Over the coming months, my wife and I will ask several companies to conduct Board‑supervised studies of whether substantial, non‑controlling, broad‑based employee ownership transactions could strengthen long‑term alignment, productivity, succession, culture, and stockholder value—while preserving Board authority and public‑market discipline.
This is a strategic ownership question, not a compensation or benefits request. Our stockholder proposals do not ask companies to adopt an ESOP, change pay, alter benefits, or manage plan administration. They ask Boards to review whether a significant but non‑controlling employee ownership stake—potentially via an employee stock ownership plan (ESOP), employee ownership trust (EOT), or a similar vehicle—could enhance long‑term stockholder value.
Take the First Step – and Music for a Democratic Corporate Governance
What I’m proposing (generic language)
- Resolved: Stockholders request that the Board prepare a report evaluating the feasibility, costs, and benefits of a potential extraordinary transaction through which a broad-based employee ownership vehicle, such as an employee stock ownership plan or employee ownership trust, would acquire ownership or equity interests in Company X or a substantial business unit. The report should be prepared at a reasonable cost, omit proprietary or legally privileged information, and be made publicly available.
- The proponent recommends that the study consider, at the Board’s discretion:
- whether such a transaction could strengthen long-term retention, workforce commitment, innovation, productivity, and sustainable stockholder value; and
- what governance rights, if any, should accompany the employee ownership vehicle while preserving Board authority and avoiding control blocks?
- Recommended Guardrails: Structure any stake as substantial but non‑controlling; use ordinary common equity; do not create special voting classes or guaranteed Board seats; include governance safeguards to avoid employee control and managerial entrenchment.
- Reporting: Prepare the review at a reasonable cost, omit proprietary or legally privileged information, and publish a summary by a date certain. The Board retains full discretion over conclusions and any subsequent actions.
Why focus on broad‑based employee ownership?
- Long‑term alignment: A meaningful, durable ownership stake can extend an owner mindset beyond the executive suite, reinforcing accountability to long‑term value creation.
- Productivity and performance: Multiple empirical studies associate broad‑based ownership—especially when paired with group performance pay—with higher productivity growth and improved operating outcomes. Research supports broad-based ownership as a productivity tool. Blasi et al. report that average productivity rose 4.4 percent after ESOP adoption. A decade-long comparison found productivity growth 7 points higher at public companies with over 5 percent employee ownership. They report annual stockholder returns about 2 points higher.¹ Recent Census-based research found larger productivity gains when employee ownership was paired with broad-based group performance pay.² Norges Bank Investment Management states employee share ownership can create long-term value for companies, shareholders, employees, and society.³
- Succession and culture: Thoughtfully structured, non‑controlling employee ownership can help institutionalize strong cultures, support leadership transitions, and reduce turnover.
- Capital discipline: Framing this as an ownership transaction—issuance vs. contribution vs. market purchase vs. repurchase—puts dilution, financing, tax treatment, and governance safeguards squarely in the Board’s remit.
Why frame it as an extraordinary transaction?
Board‑level reviews of ownership structure and capital allocation sit outside “ordinary business” topics like wages, benefits, or plan administration. A transaction study avoids micromanagement by not prescribing a percentage, financing method, timetable, or plan design. It asks only whether, and under what safeguards, a substantial but non‑controlling broad‑based stake could enhance long‑term stockholder value.
Illustrative examples with measurable outcomes
The following cases show substantial, non‑controlling, broad‑based employee ownership coexisting with durable operating and financial performance. They are indicators, not guarantees; each company’s context differs.
Publicly traded companies (non‑controlling, broad‑based stakes)
- Procter & Gamble (NYSE: PG)
- Vehicle: Broad-based equity/retirement plans building a meaningful, non‑controlling aggregate employee stake over time.
- Outcomes cited publicly: Multi‑decade dividend growth; sustained total shareholder return relative to staples peers; long employee tenure and engagement referenced in filings.
