’t have greater desires for success. Shouldn’t we all aspire to greatness instead of to mediocrity? Striving for success should be something of value instead of something to be vilified.

      I read this earlier this evening and I thought it worth sharing because each and every one of us has or has had the opportunity to aspire to be more than we are! How many of us could have been the CEO but instead settled to be the hourly employee?:

      “An economics professor at a local college made a statement that he had never failed a single student before, but had recently failed an entire class. That class had insisted that Obama’s socialism worked and that no one would be poor and no one would be rich, a great equalizer.

      The professor then said, “OK, we will have an experiment in this class on Obama’s plan”.. All grades will be averaged and everyone will receive the same grade so no one will fail and no one will receive an A…. (substituting grades for dollars – something closer to home and more readily understood by all).

      After the first test, the grades were averaged and everyone got a B. The students who studied hard were upset and the students who studied little were happy. As the second test rolled around, the students who studied little had studied even less and the ones who studied hard decided they wanted a free ride too so they studied little.

      The second test average was a D! No one was happy.

      When the 3rd test rolled around, the average was an F.

      As the tests proceeded, the scores never increased as bickering, blame and name-calling all resulted in hard feelings and no one would study for the benefit of anyone else.

      To their great surprise, ALL FAILED and the professor told them that socialism would also ultimately fail because when the reward is great, the effort to succeed is great, but when government takes all the reward away, no one will try or want to succeed. Could not be any simpler than that. (Please pass this on) These are possibly the 5 best sentences you’ll ever read and all applicable to this experiment:

      1. You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity.

      2. What one person receives without working for, another person must work for without receiving.

      3. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else.

      4. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it!

      5. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them, and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for, that is the beginning of the end of any nation.”

      Think how great our country could be, if we all strived for success, instead of criticizing those that are successful!

      @Hart Guy

      An economics professor talking about the failure of “Obama’s Plan”? What a laugh. A “professor” teaching a course in a ludicrous discipline like Economics is the epitomy of a failure, so him criticizing a plan that never existed is a massive joke.

      It must something else to live in an alternate reality like you do, where everyone had the opportuniy to be a CEO. Although, I wouldn’t say that striving to be a CEO means a person is necessarily reaching a higher plateau in life.

      “Striving for success should be something of value instead of something to be vilified.” .. well I guess that depends on what your definition of success is. Clearly you seem to think the more money you make is the definition of success. For me success has very little to do with how much money I can make at a job because I don’t need the 100k motorhome and the 50k speed boat or the latest and greatest UTV and Quads/Snowmobiles etc to be content. But when I see someone who makes a salary of in the millions for ANY type of paid compensations for simply a JOB I think how unfair this world really is. It isn’t envy or jealousy, it is simply my view of how screwed up this world is that 1 person can make that type of money when whole families are going hungry.

      @ Hahaha, I don’t live in an “alternate reality” as you suggest that I do!

      I live in a reality where I believe that we should do our best. Doing our best doesn’t mean that we all become CEO’s, it means that we do our best at what it is that we do in life!

      I had ended my post with the following comment:

      “Think how great our country could be, if we all strived for success, instead of criticizing those that are successful!”

      So many people seem to go to work and do just enough to get by at work. As a society, our work ethic is going down the toilet!

      Where and when did this become acceptable? Who decided that there should be no winners and there should be no losers?

      Recently, I saw a news story about how a kid’s soccer league, I believe in Vancouver, had eliminated the soccer ball from the game. Kid’s were no longer playing the game with a soccer ball! Instead, they were being encouraged to imagine that they had kicked the ball! They were being encouraged to imagine that they had scored a goal, or two goals or three goals or however many imaginary goals it took them to be happy!

      At the end of the news story, they spoke of how they were hoping to expand this to kid’s baseball, by taking away the actual baseball! No more actual base hits, no more actual home runs, just imaginary ones! Just imagine that, haha!

      You suggest that I live in an alternate reality! What kind of reality would you suggest those that think baseball and soccer without an actual ball live in?

