2006 Census of Massachusetts Companies with Employee Stock Ownership Plans (ESOPs) Final Report Submitted to the: Commonwealth Corporation The Schrafft Center 529 Main Street, Suite 110 Boston, MA 02129 T. 617-727-8158 Jonathan Raymond, President January, 2006 Survey research performed by: The Massachusetts Office of Employee Involvement and Ownership P.O. Box 38-1023 Cambridge, MA 02238 Tel: 617-576-6200 Fax: 617-868-7969 Email: [email protected]www.masseio.org Contact: Christopher Mackin P.O. Box 38-1023 Cambridge, MA 02238 Tel: 617-576-6200 Fax: 617-868-7969 Email: [email protected]a program of the Office of Employee Involvement and Ownership Funded by the Commonwealth of Massachusetts
14
Embed
Office of Employee Involvement and Ownershipcommunity-wealth.org/sites/clone.community-wealth...Office of Employee Involvement and Ownership Funded by the Commonwealth of Massachusetts.
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
2006Census of Massachusetts Companies
withEmployee Stock Ownership Plans (ESOPs)
Final Report
Submitted to the:
Commonwealth CorporationThe Schrafft Center
529 Main Street, Suite 110Boston, MA 02129T. 617-727-8158
Jonathan Raymond, President
January, 2006
Survey research performed by:The Massachusetts Office of
Office of Employee Involvement and OwnershipFunded by the Commonwealthof Massachusetts
1
BACKGROUND
The Massachusetts Office for EmployeeInvolvement and Ownersh ip(MASSEIO, www.masseio.org) wascreated by an act of the Massachusettslegislature in 1989. The purpose of thisoffice, based at the non-profit,government funded CommonwealthCorporation (www.commcorp.org), is toencourage the growth of broad-basedemployee ownership of private sectorMassachuset ts bus inesses byMassachusetts citizens. Language insupport of the passage of the originalenabling legislation cited both theproductivi ty and performanceadvantages of employee owned firms inaddition to the advantages that employeeownership contributes toward the goalof greater local ownership and controland job retention for the Massachusettseconomy.
After ten years of providing informationand technical ass is tance toMassachusetts employers consideringthe possibility of employee ownership,in late 1999 MASSEIO conducted thefirst formal survey of employee ownedcompanies in Massachusetts. Theresulting 1999 report provided usefulinformation concerning the performanceof the employee ownership sector of theMassachusetts economy, which includedat that time 89 companies thatcollectively employed 38,384 people.1
This report , along with anaccompanying booklet entitled ESOPs:The Untold Story of Wealth Sharing inMassachusetts has helped explain theadvantages of employee ownership toemployers considering the ESOPalternative as well as to political leadersthroughout our state.
1 That number includes employment figuresfor 61 of the 89 companies. One of thesecompanies is Nypro, which employed about5,500 people outside of Massachusetts in1999.
This report updates our original 1999study and provides timely and accuratedata to both business and politicalleaders. Companies participating in thesurvey will receive a complimentarycopy of this final report.
The 2006 Census found at least 95ESOP companies headquartered inMassachusetts.
What is an ESOP?
An ESOP is an employee benefitplan regulated by the Department ofLabor and the IRS, governed byERISA law. An ESOP is requiredby law to invest primarily in thesecurities of the sponsoringemployer. ESOPs are one of themost common forms of employeeownership in the United States,with over 10,000 ESOP companiesnationwide employing 8 millionemployees.
Research has linked ESOPs tohigher sales and employmentgrowth and increased productivity.
See “Research Evidence on Prevalence andEffects of Employee Ownership,” DougKruse’s February 13, 2002 testimony before theSubcommittee on Employer-EmployeeRelations, Committee on Education and theWorkforce, U.S. House of Representatives, atwww.ownershipassociates.com/kruse.shtm.
2
DATA COLLECTION
In early, 2005, a deliberately expansive,“all companies possible” list of 274potential ESOP companies inMassachusetts was generated, using thedata from the U.S. census conducted in2000; Internal Revenue Service Form5500 data and records from the NationalCenter for Employee Ownership,Oakland, CA; the ESOP Association ofAmerica, Washington, D.C.; OwnershipAssociates; and various regionalconsultant contacts.
MASSEIO sent surveys to each of these274 companies through the spring andsummer of 2005 and made follow-upphone calls to all companies that did notrespond by mail. If companies could notor would not respond to the survey,interviewers asked only for aconfirmation of ESOP status andindustrial sector.
