[comp.dcom.telecom] Ameritech Dissolves Bell Boards of Directors

telecom@eecs.nwu.edu (TELECOM Moderator) (10/27/89)

In an effort to streamline decisionmaking, the directors of Ameritech
dissolved the boards of directors of the five Bell operating companies
under its jurisdiction at a meeting held last week, I have learned.

The directors of Illinois Bell, Indiana Bell, Michigan Bell, Ohio Bell
and Wisconsin Bell will step down on the day they would have stood for
re-election, Ameritech spokesman Mike Brand said Wednesday. In the
case of Illinois Bell, that date is February 22, 1990.

The five Bell boards are vestiges of the old days, when telephone
companies were tightly regulated utilities with partial public
ownership, Brand said. For example, when AT&T was the *majority* owner
in the Bells, there were still a few minority stockholders. Illinois
Bell for example was 97 percent owned by AT&T, and 3 percent by
private individuals.

Ameritech now feels the individual boards are cumbersome and not needed
because the Bell companies are wholly owned subsidiaries of Ameritech,
which is based here in Chicago, and don't have their own shareholders.

The dual system of boards created fractured reporting responsibilities
for executives who were directly supervised by the Board of Directors
of one of the Bell companies; Ameritech's senior management and the
Ameritech Board of Directors.

Brand explained that dissolving the Bell company boards is 'part of an
effort started in July to create a structure in the company that
promotes integration, streamlines decision making and speeds
implementation of decisions.....'

In July, Ameritech announced a realignment of corporate executives and
reporting lines in an effort to create a more competitive corporate
structure. At last Wednesday's meeting, the decision to dissolve the
boards of the other non-Bell subsidiaries was also made. In the case
of the non-Bell companies which are subsidiaries of Ameritech, those
boards are comprised entirely of inside managers, and will be
dissolved by the end of this year.

No Bell company executives are affected by the move and the companies'
operations are not affected in any way.

Illinois Bell directors who will be stepping down include:

 William Bunn III, chairman of Marine Bank, Springfield, IL.
 Franklin Cole, chairman of Croesus Corporation.
 Dr. John Corbally, retired president of the MacArthur Foundation.
 Daryl Grisham, president of Parker House Sausage Company.
 Alan Hallene, president of Montgomery Elevator, Rockford, IL
 Donald Nordlund, chairman of Multi-Fresh Systems.
 Barbara Proctor, chairman of Proctor & Gardner Advertising.
 Arthur Velasquez, president of Azteca Foods.


Patrick Townson

langz@asylum.sf.ca.us (Lang Zerner) (10/28/89)

In article <telecom-v09i0475m01@vector.dallas.tx.us> telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
(TELECOM Moderator) writes:
>X-TELECOM-Digest: volume 9, issue 475, message 1 of 8

>In an effort to streamline decisionmaking, the directors of Ameritech
>dissolved the boards of directors of the five Bell operating companies
>...the Bell companies are wholly owned subsidiaries of Ameritech

Wow!  I never knew this.  Ameritech owns every basic service provider
in the country?  Why isn't this in violation of antitrust laws?  How is
it any different than before, when AT&T had a big "monopoly" (I hope
there's *some* difference!).

Be seeing you...
Lang Zerner
langz@asylum.sf.ca.us   UUCP:bionet!asylum!langz   ARPA:langz@athena.mit.edu
"...and every morning we had to go and LICK the road clean with our TONGUES!"

[Moderator's Note: Ameritech does NOT 'own every basic service
provider in the country.' They own FIVE telephone companies in the
midwest part of the United States. In the past, AT&T owned almost two
dozen telcos across the country operating under the 'Bell' name. And
at the time of divestiture, no one said *how* AT&T had to go about
divesting itself; just that it had to. In other words, AT&T could have
created one large company called "Bell Telephone", and as long as it
was separated from AT&T it would have met the requirements of the
decree, although it is likely such a new entity soon would itself have
been sued for anti-trust violations. GTE owns more telephone operating
companies than Ameritech, or for that matter, any of the other newly
formed holding companies previously part of AT&T.  PT]