The response of majority employee-owned firms during the pandemic compared to other firms

• Published in: Journal of participation and employee ownership (Online) Vol. 4; no. 2; pp. 92 - 101
• Main Authors: Blasi, Joseph, Kruse, Douglas, Weltmann, Dan
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Bingley Emerald Group Publishing Limited 26.11.2021
• Subjects: Coronavirus Aid Relief & Economic Security Act 2020-US; COVID-19; Debt cancellation; Employee ownership; Employees; Employment; Government aid; Minority set aside programs; Pandemics; Small business loans; United States > US
• ISSN: 2514-7641; 2514-765X
• DOI: 10.1108/JPEO-09-2021-0014

Purpose>The purpose of this study is to understand how majority employee-owned firms responded to the pandemic compared to firms that were not majority employee-owned. The Employee Ownership Foundation partnered with Rutgers University and the SSRS survey firm to survey ESOP and non-ESOP firms about their responses to the COVID-19 pandemic. A key purpose of the survey was to estimate firm-level changes in employment from mid-January to August (current employment figures were adjusted to August 5 using BLS industry employment trends). The survey also looked at other forms of adjustment and responses to the pandemic as reviewed below. The focus in this study is on the differences between firms that are majority owned by ESOPs and those that are not.Design/methodology/approach>The survey included 247 executives from ESOP Association member companies and 500 executives from an SSRS business panel constructed to be representative of US companies with 50 or more employees. The survey started on August 5 and ended on September 23, 2020.Findings>(1) Majority ESOP firms had employment declines from January to August that were on average only one-fourth as large as for other firms. The difference is maintained when controlling for industry membership. (2) Majority ESOP firms were more likely to be declared “essential,” but the lower employment cutbacks among majority ESOP firms remain among essential and non-essential businesses. As essential businesses, majority ESOP firms were more likely receive Paycheck Protection Program or other government pandemic assistance, but both assistance recipients and non-recipients had lower employment cutbacks among majority ESOP firms. (3) The extent of employment cutbacks was higher for non-managers than for managers, but the manager/non-manager gap was higher among other firms than among majority ESOP firms.Research limitations/implications>This study supports empirical findings done previously.Practical implications>This study suggests to non-EO firms what they can do.Social implications>This study suggests strengths of EO firms.Originality/value>A very original and one-of-a-kind dataset.