RESPONSE
_ Sixty-three companies or 23% fromthis “all companies possible” list (thatmay never have had ESOPs) had eitherclosed or been acquired._ T h r e e c o m p a n i e s w e r eheadquartered outside of Massachusetts._ 174 companies or 64% respondedto the survey. However, 77 of thoserespondents or 44% reported not nowor never having ESOPs. (Some hadother types of stock programs. Thesecompanies were noted, but detailedinformation was not collected fromthem.)
After eliminating companies fromour original, expansive list that hadeither been closed, acquired oridentified as never having an ESOP,the survey identified ninety-five (95)Massachusetts ESOP companies.
Of those 95 ESOP companies, 68 (or72%) completed the MASSEIO survey.
Twenty-seven (27) companies (or 28%)confirmed by phone that they have anESOP. Some of these companiesprovided information on employmentand ESOP participation.
The survey instrument (see Appendix 1)sought detailed information on a rangeof items, including:_ The percent of company stock heldin the ESOP Trust,_ The value of assets held by theESOP (employee par t ic ipantaccumulated wealth),_ The reasons the ESOP wasestablished,_ Whether the company providesadditional retirement pensions beyondthe ESOP, and_ Whether company employees arecovered by a collective bargainingagreement.
The surveycollectedresponses from174 companiesand found 95ESOPcompaniesbased inMassachusetts.
3
SIZE
Massachusetts ESOP companies rangein size from 9 employees to 13,000employees. One ESOP employer, theNypro Corporation of Clinton, employsover 10,000 overseas employees.2
Excluding Nypro’s overseas employees,Massachusetts ESOP companies rangein size from 9 employees to 3,200employees. The average size ofcompanies that responded to the survey(counting only 1,000 of Nypro’sMassachusetts employees) is 183employees.
The median size is 110 employees.
Our survey asked about increases ordecreases in employment. The 68 ESOPemployers who completed the surveyreported an average and median increasein employment of 2% between 2003 and2004.
Revenues in Massachusetts ESOPcompanies in 2004 ranged from $58,000to approximately one and a half billiondollars. The average increase in revenueover last fiscal year was 22%, but themedian increase was 5%.
Table 1: Company Size
No. ofemployees
Count PercentESOPs
Nationwide
1– 49 23 32% 34%50 – 99 8 11% 19%
100 – 199 22 31% 16%200 – 500 10 14% 14%
500+ 8 11% 17 %Total 71 100%
2 In May of 2005 Nypro initiated a StockAppreciation Rights program for allemployees worldwide.
PERCENTAGE OF
ESOP OWNERSHIP
According to survey data collected from66 ESOP companies that provided thisinformation, the percentage of companystock owned by ESOPs ranged from0% to 100%. Of those, the ESOP ownsa majority of the stock in 27 companies,or 41%. Nationwide, about 25% ofESOP companies are majority-ownedby the ESOP.
Fourteen, or 21%, of MassachusettsESOP companies are 100% employee-owned, compared to 10% nationwide.The average percentage ownership bythe stock plans was 51%.
Seven ESOP companies are publiclytraded (about 11%), and 56 are privatelyheld. Nationwide, the figure for publiclytraded ESOP companies is 10%.
Twenty-two of the companies (or 35%of those who responded to this item)reported that they are S-corporations,while 40 (65%) responded that theywere C-corporations.
It is only since 1998 that S-corporationshave been permitted by the IRS tosponsor ESOPs. Since then, there hasbeen a remarkable growth of S-corporations ESOP companies.
AGE
The age of the ESOPs ranges from justformed to 30 years old (the age of theenabling Federal legislation for ESOPs,passed in 1974). The average age of theplans is 12 years old, or formed in 1993,and the median is 11 years old.
BORROWED FUNDS
Twenty-five companies (or 41%) reliedprimarily on borrowed funds to fund theESOP. Another 17 companies (28%)used a combination of loans and cash.Six companies were unable to provideinformation for this question. Ofcompanies that responded, 69% relied inpart or primarily on borrowed funds tofund the ESOP. Nationwide, at least75% of ESOP companies used borrowedfunds to acquire employer securities.
WHY THE ESOP
WAS ESTABLISHED
In response the survey question thatasked respondents to report why theESOP was established (respondentscould choose more than one reason),
q 74% checked the response “as anemployee benefit,”
q 62% “to purchase stock from amajor owner,”
q 51% “to encourage employees tothink like owners,”
q 44% “to retain and recruitemployees,”
q 37% “for tax advantages,”q 37% “to improve productivity,”q 4% “to raise capital for the
company.”
