Vesting periods, increasing stake over time, and conditions that shares are sold back to the company upon exit. You'd need to figure out how the valuation is done.
Basically turns out into a bonus with deferred payment and a chance for growth of the bonus if they work hard to support company growth.
Still doesn't feel good to get fired and get an unemployment check with all sort of conditions attached, just because some company decided to clean up operations after hiring way too much.
Non sequitur to my point, but to what you wrote...
I would support that any bailouts come with the condition that 50%+ of the share capital is given to a Sovereign Fund. There should be no corporate welfare... Only investment opportunities.
Had a situation where an alliance partner got me to the long haul carrier late, missed the flight. The alliance partner (united) was responsible for rebooking-- offered me a downgrade in service class that same day and an added connection or next day on the original airline, class, and number of connections.
Note the "next day, maintain service" option was not coming with a hotel voucher. Work trip, they paid the hotel, but god forbid it was someone who didn't work for a large mnc...
This was also due to weather so, "deal with it, because Jesus wanted it this way" prevailed in the contract of carriage.
You generally need to have established residency in a state at some point in your life, but there is zero requirement to spend any time there if you live abroad in order to retain your voting rights. Several states allow children who have been born overseas the right to vote at their parents last US address.
However, because Puerto Rico is part of the United States, residents there (even if you retired there after living in New York your entire life) fall under the rules for Puerto Rico.
So, you can live in Mexico as a US Citizen, permanently, and retain voting rights in your last state... Or you can live in Puerto Rico and lose the ability to vote for president.
Exactly, there's a difference between baby talk and using age reasonable vocabulary.
You don't need to ask a 3 year old why they are being disobedient. But it's perfectly reasonable to ask why they "aren't doing what you asked them to do".
I naturally draw a distinction between city employees and elected officials.
I'm sort of the school of thought that transparency of who they are and conflicts of interest should be a given. Release of tax returns, etc.