[Broussebar]

As the article said Duralex was the brand use by a large number of school cantinas in France. Inside of each glass there’s a small number used by the brand to identify the mold used for the creation of the glass. For kids that was a way to decide who is going to fetch the water for the table (smaller number or higher number of the table). That’s why the CE is holding his glass like that in the guardian article. Beside the nostalgia i think a lot of people support them because it’s a SCOP (the majority of the capital of the company is owned by the employees) [1] and it’s nice to see that another kind of company is possible.

[1] https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soci%C3%A9t%C3%A9_coop%C3%A9ra...

[Zababa]

>For kids that was a way to decide who is going to fetch the water for the table (smaller number or higher number of the table).

I only knew the version where your age is the number on the glass. For fetching water, it was the slowest person to say "pot d'eau" (water jug) and sometimes put a hand to your head (it depended on the group).

[Broussebar]

I might have generalized then. It’s maybe something that we had only in the south (aka the broc à eau area). We also used it to check our age of course.

[WawaFin]

To complete, the number was also deciding what age we were for that day

[NoImmatureAdHom]

I too would like to believe that "another kind of company is possible", but this isn't a ringing endorsement...

[anigbrowl]

Eighteen months ago, Marciano oversaw a staff buyout of the company, which had been placed in receivership for the fourth time in 20 years. Today, 180 of the 243 employees are “associates” in the company.

It has only been employee-owned for a short time. Some overhang from the management style of the previous 20 years is only to be expected.

[Loic]

Durable is really the French household name "par excellence".

[bluebarbet]

You mean Duralex. And maybe not just in France. My British school canteen was monopolised by Duralex too.

[mytailorisrich]

> it’s a SCOP (the majority of the capital of the company is owned by the employees)

On the other hand, I suspect that this also makes it more difficult for them to change and adapt.

[dimal]

Why? Most large corporations I’ve dealt with are highly bureaucratic and resistant to change. Good ideas get lost in silos or bogged down in bureaucracy. Whether it works or not seems entirely dependent on whether the company has a moat around their revenue stream, which allows them to be inefficient everywhere else.

For an employee owned co-op, a more anarchistic organization structure that allows for more employee control of everyday decisions could actually allow the company to adapt and change more easily. The ones making decisions have skin in the game, both as workers and owners.