32 companies or 47% reported that theyadvertise the fact that they are an ESOP.
COST
Respondents to the survey were askedto estimate the cost of setting up theESOP. Of the 61 who answered thisquestion,
q 18 said it cost “less than $30,000,”q 9 “$30,000 to $40,000,”q 6 “$40,000 to $50,000,”q 2 “$50,000 to $60,000,”q 0 “$60,000 to $80,000,”q 1 “$80,000 to $100,000,” andq 9 “More than $100,000.”
Sixteen respondents did not know howmuch the ESOP had cost to set up.
The mediancost of settingup an ESOP isbetween$40,000 and$50,000. Atleast two-thirds ofcompaniesreliedprimarily or inpart onborrowedfunds toacquireemployer stockfor the ESOP.
5
UNIONIZATION
Nine Massachusetts ESOP companies(13%) have unions, compared to about4% nationwide.
COMPENSATION REDUCTION
Of the 68 surveyed companies, 7 (10%)report that they reduced compensation(for example, in wages or other benefits)in establishing the ESOP. Nationally,that figure is only 3%.
OTHER RETIREMENTBENEFITS
Sixty-three (93%) surveyed ESOPcompanies provide another retirementplan in addition to the ESOP. Fifty-seven (84%) provide a 401K, twelve(18%) provide a defined-benefit plan,and seven (10%) provide a profit-sharing plan.
WEALTH
What is the pay-off of employee stockownership for Massachusetts workers?By taking the total value of stock held inall ESOPs surveyed, and dividing by thetotal number of plan participants, we canestimate a rough measure of the averagewealth owned by the meanMassachusetts ESOP participant.
The total value of assets held by 60ESOP companies that responded to thisitem in our survey is almost $1 billiondollars: $933,875,261.
Taking that figure, divided by the totalnumber of participants in the ESOPsthat reported asset information (16,414)produces a per participant wealth figureof: $56,210.14.
Table 3: Measured ESOP Wealth in Massachusetts 1999 and 20051999 2005
Total ESOP Wealth3 $1,022,634,202 $933,875,261Wealth per participant $39,895 $56,210
3 The figures for total wealth are underestimates, since not all confirmed Massachusetts ESOPcompanies were able to report the estimated value of their ESOP.
Sixty ESOPcompanies inMassachusettshold assetsworth a totalvalue of almost$1 billiondollars.
The averagevalue perESOPparticipant inMassachusettsis $56,210.
Nine out of tensurveyedESOPcompaniesprovideanotherretirement planin addition tothe ESOP.
6
WEALTH OVER TIME
In 1999, the total value of assets held by51 ESOP companies that responded tothis item in our survey was$1,022,634,201.76 That figure, dividedby the total number of participants(25,633) in the ESOPs that reportedasset information, produced a perparticipant wealth figure of: $39,895.22.
This figure may give the impression thatESOP value has diminished in the five-year period from 1999 to 2005, but infact, in those companies for which wehave data (at time of publication) forboth time periods, the trend has beenpositive.
We have figures on asset value andnumber of participants in both 1999 and2005 for only 17 of the 44 companiesthat had confirmed ESOPs in bothyears. Just looking at those 17companies, the total ESOP value wentup between the two surveys by$260,431,241 (it increased in 12 casesand decreased in five cases, going upby $15 million on average). Thenumber of participants in those 17companies went up by 746 (it increasedin nine cases, stayed the same in 2, anddecreased in six). The average ESOPvalue per participant taking all 17companies together went up by$25,067, from $39,059 to $64,126. Theinformation for all 17 companies isdisplayed in the table below.
Table 4: ESOP Value and ESOP Participant comparisons for a panel of 17 companies, 1999 to 2005
All dollar figures in the following table are in nominal terms (i.e., not adjusted for inflation). Adjusting forinflation, the $64,126 figure would be $56,225 in 1999 dollars, so instead of a 64% increase over the 1999average, the change in average ESOP value per participant would be an increase of approximately 44% overthe 1999 figure.Averages are the unweighted mean of figures for all 17 companies.
The trend forESOP valuefrom 1999 to2005 ispositive, risingby $15 millionon averageand going upin 12 out of 17cases.
