Employee Ownership

[redneck]

Those that aren't in the union have excluded themselves from having a valid opinion. You don't get £9 + per hour anywhere else for unskilled work without having union representation, or being self-employed with all the uncertainty of that. The union IS the workforce's only genuine mouthpiece - if you don't like the way they operate then do something about it through the democratic routes set up, not carping from the sidelines.

Employee ownership would be a great experiment worthy of a go, but in a capitalist society that needs to destroy all alternative methods of workers generating a living it would be difficult.

[fishtank]

Those that aren't in the union have excluded themselves from having a valid opinion.

No they haven't.
Not on this position anyway.
This isn't collective bargaining or wage negotiation,this is a financial stake in the company,something that is designed to create "employee engagement"....something that every employee will have a stake in.
You cannot transfer the position of a trade union automatically into the position of owner of a company,albeit partial and then say f**k you to a large portion of your shareholders.
That is unfounded arrogance in the extreme.
To take control of the slice of RM that the employees may own the CWU will need a mandate from all of those involved...including possibly any management grades involved.

[dvbuk55]

Those that aren't in the union have excluded themselves from having a valid opinion. You don't get £9 + per hour anywhere else for unskilled work without having union representation, or being self-employed with all the uncertainty of that. The union IS the workforce's only genuine mouthpiece - if you don't like the way they operate then do something about it through the democratic routes set up, not carping from the sidelines.

Employee ownership would be a great experiment worthy of a go, but in a capitalist society that needs to destroy all alternative methods of workers generating a living it would be difficult.

So those not in the union but who do their fair share of the work to make the profit to pay the dividend should be ignored As for carping from the sidelines ................99.9% of the membership are on the sidelines, so the 0.1% make the decisions and do the negotiating whilst taking no part in the work load. Perhaps it's time those who don't do listened to those who do do for a change instead of the other way round because the last few years have been a disaster for the membership.

[redneck]

I don't need to add to what I've said already. The priniple of the workforce speaking with one voice is a very strong one.

[fishtank]

The priniple of the workforce speaking with one voice is a very strong one.

Not in the world of share ownership it isn't,not without a mandate anyway.
What if the 8,000 or so managers,many of which are "represented" for want of a better word by the CMA/Unite receive shares as they probably will?
Could the CWU legitimately speak with one voice for them?
No they couldn't so what makes you believe they can speak for non-members?
As i said earlier collective bargaining does not extend to company/share ownership...ask the TUC.
If the CWU wants to run a trust that includes the entire workforce and i assume it would have to include everyone otherwise it won't work....they will have to ask the entire workforce so despite what you think about non-members giving up the right to a say...they will have to have that say.

[fng]

Those that aren't in the union have excluded themselves from having a valid opinion.

Where have I heard that philosophy before

[fishtank]

If you set up a trust,the first rule of the trust is that it should protect the value of the trust's assets above all else.
How can a union endorse industrial action knowing that it could have a detrimental effect on the value of the company's shares and therefore the value of the trust's assets?

If a union calls a ballot for industrial action and it is found not to be covered by statutory immunities from legal liability,the employer could sue the union to recover loss or damages.
If the union is the employer how does that work?

If an industrial action ballot is found to be improper for various reasons an injunction can be acquired by the employer blocking the industrial action.
If the union is the employer how does that work?

[LinChong]

Like in Germany:

"A German court on Friday convicted two executives and issued what is likely to be the only prison sentence in the sex, bribery and corruption scandal that brought many executives at car-maker Volkswagen to their knees.
A regional court in the western German city of Braunschweig sentenced the former head of Volkswagen AG's works council, 48-year-old Klaus Volkert, to two years and nine months in prison on incitement of breach of trust charges for his role in the scandal.

Volkert, who represented employees on the company's supervisory board, received special bonus payments of close to €2 million ($2.9 million) from the company's former personnel director, Peter Hartz. The court said he should not have received that money. It is believed that Hartz ordered the money to be paid to executives on the company's works council in order to secure favorable votes in important company decisions taken by the supervisory baord.

On Friday, the court also sentenced former senior personnel executive Klaus-Joachim Gebauer to one year of probation on 40 counts of breach of trust. Under orders from Hartz, Gebauer had organized lavish pleasure trips abroad for members of the works council that included prostitutes. Hartz had ordered Gebauer to treat works council leaders "generously."

