A distraction from the election: The case for employee-owned companies

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/economy/column-the-case-for-employee-owned-companies

“Ellerman has for years made an argument as startling as it is hard to refute: “the labor theory of property.” It’s that employees should own the firms they work for because of very simple logic: If they’re responsible for the consequences of their actions while on the job — committing a crime, say — how can it be that they’re not responsible for the positive things they do?”

@politics

  • rockSlayer@lemmy.world
    47·
    11 days ago

    Worker cooperatives should be everywhere. I hope that governments start recognizing it and giving subsidies to co-ops instead of corporations.

    • J Lou@mastodon.socialOP
      40·
      11 days ago

      Any company that receives government subsidies or is bailed out because it’s too big too fail or whatever the reason should be mandated to become a worker coop

      @politics

  • Makeitstop@lemmy.worldEnglish
    28·
    11 days ago

    Local employye owned grocery chain is consistently the best place to shop, didn’t inflate prices across the board like everyone else, and the workers actually get treated like human beings. It’s proof enough for me that this model should be far more common

    • captainlezbian@lemmy.world
      7·
      10 days ago

      When the employees own the company every decision is made according to employee and community interests. I’m a syndicalist for that reason. Though I do acknowledge that there is a need for community funded and owned ventures as well.

  • Troy@lemmy.ca
    17·
    11 days ago

    Personal anecdote. I run a small business with a business partner (co-owner) and we have no employees. We need an employee. I’m personally a huge fan of employee-owned companies.

    But from a hiring perspective, it is mind bogglingly risky for us to hire someone and just automatically stake them. Like, what if it’s the wrong person? How do we claw back control? Do we risk dilution sending the company in another direction?

    It’s just so much easier just to pay someone and not have to deal with the complexity. And therein lies the rub.

    • sunbrrnslapper@lemmy.world
      19·
      11 days ago

      I worked at a place that rolled out employee ownership after they were like 250 people. If you can’t offer ownership right away, you can offer a decent profit share (requires some amount of financial transparency to help communicate the value to the employee).

    • shackled@lemm.ee
      16·
      11 days ago

      Staking should without a doubt be slowly vested not immediate at the start of hiring. The vesting period can be adjusted to the current owners risk level. As someone else mentioned below, the employee can be offered profit sharing until they are fully vested and own voting stake in the company.

    • wolfpack86@lemmy.world
      4·
      9 days ago

      Vesting periods, increasing stake over time, and conditions that shares are sold back to the company upon exit. You’d need to figure out how the valuation is done.

      Basically turns out into a bonus with deferred payment and a chance for growth of the bonus if they work hard to support company growth.

      • Troy@lemmy.ca
        3·
        9 days ago

        The legal and administrative overhead to do all of that would incur significant additional costs. We shall see.

        • wolfpack86@lemmy.world
          2·
          9 days ago

          Originally started typing something to a completely different post. Whoops.

          But yes, that becomes the challenge when deciding to stake employees versus a simple profit share.

          Staking employees gives them longer term incentives, whereas profit sharing will be fundamentally a sales commission.

        • Twista713@lemmy.world
          2·
          9 days ago

          If they don’t already exist, it sounds like a niche need for a third-party company that has some preset templates of different options? Add a lawyer and some legal aid and could be very helpful for the system.

    • J Lou@mastodon.socialOP
      4·
      11 days ago

      It would definitely be easier in an economy where this was the only way of doing things.

      I am not a lawyer.

      Based on the underlying economic theory and ethical arguments for worker coops/employee-owned companies, what you could do in such a situation is make a separate legal entity for the worker coop, and then lease the assets of the current legal entity to the worker coop. You and your partner maintain exclusive ownership of the original legal entity

      @politics

  • barsquid@lemmy.world
    6·
    10 days ago

    I would certainly prefer this to the existing system. But I haven’t seen enough people be held responsible for committing a crime as the agent of a company. Not sure if I have seen any at all.