3 ms·

The article I linked to explains the origins of Huawei's ownership structure. It made sense when it was set up decades ago, though it's not the way that a compa

The article I linked to explains the origins of Huawei's ownership structure. It made sense when it was set up decades ago, though it's not the way that a company would be set up now. Yes, it may be unusual for a company this size to be set up this way, but there are very few companies of this size anyways. There does not appear to be anything nefarious about the use of the labor union committee as a vehicle for employee share ownership. It just appears to have been a reasonable way to set things up when Huawei was starting out.

belter 5y ago
Not really: "Who Controls Huawei?" https://www.ui.se/globalassets/butiken/ui-paper/2020/ui-paper-no.-5-2020.pdf https://www.ui.se/globalassets/butiken/ui-paper/2020/ui-pape... "Technical dependency and the issue of party-state control over Huawei" "...While at first glance Huawei’s line of defence appears convincing, there are also reasons for doubt. It is true that the company is privately owned by its employees, but there is reason to believe that ownership does not come with control..." "...Huawei has not only profited from party-state support, but is operating in a specific political, legal and economic environment that makes it impossible for the company to be fully independent..." "....The widespread distinction between privately owned enterprises (POEs) and state ownership is not decisive in China. It is not ownership but the issue of “state capture”that is pivotal... " "...Following an official request, Huawei has confirmed to the author of this paper that party organisations exist within the company in accordance with Chinese law. The company has provided assurances that party organisations have no influence on the company’s business operations and that it is run by an independent management team. The party organisations are mainly responsible for educating employees. The general findings on the deep linkages between the economic and political elites, however, call into question whether such differentiation is adequate in the context of China’s political economy..." "...China lacks an independent judiciary. While theCCP government speaks of strengthening the role of law in its governance, it follows a rule by law principle and does not intend to implement the rule of law. The CCP has an essentially instrumentalist understanding of law. Law is seen not as a constraint on power, but as a means of power. This means that legal certainty does not exist in areas of crucial political importance. Hence, laws do not provide reassurance against political interference in the business operations of Chinese companies..." "...China’s Intelligence Law,raise even further doubts about whether the law could shield private sector companies from political interference. Article 7 of the Intelligence Law enacted in 2017 and amended in 2018 requires any organisation and citizen to “support, assist in and cooperate in national intelligence work”..." "...Scepticism over Huawei’s independence from party-state control does not just stem from the political, legal and economic environment in which it operates....Huawei’s founder, Ren Zhengfei, is widely believed to have a past in China’s People’s Liberation Army. His daughter and the company’s Chief Financial Officer, Meng Wanzhou, is suspected to have held a public affairs passport.... A widely discussed and controversial analysis of the CVs of leading Huawei engineers found a large overlap with China’s security apparatus..." "...This clearly demonstrates that the main control over Huawei does not lie with the employees of the company, who can only choose 83 people from a preselected list of 109 candidates, but with the nomination teams that hand-pick these people using vague criteria. Whoever wants to control Huawei needs to control the nomination teams. There are no adequate checks in place to ensure that it is not the Chinese Communist Party and its organisations within the company that are the ones exercising such control...." "...What sparks further suspicion of the process is that none of the Huawei employees I have talked to was aware of the nomination process, even though it turns out that real power of selection lies with the nomination teams..." "...In the light of these four factors – the general level of independence of the POEs, the legal environment and Intelligence Law, state support for Huawei and the company’s governance structure – it is very difficult to reject the claims of Huawei critics that the company is more than just a privately run company striving for economic profit..."
- DiogenesKynikos 5y ago
  Not really what? The article you linked acknowledges the legal reasons that Huawei's employee share ownership was set up the way it was (limits on the number of individuals that private Chinese companies were legally allowed to distribute stares to). Most of the concerns the author has with Huawei are really just general concerns about any company in China - namely that the state theoretically could exert influence over them.
  - belter 5y ago
    Its about who controls the company not who is on the record as owning. Did you read the part about the selection committees ?

belter 5y ago

Not really: "Who Controls Huawei?" https://www.ui.se/globalassets/butiken/ui-paper/2020/ui-paper-no.-5-2020.pdf https://www.ui.se/globalassets/butiken/ui-paper/2020/ui-pape... "Technical dependency and the issue of party-state control over Huawei" "...While at first glance Huawei’s line of defence appears convincing, there are also reasons for doubt. It is true that the company is privately owned by its employees, but there is reason to believe that ownership does not come with control..." "...Huawei has not only profited from party-state support, but is operating in a specific political, legal and economic environment that makes it impossible for the company to be fully independent..." "....The widespread distinction between privately owned enterprises (POEs) and state ownership is not decisive in China. It is not ownership but the issue of “state capture”that is pivotal... " "...Following an official request, Huawei has confirmed to the author of this paper that party organisations exist within the company in accordance with Chinese law. The company has provided assurances that party organisations have no influence on the company’s business operations and that it is run by an independent management team. The party organisations are mainly responsible for educating employees. The general findings on the deep linkages between the economic and political elites, however, call into question whether such differentiation is adequate in the context of China’s political economy..." "...China lacks an independent judiciary. While theCCP government speaks of strengthening the role of law in its governance, it follows a rule by law principle and does not intend to implement the rule of law. The CCP has an essentially instrumentalist understanding of law. Law is seen not as a constraint on power, but as a means of power. This means that legal certainty does not exist in areas of crucial political importance. Hence, laws do not provide reassurance against political interference in the business operations of Chinese companies..." "...China’s Intelligence Law,raise even further doubts about whether the law could shield private sector companies from political interference. Article 7 of the Intelligence Law enacted in 2017 and amended in 2018 requires any organisation and citizen to “support, assist in and cooperate in national intelligence work”..." "...Scepticism over Huawei’s independence from party-state control does not just stem from the political, legal and economic environment in which it operates....Huawei’s founder, Ren Zhengfei, is widely believed to have a past in China’s People’s Liberation Army. His daughter and the company’s Chief Financial Officer, Meng Wanzhou, is suspected to have held a public affairs passport.... A widely discussed and controversial analysis of the CVs of leading Huawei engineers found a large overlap with China’s security apparatus..." "...This clearly demonstrates that the main control over Huawei does not lie with the employees of the company, who can only choose 83 people from a preselected list of 109 candidates, but with the nomination teams that hand-pick these people using vague criteria. Whoever wants to control Huawei needs to control the nomination teams. There are no adequate checks in place to ensure that it is not the Chinese Communist Party and its organisations within the company that are the ones exercising such control...." "...What sparks further suspicion of the process is that none of the Huawei employees I have talked to was aware of the nomination process, even though it turns out that real power of selection lies with the nomination teams..." "...In the light of these four factors – the general level of independence of the POEs, the legal environment and Intelligence Law, state support for Huawei and the company’s governance structure – it is very difficult to reject the claims of Huawei critics that the company is more than just a privately run company striving for economic profit..."

DiogenesKynikos 5y ago
Not really what? The article you linked acknowledges the legal reasons that Huawei's employee share ownership was set up the way it was (limits on the number of individuals that private Chinese companies were legally allowed to distribute stares to). Most of the concerns the author has with Huawei are really just general concerns about any company in China - namely that the state theoretically could exert influence over them.
- belter 5y ago
  Its about who controls the company not who is on the record as owning. Did you read the part about the selection committees ?