      Success isn’t just about the size of one’s paycheque! Success comes in many forms, but in order to achieve success, one must put out an effort and one must also accept the risk that failure might be the outcome!

      Some people would prefer to live in an alternate reality where failure no longer exists! No more success! No more failure! Instead, mediocrity!

      Hahaha, what reality would you prefer?

    Well, if they don’t have work for them, what are they supposed to do? Even if the whole of the CEO’s salary were taken and paid out as wages to those laid off, it wouldn’t go very far at the kind of wage bill that number of people are going to run up over a few pay periods.

    Why don’t people who are promoting job training and higher education come clean with those seeking both? There really is no ‘sure thing’ just because someone is educated. We create a culture of entitlement, but it isn’t exactly the kind of entitlement a lot of people are so down on when discussing today’s youth. Instead, it’s what we do when we can’t deliver on the employment prospects those who’ve gone on to seek them through doing what we’ve told them to do finish their courses, and find there’s still no jobs. or at best, not very steady ones. At the university level, it embarrasses those who’ve promoted they follow the course they’ve taken, so much so that in a lot of cases they make either real or pseudo bureaucrats out of a lot of them. In all too many instances this just adds to the overall costs of doing anything ‘real’ anymore. And so it doesn’t get done. Not on any human scaled enterprise.

The job of POTUS, according to FDR, (who should know, he held it long enough), is “to yield to pressure.” If the country is truly a democracy, it’s the citizens who apply the pressure they want their executive to ‘yield to.’ Is the CEO of a private company in the same position? I don’t quite believe so. Aside from that, if the POTUS were taxed on the value of the benefits he receives on top of his seemingly meagre salary, I’ll bet it would absorb all his salary, and probably then some.

I agree with most of the five points above in Hart Guy’s post, (and with what Hart Guy wrote himself before that), but not with these two:-

“2. What one person receives without working for, another person must work for without receiving.”


“3. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else.”

#2. posits that all wealth is the result of human labor, inferring CURRENT human labor. When , in actual fact, most wealth is the result of the PAST human labor of those long deceased, and has been passed on to us in the form of inheritance. It is this ‘cultural heritage’ that each successive generation receives ‘free gratis’ that has allowed wealth to multiply the way it has. To say, as a passage in the Bible said, “Let none amongst ye eat who has not first worked”, had great meaning in the 1st Century AD. When, and for most of the two thousand following years, actual scarcity stalked the land if everyone’s shoulder wasn’t harnessed to the plough. Today, we’re physically beyond that. Glut that CAN’T BE SOLD for enough to cover the costs of its making as they are computed financially is a far greater problem.

And #3. does not recognise that even though the power in most modern countries has been assigned to a central bank, governments DO have a power to give ‘money’ to any of us and all of us WITHOUT taking any away from anyone. If it did it right, it could do so in a way that’s counter-inflationary, and could allow our economy to perform to its full potential.

All five of Hart Guy’s points are so ridiculous and simplistic they barely deserve the effort to refute them.

    No, they’re not ridiculous at all. What Hart Guy is describing is EXACTLY what does happen in countries that try to enforce an artificial ‘equality’. Everything and everyone is reduced to the lowest common denominator amongst the masses, and anything that does get achieved is only done so under external ‘compulsion’ from the top down in the name of ‘the State’ rather than from any form of internal ‘inducement’ emanating from ‘the individual’ as he or she tries to satisfy the needs and desires of other individuals in a way that advances all in the process. It is the fundamental difference between those on the Left, and those on the Right. Reduced to its basics, the premise of those on the Left seems to be that “misery likes company”, and a perfect world is one where everyone is equally miserable. The big problem for those on the Right is that they have not yet learned how to counter this effectively, which won’t happen until they understand that ‘money’ and ‘wealth’ are two completely different things.

      Yes…actually….they are ridiculous. And simplistic too. But then Cons and Free Enterlprisers always want to convince other people to join in their delusion that unfettered “free market” forces work for the betterment of all people, when evidence shows they only work within a massively constraining regulatory framework.

Hahaha, do you work for the UN?

I always get a kick out of an economics professor or finance adviser working for a living.

Comments for this article are closed.