I agree sometimes with Robinson as a writer, and sometimes not. Personally I find him a bit off-putting in a "I'm superior to you" kind of way. Full disclosure: I also founded a company and have employees.

I looked at three other articles about this situation. Each noted that the staffers wanted to form a worker's coop that would limit Robinson's power. Not one of the articles mentioned anything about Robinson being compensated for his loss of ownership and power. If there was nothing offered to Robinson in exchange for his years of investment building up the magazine, then I totally understand him firing them. I'd do the same thing, and I also like socialism.

I knew some guys who started a partnership a couple years after me. Same business. We worked together. I stayed smaller and kept my ownership. They took on new partners to grow their business. Eventually the two original partners were in the minority. The earliest new partners (e.g. #3) took over the rotating position of president and never gave it up. He had convinced the original partners to take on new partners (4-6) who were more closely aligned with #3 than with 1 and 2. Unfortunately, #3 was also not very good at being president and all those new partners were expensive. When an eventual economic downturn came, the company was headed for bankruptcy quickly. In the end, the company was "purchased," with remaining partners (who hadn't bailed by then) trading all their equity in the old firm for jobs in the new company.

The original two partners certainly made good money for the 5 years or so the company was around, but they lost huge equity they originally had, and the last few years there were a nightmare.