Lenient Sentences?

But Friday's sentences proved to be milder than those called for by prosecutors in the case. They had called for Volkert to spend an additional year behind bars for 48 charges of breech of trust. For Gebauer, they had called for 20 months of probation. Volkert's defense attorneys had called for acquittal or, at the most, probation for their client.

Volkert and Gebauer are considered the key figures in the VW's bribes and corruption scandal -- which first became public in summer 2005. In January, Hartz pleaded guilty to making the secret payments to Volkert between 1995 and 2004 to smooth labor relations and to ensure the works council accepted VW's restructuring plans. Hartz received a two-year suspended sentence and a fine of €576,000.

On Friday, it remained unclear whether Volkert or Gebauer would appeal their sentences.

Volkert had entered a not-guilty plea in the case, denying that he had persuaded Hartz to pay him almost €2 million. He did admit in court, though, that he helped to arrange a lucrative contract for his former girlfriend, though he denied any wrongdoing in the action.

Gebauer, accused of organizing lavish, company-paid holidays for works council officials on instructions from Hartz, has admitted most of the charges against them -- although he said he had acted at the behest of his superiors. But attorneys for both defendants argued as recently as this week that they should be acquitted or, at the most, receive mild suspended sentences. The men had said their actions had not been damaging to the company.

The trial, however, which saw senior executives including VW Chairman Ferdinand Piech testifying in court, caused significant image damage to Europe's biggest carmaker, which has struggled financially in recent years.

The investigation into corruption at Volkswagen is one of many high-profile cases of clean-ups by prosecutors of dirty practices at German businesses in recent years. Former senior officials at Siemens are awaiting trial on corporate bribary charges. Plus, in a case that has nothing to do with his employer, Deutsche Post CEO Klaus Zumwinkel was forced to resign last week after he became embroiled in a massive tax-evasion case. The investigation of Zumwinkel was part of a nationwide sting involving hundreds in Germany thought to have illegally parked their wealth, tax-free, in Liechtenstein."

http://www.spiegel.de/international/bus ... 37137.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

It's easy to get rid of ambition. Desire is more difficult. When it comes to bribery, sex is the name of the game.

The CWU should forget about a trust. Members will not be happy at being deprived of a windfall.

[dvbuk55]

I got the bribery and corruption but where was the sex

I mean looking at this case I'm not too sure I am totally against these proposals now..............purely on the grounds of prison sentences for the inept, incompetent, mistrustful trustees

[LinChong]

"For years, it is a wonder that Volkswagen managed to produce any cars at all. Europe's biggest automobile company, and the leading symbol of corporate Germany, was embroiled in a widespread scandal involving sex, bribery and pleasure trips, the scale of which the continent has not seen before.
In a courtroom investigation in Braunschweig in Lower Saxony, in the north west, details of the €2.5m affair have been unfolding and the nation has been poring over the lurid details. They involve a string of expensive hookers, sex parties and expense-account shopping trips which took place over the best part of a decade, endorsed by a management keen to buy the support of union officials and the shopfloor at a critical time for the company. The scandal has claimed the scalp of the personnel director Peter Hartz - who was convicted at a trial last year - along with two senior managers and the chairman of the powerful works council.

Last Wednesday the excitement of the courtroom reached fever pitch following the arrival - appropriately in a black VW Tiguan, driven by his wife Ursula - of the patriarch of Germany's car industry and VW's current chairman, Ferdinand Piech. He was the company's chief executive between 1993 and 2002 when the alleged offences took place. Piech is also at the centre of Porsche's current nail-biting takeover of Volkswagen.

He is also a man said to be so involved in the detailed running of the company that during his time as chief executive he decided the colour of the car dashboards and had informants tell him what was going on across the company. Prosecutors hoped the appearance of Piech - not under investigation and called only as a witness - would mark a turning point in the trial. He is giving evidence in the corruption trial of Klaus Volkert, a former head of the VW works council charged with receiving about €2m (£1.3m) in illegal bonuses as well as paid holidays for Adriana Barros, his Brazilian mistress, and Klaus-Joachim Gebauer, a former VW personnel manager accused of endorsing the payments to Volkert.

