S&W Boycott- It's working; Layoffs announced

N

nralife

New member
S&W Boycott- It's working; Layoffs announced


Layoffs expected at Smith & Wesson

Associated Press
October 19, 2000

SPRINGFIELD, Mass. (AP) -- Smith & Wesson, the nation's biggest handgun maker, will announce the layoffs of hundreds of workers this week, a news report said Thursday.

WGGB-TV in Springfield cited a memo posted at the company's Springfield plant. The station said the layoffs were confirmed by company officials it did not
identify.

The memo blamed the need for layoffs on "the extended decline in business." It said workers would receive details Friday.

There are about 800 workers at plants in Springfield and Houlton, Maine.

There was no immediate answer to messages left at the company's executive offices or with its media contact.

Smith & Wesson has been struggling to deal with rancor from some competitors and buyers since March, when it entered into an agreement with the government.

In the agreement, the company promised to demand background checks on gun-show buyers, install safety locks, and work on high-tech guns that can be fired
only by their owner.

In exchange, public officials agreed to drop Smith & Wesson from some municipal and other government lawsuits challenging the safety and marketing practices
of the gun industry.

Company officials sent many workers home in July and suspended most of its manufacturing, blaming a consumer boycott and seasonally slow sales.

Recent weeks have brought other signs of turmoil.

On Oct. 6, the gunmaker announced it was replacing Ed Shultz, its president since 1992. It named George Colclough, an executive with the company for 25
years, as his replacement.

The next week, Smith & Wesson's British owner, Tomkins PLC, announced that its longtime chief executive, Greg Hutchings, was leaving. David Newlands, who was acting as the non-executive chairman since June, was named to take his place.

The move followed a series of allegations in the British media about excessive company perks.

Company officials have acknowledged they would consider selling Smith & Wesson. But the gunmaker's executives have said in recent months that it would be
virtually impossible to find a good buyer now.

-30-



------------------

NRA Joe's Second Amendment Discussion Forum

http://Second.Amendment.Homepage.com
 
I'm really sorry to see this happening to a long time American icon in firearms. But you sleep in the bed you make.

I hope other gun makers are getting the message.

Regards,
MP
 
Wonder what would happen if these cowardly bastards would renounce their pact with Satan, declare that they're going to stand up to the national socialists who control the White House, and beg for support from the "gun culture" that the unlamented Ed Schultz loved to slander? I'd send money for their legal defense fund and would go buy a new S&W handgun tomorrow.
 
David - I would contribute as well and likewise buy a new S&W gun. The fact is now, that S&W could be purchased for a song relatively speaking. I still think the NRA should buy it or finance an AMERICAN consortium to buy it. Smith could become the Harley Davidson of U.S. gun manufacturing. It would have to renounce the one sided onerous agreement with Clinton/Cuomo in no uncertain terms, and with a Bush White House HUD and Cuomo can ES&D.

------------------
Safe shooting - PKAY
 
PKAY,

Anyone buying S&W is bound by their agreement with Klinton. However, I do wonder if S&W could sell their designs to a 'start-up' who would then buy their plants etc.... Rename it Smith and Dan Wesson or something along those lines.

madison46

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by PKAY:
David - I would contribute as well and likewise buy a new S&W gun. The fact is now, that S&W could be purchased for a song relatively speaking. I still think the NRA should buy it or finance an AMERICAN consortium to buy it. Smith could become the Harley Davidson of U.S. gun manufacturing. It would have to renounce the one sided onerous agreement with Clinton/Cuomo in no uncertain terms, and with a Bush White House HUD and Cuomo can ES&D.

[/quote]
 
I feel sorry for the employees, but I am still going to enjoy going to the SHOT Show and seeing a big carpeted empty space on the convention center floor where the S&W booth is suppose to be. It would have been an honorable death for the company to have died fighting the good fight, but they dishonored themselves by committing suicide looking for the easy way out.
 
madison46 - That's certainly an approach. I'm just thinking of the "good will" associated with the S&W monicker. With respect to the agreement, Smith was supposed to enjoy a forbearance on the part of the states and municipalities whose current lawsuits named Smith as a defendant along with a number of other manufacturers. That has not happened. I believe only a couple of jurisdictions have dropped Smith from the list. In that case, Smith could simply sh*t can the agreement for lack of consideration and blow it off. BTW, this agreement was not an outgrowth of legislation. It was a unilateral, arm twisting, despicable power play by the Clinton administration which could be rescinded by Bush upon his accession to office. And it should be!

