okay, maybe not in-depth. Just, well, a strange story kept popping up on my facebook feed that I sort of didn’t understand, and so, really, really needing a distraction from all of the current events that lead me to inconsolable sadness if I dwell on them to long. So, here I am writing about something that, to me, is probably one of the least important things to me in the world right now, because, well, I find it interesting how outside of the mainstream my thinking might be, if everyone else seems to be viewing this story from such radically different points of view than my own.
I have a long-time online friend who shops at a farmer’s market. She really likes the place, and so do a lot of other people. I’ve hardly ever set foot in *any* farmer’s market, let alone the regional one at the center of the story.
Let me see if I can summarise, before we get started. A family owned business for over a century recently replaced its CEO. The employees and customers all really liked the way the CEO ran the business, and so conducted a walkout/strike sort of thing. Some of the upper level managers who helped organise the walkout/strike were fired for their participation. The walkout/strikes are ongoing, and apparently the shareholders are entertaining selling partial control of the company.
I left out a lot, because, it’s a summary, but I think that touches on the main points.
Now, I support my friend’s view, in that, hey, I probably will never set foot in the store in question, and she’s an actual customer there, so what she has to say about it means a lot more than someone who just has a little too much time on his hands, and wants to write something about something that doesn’t really concern me in any way.
But there’s things I simply don’t understand, and suspect it has to do with a larger general feeling in the populace today that I never have or likely will fit into. To me, it sounds like the employees were exceptionally well taken care of I haven’t read anything that makes me think the changing of the CEO affected them a whole lot, personally, other than having to learn to work with new managers. I guess I’ve never understood the “go on strike” mentality, so I probably never will understand why the employees rallied behind the former CEO. They had a good thing, and they were willing to risk it for a CEO/owner who probably is a lot better off than they ever will be. That’s cool. I guess on the face of it, I kind of admire it, in a way. Like if they didn’t have a family to feed, or rent to pay, or anything like that. I don’t understand risking your livelihood over it, though.
I sort of have an informal mantra: Be the kind of employee you would want to have, if you were a business owner. I don’t think I would want an employee that was trying to hurt my company by denying my customers my services. I think that I would probably want to fire an employee who did something like that. That’s just me, and my informal mantra talking tho.
I suspect part of what is going on, is that one of the minor owners is probably getting older, and looking to cash out. I don’t know anything about this person, having just learned her name today, but apparently she was the swing vote that got the former CEO put in place in the first place. six years later, after he had some success with it, she changed her vote, for whatever reason. And that triggered the whole chain of events.
As I said before, it is a great media sensationalisation story, but as far as a case study for business, well, it sounds to me like one of the owners has reached the point where she’d like to cash out, as eventually owners like to do. So, that minor owner’s story remains to me the interesting part of the story. .