Compensation and Benefit Systems Research Paper

Compensation and Benefit Systems - Research Paper Example Moreover, harsh working conditions that are undergone by Chinese employees who put together Apple products at Foxconn worsen the already deprived compensation system. A survey by FLA (Fair Labour Association) in early 2012 discovered that 64.3% of Apple employees at Foxconn were not content with their compensation because they did not cover their basic needs. Moreover, the same proportion of Apple workers experience difficult work conditions for about 56 hours weekly (Denning 2012). The same FLA investigation discovered that the average monthly salary for unsupervised Apple employees at Foxconn was around $385, which is equal to $4,622 per annum. This compensation system includes salaries from the high rate of overtime hours these employees engage in. It is worth noting that the calculation of this analysis of the yearly salaries of Apple employees at Foxconn presumes that wages over the previous financial quarter represent those received all through the year. As a result, the strate gy might exaggerate incomes for 2013 because they might have increased since and play down incomes for the financial year 2014 because incomes might increase (McRitchie 2015). The compensation system for Apple’s executive or leadership team demonstrates the significant income discrepancy between the Apple C-suite and staffers compensation systems. The table below offers a detailed illustration of the sum of $441 million required in compensation by the team of nine executives comprising Apple’s leadership team in 2011.

Examination of the Extent to which section 51 Companies Act 2006 has Essay

Examination of the Extent to which section 51 Companies Act 2006 has clarified the Law relating to Pre-Incorporation Contracts - Essay Example The purpose of pre-incorporation contracts is to encourage entrepreneurship and efficiency in creating simplicity and flexibility in formation and maintenance of companies. It also satisfies the need of an upcoming company to acquire rights and liabilities. This ensures that the company can start with business after incorporation. The challenge is that these companies do not have legal personality, due to their inexistence, and thus cannot make agreements. It is therefore important to evaluate the advantages and the shortcomings, and the future of the same on the role of promoters. If the Company does nothing, it is taken to have ratified to the agreement and the promoter is not be personally liable for the agreement. However, if the incorporation of the company has not been done or, after incorporation, rejects the agreement, the promoter becomes automatically liable for liabilities that may be created in the course of acting as promoter and entering into agreements. The liability i s then discharged only if the company subsequently enters into an agreement on similar terms or in exchange of, the pre-incorporation contract; or to the ends that the Board ratifies or is taken to have ratified the contract or action. The only option is then to have a promoter or agent contract in the company’s behalf. They thus incur liability for the company before incorporation. A promoter, according to the case of Twycross v Grant, 3 is one who forms a company with reference to specific projects and set it going, and take necessary steps to meet that purpose. This includes those who take the procedural steps necessary to form the company, or sets up the company’s business, but not those acting merely in professional capacity on the instructions of a promoter. They deal with formalities of registration of companies, from finding directors and shareholders to holding negotiations for business contracts for the new companies. They are also involved in the formation o f a company and are thus personally liable for the pre-incorporation contracts as neither the principle and agent relationship exists. Reason being the lack of that relationship between the agent and the principal as there is in real sense no principle. The common law puts in obstacles to those wishing to contract on behalf of such companies. This is to discourage people from signing or contracting on behalf of non-existent companies. These companies are not legal entities and thus are not permitted to perform juristic acts. According to common law, no person has the right to act as an agent of a company not yet established, in the expectation of ratification after it becomes incorporated. A company cannot then gain legal status before its existence of attaining contractual rights or sustaining contractual liabilities that exist from pre-incorporation agreements. These contracts cannot then oblige a company. The status of promoters ceases to exist after formation of the board of dir ectors. Promoters of the company may also undertake to enter into contracts on the entity’s behalf, where the company may later refute to approve or consent after incorporation. This position is important as it prevents fiduitiary promoters claiming to be acting for the company, as in the case of