The miserable fate of Enron’s employees will be a landmark
in business history, one of those awful events that everyone agrees must never
be allowed to happen again. This urge is understandable and noble: thousands
have lost virtually all their retirement savings with the demise of Enron stock.
But making sure it never happens again may not be possible, because the sudden
impoverishment of those Enron workers represents something even larger than it
seems. It’s the latest turn in the unwinding of one of the most audacious
promises of the 20th century. The promise was assured economic
security—even comfort—for essentially everyone in the developed world. With the
explosion of wealth, that began in the 19th century it became possible to think
about a possibility no one had dared to dream before. The fear at the center of
daily living since caveman days—lack of food, warmth, shelter—would at last lose
its power to terrify. That remarkable promise became reality in many ways.
Governments created welfare systems for anyone in need and separate programs for
the elderly (Social Security in the U.S.). Labour unions promised not only
better pay for workers but also pensions for retirees. Giant corporations came
into being and offered the possibility—in some cases the promise—of lifetime
employment plus guaranteed pensions The cumulative effect was a fundamental
change in how millions of people approached life itself, a reversal of attitude
that most rank as one of the largest in human history. For millennia the average
person’s stance toward providing for himself had been. Ultimately I’m on my own.
Now it became, ultimately I’ll be taken care of. The early
hints that this promise might be broken on a large scale came in the 1980s. U.S.
business had become uncompetitive globally and began restructuring massively,
with huge Layoffs. The trend accelerated in the 1990s as the bastions of
corporate welfare faced reality. IBM ended its no-layoff policy. AT&T fired
thousands, many of whom found such a thing simply incomprehensible, and a few of
whom killed themselves. The other supposed guarantors of our economic security
were also in decline. Labour-union membership and power fell to their lowest
levels in decades. President Clinton signed a historic bill scaling back
welfare. Americans realized that Social Security won’t provide social security
for any of us. A less visible but equally significant trend
affected pensions. To make costs easier to control, companies moved away from
defined benefit pension plans, which obligate them to pay out specified amounts
years in the future, to defined contribution plans, which specify only how much
goes into the play today. The most common type of defined-contribution plan is
the 401(k). the significance of the 401(k) is that it puts most of the
responsibility for a person’s economic fate back on the employee. Within limits
the employee must decide how much goes into the plan each year and how it gets
invested—the two factors that will determine how much it’s worth when the
employee retires. Which brings us back to Enron Those billions
of dollars in vaporized retirement savings went in employees’ 401(k) accounts.
That is, the employees chose how much money to put into those accounts and then
chose how to invest it. Enron matched a certain proportion of each employee’s
401(k) contribution with company stock, so everyone was going to end up with
some Enron in his or her portfolio; but that could be regarded as a freebie,
since nothing compels a company to match employee contributions at all. At least
two special features complicate the Enron case. First, some shareholders charge
top management with illegally covering up the company’s problems, prompting
investors to hang on when they should have sold. Second, Enron’s 401(k) accounts
were locked while the company changed plan administrators in October, when the
stock was falling, so employees could not have closed their accounts if they
wanted to. But by far the largest cause of this human tragedy
is that thousands of employees were heavily overweighed in Enron stock. Many had
placed 100% of their 401(k) assets in the stock rather than in the 18 other
investment options they were offered. Of course that wasn’t prudent, but it’s
what some of them did. The Enron employees’ retirement disaster
is part of the larger trend away from guaranteed economic security. That’s why
preventing such a thing from ever happening again may be impossible. The huge
attitudinal shift to I’ll-be-taken-care-of took at least a generation. The shift
back may take just as long. It won’t be complete until a new generation of
employees see assured economic comfort as a 20th-century quirk, and understand
not just intellectually but in their bones that, like most people in most times
and places, they’re on their own. Why does the author say at the beginning "The miserable fate of Enron’s
employees will be a landmark in business history..."
A. Because the company has gone bankrupt.
B. Because such events would never happen again.
C. Because many Enron workers lost their retirement savings.
D. Because it signifies a turning point in economic security.