3 ms·
No. But that has never stopped a layoff. It would be better to do this the way the FDIC treats failed banks: sell off obligations of the company, including bui
by anonymouskimmer 4y ago
No. But that has never stopped a layoff.
It would be better to do this the way the FDIC treats failed banks: sell off obligations of the company, including buildings, equipment, and employees, to competitors. For a straightforward business such as a train logistics company with direct competitors who do effectively the same business, this seems relatively simple.
- refurb 4y agoSelling to competitors sounds like a great way to create monopolies and perverse incentives. Your idea is full of holes.
- anonymouskimmer 4y agoYou do know that the FDIC requires spin offs as necessary to eliminate monopolies?
- refurb 4y agoOk, so going with your idea. We kill a company, then sell to competitors. FDIC says "that's anti-competitive". Now what?
- anonymouskimmer 4y agoPart of the merger plans include the spin-off plans. This is typical even in large mergers that aren't government negotiated.
- refurb 4y agoSo you're not killing the company? You're justing selling it (bad safety culture and all) to another company?
- anonymouskimmer 4y agoYou'd be selling the pieces of it. There would be no corporate charter, shareholders, board of directors, or other corporate structure left.
- refurb 4y agoAnd no workers.
- SinParadise 4y agoThe invisible hand of the labor market will solve this issue.
- anonymouskimmer 4y agoOnly if they quit. Otherwise they'd be transferred to the new company or one of the anti-monopoly spin-offs along with their part of the business, just like bank branches and headquarters are today.