• rynn@piefed.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    22 小时前

    That is absolutely one model, but I think it might be better to have an explicit union setup to avoid the co op elements being perverted into old school capitalism over time and nobody wants to unionize there because it is nominally a co op.

    It might be more interesting to setup an explicit capitalist vs union structure where the capitalist side has strict bylaws in place to enforce union negotiation and support. That would probably be more honest over time as I think systems tend towards power for those that are running things one way or another.

    A co op could work really well though if the company stayed smaller and had strict guidelines for membership and clear processes for removal of bad actors.

    Definitely worth a lot more thought.

    • menas@lemmy.wtf
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      8 小时前

      I work in a self-organized tech coop that we made by ourselves, and I do agree with your. This is a lot of concern to deal with unstable future, and it’s prevent ourselves to be active with others; some people left for stability, and reduce stress.

      We are unionize too; and we think about modifying our rules to give the final word to union.

    • chobeat@lemmy.mlOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      21 小时前

      both coops and unionized companies operate within a capitalist structure and on the market (usually). Neither model can emancipate itself from its context. So I’m not sure about what aspect you expect to be different. And coops can be run with good governance where power structures are explicit, managed and democratically altered to reflect the values of the members. The case where you have few people controlling everything is a dysfunction, it’s not part of the model (and also can happen with unions).