But Piech, 70, a grandson of Ferdinand Porsche, the luxury car's founder who also made the Volkswagen, or People's Car, for Adolf Hitler, referred to the slips of protocol which led to the brothel and slush-fund affair as mere 'irregularities' about which he had 'not been aware'.

The 'irregularities' cover a host of alleged abuses that took place worldwide, from Barcelona to Seoul, Prague to Delhi. Managers endorsed a company slush fund to pay for high-class prostitutes and to sponsor the mistresses of trade union officials, as well as regular visits to brothels, cash gifts for wives and even free supplies of Viagra. There also existed an illegal network of front companies set up to channel money from VW suppliers abroad.

According to the defence team in the trial, the reward system - which came to light in 2005 when a VW insider revealed that it had been going on for a decade - was sanctioned from on high. On one VW trip to Lisbon in 2003, a Brazilian prostitute was 'ordered' by a senior manager who requested a 'young and lively dark-skinned girl'. He was so impressed by her performance that she was flown first-class to Paris and delivered to the George V Hotel, where the executive was attending a board meeting. On another occasion, wives of works council members were given gift vouchers for the luxury chain Hermès and taken on a shopping spree in Paris.

In court last week a secretary to Gebauer, the former VW personnel manager who is in the dock on charges of abetting breach of trust, was close to tears as she told of her distress at having to 'go beyond my call of duty' and, at the behest of her boss, look for a flat in Braunschweig where union leaders could go for their trysts with prostitutes. 'I found it really very unpleasant,' said the 41-year-old secretary named only as Silke W. She described finding a flat with an underground garage and a lift that went to the door of the sixth-floor flat to ensure the men's privacy. Once she had secured the flat, she was then given the task of arranging the decor.

The Social Democrat MP Hans-Jurgen Uhl, a member of the works council until 2006, who has already been fined for his involvement, told the court that on works council trips 'everything was centred on the number one topic' - sex.

At the heart of the matter is a system which has delivered decades of harmonious labour relations - Mitbestimmung, or co-determination - in which workers and unions are involved in the workings of management and its decision-making. Advocates of co-determination say this model of social consensus helps raise productivity and enables Germany to maintain a large manufacturing base - making it the envy of countries like Britain. Critics say it is open to abuse, as the VW imbroglio seems to bear out.

During his day in court Piech pointed out that the company, which he had found in a 'catastrophic state close to collapse' when he took over as its chairman, had been transformed into a success story. The implication was that the 'irregularities' were a small price to pay if they contributed to such a turnaround.

But the case has enraged millions of ordinary Germans, understandably smarting at the lurid reports of ostentation and sleaze after several years in which they have been forced to face wage freezes and welfare cuts. And they are well aware that the glory days - when VW made cars for the masses rather than rivalling luxury brands like Mercedes and BMW - are over.

While giving evidence, Piech, who is reportedly Germany's highest paid executive, rubbed salt into the wound with his rebuke to a lawyer over his mispronunciation of the name Lamborghini, the luxury sports car which is part of the VW group. 'Everyone who buys a Lamborghini can pronounce the name just as he likes,' Piech said. 'But those who can't afford one should say it properly.' The case continues this week when Piech's successor as CEO, former VW head Bernd Pischetsrieder, is due in the witness box."

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/ja ... automotive" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[fishtank]

Funny you should mention Volkswagen LinChong...

The seeds of a debate began to emerge from conference around the issue of industrial
democracy. The view from the platform being we need to change and improve our
relationship with the employer and for the employer to do the same.
Whilst I think most of us recognise that the world would be a much better if we all got along a bit better, the leadership of the union must think very carefully before it enters into partnerships of this type.

It emerged during the debate that industrial democracy had been trialled in the Post Office
during the 1970’s following the infamous “Bullock report” and could hardly be described as a
success. For me this quite a timely debate as only the week before annual conference I went
to Hannover in Germany as part of a southwest TUC executive delegation. This was a meeting
of regional trade union and employers bodies from across Europe to explore social partnership. This is where employers, unions and governments work together in the
collective interest.

Social partnership is something that we don’t really do in this country. This for many reasons is a real shame because in Italy, Germany, France and Spain trade unions have a real input into everything from public services, employment and development policy.

