Since this got blown by on another thread I figured I'd post it here for a little discussion on the topic...
No one wants to talk about the ultimate in REAL control - OWNERSHIP. This concept is patly written off as unworkable: pilots fly airplanes, they don't own/run companies; the inmates running the asylum, etc. The idea is that the pilots themselves wouldn't manage the company. The BOD would be replaced and new management would be put into place that didn't espouse the standard Wharton/Harvard MBA-think that management is a separate class than the people who do the day-to-day work and are thus deserving of ridiculous salaries and benefit packages. Business is not theoretical physics - these guys are NOT the brightest bulbs in the room - don't forget that. MBA programs churn out new graduates like flight schools churn out new pilots (except at a much higher rate). In other words, this "talent" concept is just another marketing lie. They can be replaced, and for less. What is needed is a BOD with vision, power, and balls.
On the subject of employee ownership, everyone points to UAL and, saucer-eyed, says, "Fire burn Grog! No mess with fire!" Yeah, the United experiment didn't work out so well. Is it a Newtonian Law that it will never work? Isn't there a different way to structure a buyout? (There is.) There must be DISCIPLINE. Rick Dubinsky, one of the architects of the UAL ESOP, once stated, "We don't want to kill the golden goose. We just want to choke it by the neck until it gives us every last egg." Clearly, that's not the way to go if you want a viable company going forward.
We must remember that management's duty is to increase the value of the company for the shareholders. Ownership means these "shareholders" are YOU and it means the direction of the company will be decided (with discretion, restraint, vision, and discipline - ideally) by your union leadership with your interests in mind - either as an employee OR as a shareholder but preferably both.
No one wants to talk about the ultimate in REAL control - OWNERSHIP. This concept is patly written off as unworkable: pilots fly airplanes, they don't own/run companies; the inmates running the asylum, etc. The idea is that the pilots themselves wouldn't manage the company. The BOD would be replaced and new management would be put into place that didn't espouse the standard Wharton/Harvard MBA-think that management is a separate class than the people who do the day-to-day work and are thus deserving of ridiculous salaries and benefit packages. Business is not theoretical physics - these guys are NOT the brightest bulbs in the room - don't forget that. MBA programs churn out new graduates like flight schools churn out new pilots (except at a much higher rate). In other words, this "talent" concept is just another marketing lie. They can be replaced, and for less. What is needed is a BOD with vision, power, and balls.
On the subject of employee ownership, everyone points to UAL and, saucer-eyed, says, "Fire burn Grog! No mess with fire!" Yeah, the United experiment didn't work out so well. Is it a Newtonian Law that it will never work? Isn't there a different way to structure a buyout? (There is.) There must be DISCIPLINE. Rick Dubinsky, one of the architects of the UAL ESOP, once stated, "We don't want to kill the golden goose. We just want to choke it by the neck until it gives us every last egg." Clearly, that's not the way to go if you want a viable company going forward.
We must remember that management's duty is to increase the value of the company for the shareholders. Ownership means these "shareholders" are YOU and it means the direction of the company will be decided (with discretion, restraint, vision, and discipline - ideally) by your union leadership with your interests in mind - either as an employee OR as a shareholder but preferably both.
uke:
