Their salaries might be low, but I am sure the profit sharing is good..
But according to Wikipedia, Landmark does not distribute dividends. But then again, why should they? Why should this money-hungry organization share their profits when they are able to get the majority of their staffers to willingly work for nothing or as Sonnie_dee pointed out above, near or even below minimum wage? Boy, someone's gettin' rich the easy way!!
This whole set-up is very fishy. I've never heard of a for-profit, international multi-million dollar corporation with a workforce comprised mostly of unpaid or poorly-paid staff. Can somebody give another example? Unless you're talking sweatshops. You normally see high numbers of volunteers only in non-profit organizations.
They make Millions in profit and claim it goes back into the company but i can't see where.... we used to scrimp and save and on EVERYTHING!
Yes they do make that claim and I'm sure it's true. So what? Why shouldn't they? That's how corporations make more and more of the green stuff, by expanding! So if Landmark takes some or all of their profits to create more courses or make their current ones more widely available, then of course their profit base is going to expand. There's nothing wrong with corporate expansion but Landmark makes it sound so altruistic, like they're doing everyone a favor. Almost as if they're running a charity.
Landmark a charity? Now there's a good laugh.