Sacked workers to open new wind turbine factory

Way to go!! It's smart for workers to own the factory as they don't have to pay such CEO , ect overhead or shareholder profits, cutting out the parasites!!

Way to go!! It's smart for workers to own the factory as they don't have to pay such CEO , ect overhead or shareholder profits, cutting out the parasites!!

Some one will have to be in charge. Should he be paid more?
If they organize like Nucor Steel, they may be successful.

Way to go!! It's smart for workers to own the factory as they don't have to pay such CEO , ect overhead or shareholder profits, cutting out the parasites!!

Not only does someone have to run it, but someone has to own it. In general principles, CEO's and shareholders are NOT parasites and profits are not evil as some others might imply. It always makes sense for workers to have a small part of their financial investment into the company they work for. Profits are required either now or in the future to grow a business. Someone's comments above sounds a lot like he has been drinking the socialists' poison Kool-aid.

Back to the real story. Vestas is a large company that had taken a hit as part of the global recession but now seems to be recovering. (They still have a CEO and shareholders, by the way.) Curious the real reason why they closed that plant. That lesson should not be lost.

Best of luck to those picking up the pieces and trying anew.

Not only does someone have to run it, but someone has to own it.

The concept of incorporation says otherwise.

Several companies run by democracy, odd concept for a business but they're typically competitive and forward thinking as they include innovative concepts from all levels of the work force.

Not only does someone have to run it, but someone has to own it.

The concept of incorporation says otherwise.

Several companies run by democracy, odd concept for a business but they're typically competitive and forward thinking as they include innovative concepts from all levels of the work force.

Shareholders are still owners. Successful businesses usually don't make decisions by majority vote. That is fairly well documented.
Decisions typically come down to one individual who is willing to accept responsibility. That is why such people usually get paid more.
Accepting responsibility for one's actions is so uncommon that business rewards and government punishes such responsible individuals.

I believe you might be correct regarding decisions being made.But the person making the decision should also accept the failure and resign,and depart from the marketplace.
Many people would be willing to accept responsibility at the wages given to presidents today.
The shareholders should not tolerate a high priced person who does not accept responsibility or listen to the heavy breath of competitors.
GM,Ford,and Chysler prove the leadership did not believe outsiders could make cars.Xerox and Kodak did not think anyone could enter their markets.
By saying the word successful you eradicate any chance of criticism.

Many people would be willing to accept responsibility at the wages given to presidents today.

Recruiters are searching for such people. Of course they must bring some level of experience to the job.

But the person making the decision should also accept the failure and resign,and depart from the marketplace.

Maybe our politicians could lead by example. 75% of Congress should resign, but it will be better to fire them and have that on their record.
CEOs don't own the company and can be fired. Why doesn't that happen more often?