The New Yorker has a piece entitled “Walmart and the Push to Put Workers on Company Boards” in which it says that at least some store level personnel believe that the company is making short-term devisions driven by economic and competitive factors, and that if “a meaningful number of people with a stake in Walmart’s longer-term health - such as store associates - involved in the business decisions, some of these changes wouldn’t have happened, and the company would be better off.”
An excerpt:
“Because workers have so rarely been invited to participate in board-level decisions at companies in the U.S., there are few domestic examples to look to for a sense of how it would play out. In Germany and a handful of other European countries, however, having worker representation on boards is required.” Research has shown that “companies with worker representation invest twice as much in their businesses as those without; wages are higher, and profits are distributed more evenly. These firms also performed better.”
Interesting story, and you can read it here.
An excerpt:
“Because workers have so rarely been invited to participate in board-level decisions at companies in the U.S., there are few domestic examples to look to for a sense of how it would play out. In Germany and a handful of other European countries, however, having worker representation on boards is required.” Research has shown that “companies with worker representation invest twice as much in their businesses as those without; wages are higher, and profits are distributed more evenly. These firms also performed better.”
Interesting story, and you can read it here.
- KC's View:
