 |
| |
|
|
Flubber
|
|
With a view of the Rockies
Aug 2000
time: 22:32
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
In most law firms, the employee/owners are definetly a majority of the firm.
|
err thats not right. In most firms I see, there is usually a partner to associate ratio of about 1 to 1 ( and in some departments you can see several associates per partner) and then there is all the support staff. I don't know of ANY firm where the partners make up 50%+ of the people working there.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Kontiki
|
|
Canada
Aug 2001
time: 00:32
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
In most law firms, the employee/owners are definetly a majority of the firm.
|
Wha? That's not even close to being true. Unless you mean that there's lots of one and two man operations out there.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Flubber
|
|
With a view of the Rockies
Aug 2000
time: 22:32
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Kontiki
Wha? That's not even close to being true. Unless you mean that there's lots of one and two man operations out there. |
Even the one and two man operations out there will generally have as many or more non-owner support folks as there are lawyers. In fact I find that most of the successful smaller shops have more support staff per lawyer than the large firms ( they can't utilize economies of scale and more typical small firm work like real estate, family and criminal can require a lot more support than the typical corporate practice.)
|
|
| |
|
|
|
chegitz guevara
|
 |
Ft. Lauderdale, FL Communist Party of Apolyton
Jun 2000
time: 00:32
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Kidicious
Something bothers me. The union previously represented the workers but now the union owns the company and is responsible for the bottom line. Does anyone else see a problem there? |
It depends on wether the union as a whole owns it or the local owns it. I doubt the local could come up with the money, but regardless, the workers have a lot more say in their workplace now than they did before.
Last edited by chegitz guevara on 01-04-2005 at 06:49
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Kuciwalker
|
 |
of Schmooism
Feb 2001
time: 00:32
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Azazel
http://www.haaretzdaily.com/hasen/spages/559085.html
quote:
Arkia employees buy their company
By Zohar Blumenkrantz and Omri Cohen
Arkia Airlines' employees bought Knafaim's 75 percent stake in the carrier for $12 million yesterday. Since the union already owned 25 percent of the airline, the deal gives the workers 100 percent ownership.
Under the deal, the workers also received an option to buy Knafaim's shares in the travel agencies Issta and Kishrei Te'ufa, at a price to be determined by a mutually agreed assessor and subject to the consent of parties that hold the right of first refusal on the shares. Knafaim owns 25 percent of both companies.
Media reports have suggested that the workers coordinated the options deal with the New York based-Nakash brothers, who would then come in as strategic investors after the options were exercised.
The Arkia sale was mandated by Antitrust Commissioner Dror Strum after the Borovitch family, which owns Knafaim, purchased 39.6 percent of El Al from the state.
In a statement to the Tel Aviv Stock Exchange yesterday, Knafaim said that it believes that with the sale of Arkia and an option to buy Issta and Kishrei Te'ufa, coupled with the earlier sale of its 25 percent stake in another company, Arnon Paz, it believes that it has fulfilled all of Strum's conditions, and there is therefore no longer any need for him to appoint a trustee for Knafaim - a move he had threatened to take if Arkia were not sold.
"The sale to Arkia's workers reflects the relations of mutual trust between Knafaim's shareholders and Arkia's workers, which led to Arkia's growth, via mutual cooperation, over many years," said Israel Borovitch, CEO of Knafaim and chairman of the board of El Al, after the sale. "I wish Arkia's workers great success."
Meanwhile, Knafaim published its financial statements for 2004 yesterday. The company reported a 3.3 percent decline in revenues compared to 2003, from $174.9 million to $169.1 million. Nevertheless, it turned a profit of $1.46 million for the year, compared to a loss of $2 million in 2003.
In the fourth quarter, the company posted a loss of $2 million on revenues of $30.9 million. |
This is great: the workers will now be the masters of their own faith.
Of course, this is just a reason to open a fresh new cap/com thread, and this time, the issue is worker-owned corporations: do we need much more of those around? Are they superior to ordinary corps?
Discuss!  |
Every person is his own worker-owned corporation, which is free to enter into business contracts with other corporations 
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Flubber
|
|
With a view of the Rockies
Aug 2000
time: 22:32
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Kidicious
Workers don't always have the same interests and sometimes their interests come into conflict. Capitalists and managers aren't the only ones who can take advantage of you and keep you from getting what you deserve. |
Very true.
Even though it has happened a number of times now, I still feel odd whenever I agree with kidicious.
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:32.
Apolyton Time is 00:32. |
top of page
|
|
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
01-04-2005 02:14
|