- Relevance: Demonstrates that large‑scale, non‑controlling employee ownership participation can coexist with disciplined capital returns and Board stewardship.
- Southwest Airlines (NYSE: LUV)
- Vehicle: Longstanding profit‑sharing with broad employee equity participation.
- Outcomes disclosed: Recurring profit‑sharing payouts; an industry‑leading multi‑year pre‑pandemic profitability streak; competitive operating metrics (e.g., unit costs) over multiple cycles.
- Relevance: Links broad‑based ownership participation to durable operating performance and workforce alignment in a cyclical industry.
- Cisco Systems (NASDAQ: CSCO) and Intel (NASDAQ: INTC)
- Vehicle: Broad‑based equity participation creating substantial but non‑controlling workforce ownership in aggregate.
- Outcomes disclosed: Sustained free cash flow supporting dividends/buybacks alongside share‑based compensation; breadth of participation noted in filings; retention/engagement initiatives tied to performance.
- Relevance: Illustrates that broad participation can scale in large public companies while maintaining capital discipline and Board control.
Large private or formerly public exemplars (analog outcomes)
- Publix Super Markets (ESOP/trust)
- Outcomes: Consistent profitability, recurring dividends, internal share price appreciation over time; low turnover compared to grocery peers.
- Relevance: Shows durable operating performance and wealth creation for a workforce‑wide, non‑controlling ownership base.
- WinCo Foods (ESOP)
- Outcomes: Multi‑state expansion; documented ESOP wealth accumulation; low turnover supporting an everyday‑low‑price strategy.
- Relevance: Connects broad‑based ownership to execution quality in a thin‑margin sector.
- Davey Tree (ESOP/trust)
- Outcomes: Sustained revenue and EBITDA growth; long employee tenure; continued acquisition program under a non‑controlling employee ownership model.
- Relevance: Demonstrates the scalability of non‑controlling employee ownership in service businesses with specialized talent.
- New Belgium Brewing (pre‑acquisition ESOP)
- Outcomes: Growth during ESOP era; realized employee payouts upon strategic sale.
- Relevance: Shows financial value realization for broad‑based owners in an eventual liquidity event.
- Taylor Guitars (Employee Ownership Trust, 2021)
- Outcomes (reported in trade press): Continued revenue growth and order backlogs; retention of skilled craft labor post‑transaction.
- Relevance: Indicates potential for stability and quality in a premium manufacturing niche under an EOT structure.
What a good Board study should measure
- Financial: Dilution/EPS and cash‑flow impact; credit profile; dividend capacity; total shareholder return drivers; cost of capital.
- Operating: Revenue and EBITDA growth; productivity/throughput; safety and quality; customer metrics.
- Human capital: Turnover, tenure, and retention of critical skills; employee diversification risk and financial education.
- Governance: Size and form of any ownership rights (if any) that avoid employee control; safeguards against entrenchment or hidden control blocs; continued Board authority and public‑market discipline.
What this campaign is not
- Not a request to change compensation, benefits, hiring, promotion, workforce metrics, or plan administration.
- Not a prescription of a percentage, financing method, timetable, plan design, voting formula, or implementation date.
- Not a demand for employee control. Any transaction contemplated would be substantial but non‑controlling and subject to governance safeguards and full Board discretion.
Broad‑Based Employee Ownership Transactions: Closing
Broad‑based, non‑controlling employee ownership is a strategic option worth putting through a disciplined Board process. The ask is simple: study feasibility, costs, benefits, structures, and safeguards, then publish a short summary. If no transaction is advisable, the Board can and should say so. If there is a path that strengthens alignment, productivity, succession, culture, and stockholder value—without compromising Board authority or market discipline—stockholders deserve to see it.
Additional Citations Invited (Pro and Con)
Collaborate with CorpGov.net on Social Media (or Leave a Reply at the bottom)
Linkedin
BlueSky
Facebook
Mastodon
Substack
X (formerly Twitter)
Posts Related to Broad‑Based Employee Ownership