and everything he does NOT like, looses

Yes ma'ams, I was right (once again!) to predict that aspect's of Ellen's partnership position remained obscure last year and will likely add up to a far less desirable position than she believed she was getting. I have a feeling that this vote-inequality is just the first, and probably relatively minor, in the entirety of unread fine print. 

It's not clear below whether Dad knew of this arrangement already, but since he was so instrumental in cutting the deal in the first place my suspicion is yes. But again, this could be only the beginning...and I also wonder if fooey man Mr. Barshevsky agreed to further unfavorable terms in Ellen's contract because doing so benefited him individually.

Ellen :

01/08/2014 at 9:45 am

I know. Frank would be salivateing if I wore such a dress, but I will tell ROSA b/c she is less curvey and Ed does NOT stare at her boobie’s.

I just learned that I do NOT have an even vote in partnership matter’s. I have a total of 3.76 vote’s, based on my economic share, but the manageing partner told me that we do NOT have per capita voteing. Dad says he did NOT consider this in negotieating matters for me. I just found out the manageing partner has a total of 73.40 vote’s, and there is a total of 100 vote’s, which dad says mean’s that the manageing partner can vote down everything, even those vote’s that require what he calls a supra-majority, which is 66.67 votes! FOOEY!

Because the manageing partner has more then 66.67 vote’s, dad say’s all vote’s are like a communist election, where everything that the manageing partner vote’s for win’s, and everything he does NOT like, looses! DOUBEL FOOEY!

So it seem’s that all I have to do is make sure the manageing partner vote’s my way to get whatever I want. At least that is a good thing. That is why I am abel to get the clotheing allowance even tho NONE of the other partner’s wanted me to get it. YAY!!!!!

Reply