------------------
Safe shooting - PKAY
 
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by PKAY:
I believe only a couple of jurisdictions have dropped Smith from the list. In that case, Smith could simply sh*t can the agreement for lack of consideration and blow it off.[/quote]

Not hardly. As I understand it, the "agreement" was a consent decree--i.e., it is not a "contract" in any way, shape, or form. Think of it as a "plea bargain". S&W has no legal rights in the matter any more--whether or not anyone else lives up to _their_ end of the agreement, S&W must comply or face the legal consequences.

This is the ugly truth of all plea bargains--you can be held to _your_ side of the bargain, but you can't enforce it on the government.
 
What if S&W declared bankruptcy, and sold all of its assets (including the S&W name) to a new corporation owned by the workers/employees.

They could then elect/select the staff of their choice and be owners (stockholders) with the requirement that anyone who left the company (for any reason other than retirement) must sell their stock back to the company (Treasury Stock).

Couldn't a closely-held corporation could do this and generate revenue (other than sales) by selling bonds or getting loans?

If such an arrangement is legal, the workers could shed the onerous agreement, own their own company and control their own destiny.
 
Al, I think you're wrong and PKAY is right. The text of the agreement says that it is indeed a contract. Surely there are some smart lawyers out there who would represent a new and revitalized S&W whose leadership said "OK, Cuomo, you didn't honor your part of the contract, so it's now null and void, and all bets are off." As I said, I'd be willing to contribute to a legal defense fund to help S&W fight that battle, and I bet millions of other gun owners would do the same.
 
Cuomo upheld his end of the deal (HUD isn't suing S&W) so S&W can't declare a breach. S&W is presumed to have knowledge of how much Cuomo can actually deliver so they can't claim misrepresentation.

S&W's best hope is that another vendor (such as Glock) is denied access to a contract based on the agreement. The contract calls for "sweetheart" deals for S&W that violate nearly every known procurement law and regulation. Glock could get the agreement thrown out, at least those provisions. With luck, the whole contract would get knocked out.

Despite posts to the contrary, I really hate to see S&W go. With any luck, someone will come along and buy the patents and machinery, and start up a new corp. Maybe call it "Liberty Arms" or something like that.
 
The part I hate most about this mess is that, once again, the little guys (S&W employees) get the nasty end of the stick because of upper management's (those with "golden parachutes") bad decisions.
 
Maybe the employees could band together and buy out the patents, machinery, etc. and start the new company. Similar to Harley Davidson but under a new name.
 
The sign at the Shot show in S&W's empty spot could read something like "Here's what happens when you stab your customers in the back"

Sorry for the good folks who lost their jobs but when you work for the devil you'll pay the price.
 
I never claimed it was my own idea, Dennis. It's just one that I've grown more and more interested with.

Maybe a representative from TFL could approach S&W's union (surely, they have one) and suggest such a thing. Maybe TFL members could even become stockholders ourselves. I'd put a $1000 towards that.
 
We're outsiders looking in (remember H-D?)
But I'd "mortgage the farm" for that IPO! :D

------------------
NRA LIFE MEMBER
ILLEGITIMI NON CARBORUNDUM
 
I think the agreement is dead meat. The NRA should get involved. Forget the "theme restaurant" bull sh*t in Times Square and bankroll a group of employees and managers to buy the company.

With respect to certain elements of the agreement, a newly reorganized S&W could pursue innovations in firearms design and manufacture as do their competitors; issue a statement to the public explaining their position and renouncing the Clinton/Cuomo accord as unreasonable and unworkable while retaining the moral high ground.

Now is the time for S&W employees to get involved, really involved.

------------------
Safe shooting - PKAY
 
When you consider that the "agreement" was coerced under penalty of law enforcement action, I cannot see how it would hold up in court. Perhaps the initial ruling would be for the gov, but I cannot believe that upon appellate review, it wouldn't be seen for what it is: backdoor (hence unconstitutional) "legislation".
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top