7
PRODUCTIVITY AND
COMPETITIVENESS EFFECTS
Respondents to the survey were asked toestimate the effect of the ESOP onemployee motivation and productivity.Of the 67 respondents who answeredthis question,q 12 (or 18%) said it had “strongly
improved motivation andproductivity,”
q 42 (or 63%) said it had “somewhatimproved motivation andproductivity,”
q 12 (or 18%) said it had “no impacton motivation and productivity,”
q 0 said it had “a negative impact onmotivation and productivity,” and
q 1 was “not sure.”These percentages are nearly identical tothose from a nationwide survey on thetopic.
When asked if they felt that thecompany was more competitive becauseof the ESOP,q 25 (or 37%) said “Yes,”q 20 (or 30%) were “not sure” andq 22 (or 33%) said “No”
Nationwide, the percentage of surveyedcompanies that felt that their companywas more competitive as a result of theESOP was 47%. Only 13% were unsureof the ESOP’s impact and about 25%did not feel that the ESOP had increasedcompetitiveness.
COSTS AND BENEFITS
The survey asked respondents to reporttheir opinions on the major benefits ofthe company’s ESOP. More than oneanswer could be checked.
q 75% said it “provides an attractivefinancial benefit for employees,”
q 49% said that “employee ownershipbuilds a more stable workforce,”
q 40% cited the “incentive forimproving productivity,”
q 37% said it “can be used as a tax-advantaged technique of corporatefinance,” and
q 21% said the “ESOP provides amarket for company stock.”
For the respondents, issues of concernassociated with the ESOP included:
keeping Complexity,q 13% Expense of Establishing and
Operating Plan, andq 10% Legislative and Regulatory
Changes.
Again, more than one answer could bechecked.
The relative benefits and concernslargely mirror those of ESOPsnationwide.
Eight out of tensurveyedcompaniesthought thatthe ESOP hadeither“strongly” or“somewhat”improvedmotivation andproductivity.
8
INDUSTRY SECTOR
We have data on industry group for allof the 95 Massachusetts ESOPcompanies. ESOPs in Massachusettsexist in every industrial sector.The distribution of ESOPs in industrialsectors in Massachusetts is fairlyconsistent with national patterns.
• Sixteen ESOP companies (17%) arein banking, finance, and insurancesectors. This is a somewhat higherproportion than the distribution ofESOPs in finance, insurance, andreal estate nationwide (10%).4
• In Massachusetts, 30 companies aremanufacturing firms, or 31% of thesample. This is a similarconcentration in manufacturing tothat which exists nationally.Nationwide, 31% of ESOPcompanies are located inmanufacturing sectors. LikeMassachusetts, Washington Statehas 29% of its ESOP companieslocated in manufacturing sectors.5
• Eight ESOP companies (8%) are inhigh tech sectors (includingr o b o t i c s , s o f t w a r e , a n dbiotechnology.)
Other sectors where ESOP companiesare found in Massachusetts includewholesale, retail, transportation,publishing, consulting, research,business services, construction, andarchitecture. 4 National numbers based on ESOPAssociation membership.5 Kardas, Peter, Adria Scharf, Jim Keogh.1998. “Wealth and Income Consequences ofEmployee Ownership: A Comparative Studyfrom Washington State.” Washington StateDepartment of Community, Trade, andEconomic Development.
PARTICIPATION
The 66 Massachusetts ESOP companiesfor which we have data have 17,846ESOP participants.
The survey also asked respondentswhether the company adopted certainemployee involvement practices.
Of the 68 companies that returnedsurveys, 35 marked at least one of thepractices. More than one answer couldbe checked. The results were asfollows.
q 24% “employee voting of ESOPshares (at any time),”
q 19% “employee involvement in newhires,”
q 19% “employee task forces,”q 16% “employee representation on
the board of directors,”q 9% “quality circles,” andq 7% “autonomous work groups.”
EMPLOYMENT
The 71 Massachusetts ESOP companiesfor which we have data employ 29,593employees. 6
LOCATION
ESOP companies are located in all 10Massachusetts congressional districts,concentrated in the state’s biggestpopulation centers. See Appendix 2 for adetailed map of Massachusetts ESOPcompanies. 6 Approximately 12,000 of those employeeswork primarily out of state.
ESOPs inMassachusettsexist in everyindustrialsector andeverycongressionaldistrict.
9
Appendix 1: MASSEIO ESOP Census Survey – Mailed Winter 2005
Section I — Company Information
1. Company Name: _________________________________________________________
2. Respondent’s Name and Title: _______________________________________________
5. Does this company have an employee stock ownership plan (ESOP)? Yes r No r(An ESOP is an employee benefit plan regulated by the Dept. of Labor and the IRS, governed byERISA law. An ESOP is required by law to invest primarily in the securities of the sponsoringemployer.)If YES, Please complete the rest of the survey and return it in the enclosed envelope or fax itback to 617-868-7969.If NO, Would you be interested in learning about how to establish an ESOP? Yes r No r
Please skip the remaining questions and return the survey in the enclosedenvelope or fax it back to 617-868-7969.
