> The company is only 12-years old. That explains a lot. Not only is it not much time for turnover, but it almost certainly means the original management is s

> The company is only 12-years old. That explains a lot. Not only is it not much time for turnover, but it almost certainly means the original management is still running the show. Trusting in a person is easy, but keeping that company trust for year after year is very hard, especially if the company grows. It only takes one asshole manager to break that trust and once broken it takes many many years to rebuild, if ever. This happened a lot in the US where companies would cultivate loyalty in their employees throughout the 50s and 60s and even into the 70s. Then the old guard retired and new management came in and started abusing the trust in the name of a higher bottom line--doing mass layoffs, cutting pensions, slashing benefits, outsourcing, engaging in huge stock buybacks with the funds instead of investing in R&D, typical 80s and beyond behavior. Then they went all Pikachu face when employee loyalty dried up and their competitiveness faltered and the companies found themselves unable to compete without government assistance.