There was one part of my visit that did concern me. That was a visit to the Volkswagen factory on the outskirts of Hannover. This was the plant where they make all the commercial vehicles and camper vans. The trip was organised because VW are seen as a model when it comes to social partnership and co-determination within the workplace. I had the usual tour of the massive factory, where of course kiazen (the original version of world class mail) was in full operation.

After the tour I sat down and listened very carefully to a presentation from the production
manager and the chair of the works council (senior elected union official). What they both
described was a perfect picture and a very close and blissful relationship. However if you
scratch away at the surface the mask began to slip. The chair of the works council had no
adequate response to some fundamental questions that I put to her about my concerns. In
your view do you believe that because of your very close relationship with the employer that
you gain more concessions from the company? Or do you believe that because of your
relationship with the employer that they gain more concessions from the works council
(Union)?

I went on to ask a question about the perception of the works council amongst the workforce.
Does the workforce see the works council as a vehicle for representing them and achieving
their aspirations? Or is there a sense of apathy towards the works council from the workers?
The chair of the works council really struggled to answer these questions.
What I wanted to hear was that the trade union gets a much better deal out of the employer from this relationship and the workforce has confidence in the body to work for their aspirations. I didn’t hear any of this in her answers and this concerned me. It also worried me throughout my questioning (and the chair of the works councils answers), that the production manager had a very big smug smile on his face. A picture is worth a thousand words as they say.

The atmosphere of apathy around the VW plant could be linked to major corruption that took
place a few years ago on the works council. The former head of the works council was jailed
for two years and nine months over a sex and bribery scandal. This involved a slush fund for
managers and union reps to enjoy lavish meals and trips to overseas brothels. This was in
return for accepting inferior collective agreements. This was probably only possible because
of the very cosy relationship management had with the works council.

At conference I listened to the leadership talk of their vision for the future in having the trades union, customers and local bodies on joint boards of this type. This is missing the point. Do you really think that privateers driven solely by profit will care about the views of others? In any case they are bound to have a majority on these forums in order to marginalise the CWU as they drive through their plans.We have already seen this type of relationship prove detrimental to us in the form of the CWU pensions trustees, where despite being on the board they always get outvoted.

I believe these plans are pie in the sky and even if implemented will only benefit the company and not members of the CWU. We must maintain our strength as an independent trade union and not a dependant trade union.
By Kye Dudd Royal Mail Section Secretary

[dvbuk55]

I think there's quite a few people who are concerned about the "hail fellow well met" relationship between the CWU and RM Management: are we then to assume that this is a precursor to a closer relationship altogether? There has already been mention of seats on the board previously and at least one supporter of the union feeling that it is no bad thing. So how would the ordinary membership go about combating such a move? Would we, for example, be given a vote, would we actually be a party to the machinations behind closed doors at all - if it was a vote would it be a free vote or would we be subjected, once again, to a road show advocating acceptance. I'll just bet there are a few in the Ivory Tower can't wait to experience "inclusion" with the prawn sandwiches, caviar, days at the races, evenings at the opera and expensive wine................well forget that, more a darts tournament and a pint of best bitter but if it's free......................................

[LinChong]

The minority status of employee representatives on the Board of Volkswagen was enough to make sure that employees could not influence decisions but bribes had to be used to get the employee representatives to agree to sell these decisions to the workforce.

In Volkswagen the employee representatives were used as an enabling tool of top down control.

[dvbuk55]

The minority status of employee representatives on the Board of Volkswagen was enough to make sure that employees could not influence decisions but bribes had to be used to get the employee representatives to agree to sell these decisions to the workforce.

In Volkswagen the employee representatives were used as an enabling tool of top down control.

Oh dear........................

[fishtank]

So how would the ordinary membership go about combating such a move? Would we, for example, be given a vote, would we actually be a party to the machinations behind closed doors at all - if it was a vote would it be a free vote or would we be subjected, once again, to a road show advocating acceptance.

To galvanise membership support we will be launching new communications and consideration is being given to both a survey of the membership and a full postal consultative ballot with independent scrutineers. Such a ballot would seek the membership's endorsement of our opposition to privatisation, their support for a new Royal Mail Business Model and the CWU view of the minimum requirements on employee ownership, should the government advance privatisation. The consultative ballot could also be used to gain membership support against the threat of End to End competition.

The approach to membership engagement is currently being developed and a more detailed paper will be placed before the Executive in October 2012.