6a. This company is: Privately held r Publicly traded r
6b. Is your company an S corporation or a C corporation? S r C r
7. Total number of employees: _____ 8. Number of employees at this time last year: ________
9. Are any employees in this company covered by a collective bargaining agreement?Yes r No rIf YES, Number of unionized employees _____ Name(s) of union(s) ___________________
10. In addition to the employee stock ownership plan, does the company provide any otherretirement benefit? Yes r No rIf YES, please check:r 401(k) plan or savings and thrift plan r Deferred profit sharing planr Defined benefit pension plan r Other retirement benefit (please specify) _____
11. Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) Code (if known): __________
If you do not know your SIC code, please describe your industry:
12. Revenue in 2003: ____________ 13. Projected revenue for 2004: __________________
10
Section II — Employee Stock Ownership PlanInformation
14. Year the ESOP was established: __________
15. Percentage of company stock currently held in the ESOP trust: ___________________
16. Total number of plan participants: __________
17. Total value of ESOP stock as determined in the last valuation: __________________
18. Were there any reductions in compensation (i.e., in wages or other pension benefits)that accompanied the ESOP implementation? Yes r No r
19. The ESOP was established in whole or in large part:r With borrowed funds r By company contributions of stock or funds to buy stockr Both borrowed and company funds r Other (please explain) ____________________
20. Check the best answer(s). You may check more than one. The ESOP was formedprimarily:r to purchase stock from a major owner r to improve productivityr to raise capital for the company r as an employee benefitr to encourage employees to think like owners r to retain or recruit employeesr for tax advantages r Other (please specify) _________
21. Along with the ESOP, does the company engage in any of the following employeeinvolvement practices? Please check all that apply.r Quality circles r Employee task forces r Employee involvement in new hires r Autonomous work groupsr Employee voting of ESOP shares (at any time) r Employee representation on the board
22. Please estimate how much it cost to set up the ESOP.
r Less than $30,000 r $30-40,000 r $40-50,000 r $50-60,000r $60-80,000 r $80-100,000 r More than $100,000 r Don’t Know
11
Section III — Employee Stock Ownership PlanExperience
23. How would you describe the influence of your company’s ESOP on the motivationand productivity of your employee-owners?
r Strongly improved motivation and productivity
r Somewhat improved motivation and productivity
r No impact on motivation and productivity
r A negative impact on motivation and productivity
r Not sure
24. Do you feel that your company is more competitive because of the ESOP?Yes r No r Not sure r
25. Does your company advertise the fact that it is employee owned? Yes r No rIf YES, how? ______________________________________________________
26. In your opinion, what are the major benefits of your company’s ESOP?r Provides attractive financial benefit for employeesr Incentive for improving productivityr ESOP provides market for company stockr Can be used as a tax-advantaged technique of corporate financer Employee ownership builds more stable workforcer Other _________________________________________________________________
27. In your opinion, what is the biggest issue associated with the ESOP?r Employee communications r Repurchase liabilityr Stock Valuation r Administration and record-keeping complexityr Expense of establishing and operating plan r Legislative and regulatory changesr Fiduciary concerns r Other ___________________________
28. Please list any ideas or information you wish you had known before the companyimplemented the ESOP.________________________________________________________________________
29. Which of the following services would be useful to you?
r Networking opportunities with other ESOP companiesr Educational opportunities for managementr Educational opportunities for your employeesr Other (please specify) _________________
30. Are you interested in educating your local, state or federal political leaders about employeeownership?
Yes r No r
31. Are you interested in participating in possible media stories about employee ownership inMassachusetts, including your local media?
Yes r No r
32. Do you know of any Massachusetts companies that might be interested in conducting afeasibility study of ESOP implementation?
Yes r No r If YES, We will contact you for more information.
33. If the ESOP does not own 100% of company stock, do you need help thinking through apossible expansion of employee ownership?
Yes r No r
34. Do you need assistance in communicating with employees about the ESOP?Yes r No r
35. In order to communicate the results of this survey, MASSEIO is planning to producean informational booklet including a geographic map of Massachusetts that identifiesindividual ESOP companies by name and industry sector. All other data from thissurvey will be reported as group averages to protect confidential information.Would you prefer to have your company included or excluded from the booklet/map? Included r Excluded r
All survey respondents will receive a complimentary copy of the ESOP informationalbooklet.
Thank you for completing the survey!Please return it in the enclosed envelope
Or fax it back to 617-868-7969
13
Appendix 2Massachusetts ESOP Companies
78
1
2
25
24
2322
21
20
19
1817
16
151413
12
11
10
9
8
7
6 54
3
45
44
43
42
4140
39
38
37
35
34
33
32
31
30
29
282726
66
65
64
63
6261
60
59
58
57
56
55
54
53
52
5150
49
4847
46
67
71
72
68
70
6981
82
79
77
76
75
74
73
8090
898887
86
8583 91
92
95
9493
CambridgeSomerville
Boston
36
Worcester
Pittsfield
Deerfield
Springfield
Lowell
Brockton
NewBedfordFall
River
Lynn
Beverly
1. ABC Companies, Inc., Holbrook 37. Hill-Engineers Architects Planners Inc, Dalton2. Abt Associates, Inc., Cambridge 38. International Cars, Ltd, Danvers3. Action Automation & Controls, North Attleboro 39. Intral Corporation, Boston4. Adcole Corporation and Subsidiary, Marlboro 40. J J Vaccaro Inc, Somerville5. ADD Inc, Cambridge 41. James Monroe Wire & Cable Corp, South Lancaster6. Aegis Associates, Watertown 42. Janis Research Company, Inc., Wilmington7. Aerodyne Research Inc., Billerica 43. Jung/Brannen Associates, Inc., Boston8. Architectural Resources Camb., Cambridge 44. L.S. Starrett Co., Athol9. Barr Associates, Inc., Westford 45. Lampin Corporation, Uxbridge10. Berkshire Bank, Pittsfield 46. Lawrence R Mccoy & Co Inc, Worcester11. Beverly National Bank, Beverly 47. Lebaron Foundry Inc, Brockton12. Brookfield Engineering Labs, Inc., Middleboro 48. LITECONTROL, Hanson13. Brookline Savings Bank, Brookline 49. Luvak, Inc., Boylston14. Cape Air, East Boston 50. Market Forge Industries, Inc., Everett15. Central Coating Co Inc, West Boylston 51. Marland Mold, Inc., Pittsfield16. Cesco Plumbing and Heating, Becket 52. Massachusetts Materials Research, W. Boylston17. Channing L. Bete Co., Inc., South Deerfield 53. MASSBANK Corporation, Reading18. Claremont Flock Corporation, Leominster 54. Middleton & Company, Boston19. Commerce Group Inc, Webster 55. Needletech Products, Inc., Attleboro20. Concord Lumber Corp., Littleton 56. Nye Lubricants, Inc., New Bedford21. Cook & Company, Inc., Marshfield 57. Nypro Inc., Clinton22. Country Curtains, Stockbridge 58. Packaging Consultants, Inc., New Bedford23. Danafilms, Inc., Westborough 59. Physical Sciences, Inc., Andover24. Darmann Abrasive Products, Inc., Clinton 60. Quirk Wire Co. Inc., West Brookfield25. Expert Laser Services Inc., Southbridge 61. Sager Electrical Supply Company, Inc., Weymouth26. Feingold & Feingold, Worcester 62. Savogran Company, Norwood27. Foreign Motors West, Natick 63. Shawmut Design and Construction, Boston28. Fraser Engineering Company Inc., Newton 64. Spaulding Brick Company, Somerville29. Fred C. Church, Inc., Lowell 65. Strata Bank, Medway30. Geologic Services Corporation, Hudson 66. Symmes, Maini & Mckee Associates, Inc., Cambridge31. George Melhado & Co., Sharon 67. Tech-Etch, Inc., Plymouth32. Goody, Clancy & Associates, Boston 68. The Cadmus Group, Inc., Watertown33. GZA GeoEnvironmental, Norwood 69. Visidyne, Inc., Burlington34. H H & M Metals Co. Inc., Everett 70. Web Industries, Inc., Westborough35. Hartney Greymont, Inc., Needham 71. Wirefab, Inc., Worcester36. Health Resources Corporation, Woburn 72. Woronoco Savings Bank, WestfieldESOP Companies 1-72 agreed to be listed on this map. The remaining 18 companies, represented asthe smaller unnumbered dots, are confirmed ESOPs that asked not to be listed on this map.
Map regions represent the 10 UnitedStates Congressional districts in MA.