Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Ukrainian Ranger]

So, Eagle_eye says that all factories should be jointly owned workers...

Some questions to you, Eagle_eye...

1) Decision making? Direct democracy or factorysized micro-government?
2) Voting method? Universal suffrage? Weighted?
3) If Universal suffrage, don't you think that less skilled workers will rule here, while 1 skilled worker can be far more important for factory success than 10 unskilled workers
4) If some weighted voting, who will determine ratios?
5) What to do with new hirings? Let's say factory had 100 workers, hired 50 more. Reelections\revoting? Maybe that 50 have no right to be represented till the next scheduled election\voting?
6) What if factory hired 200 new workers and they, using majority, decided to kick out those 100 who built it with their sweet and blood?
7)  How salaries\dividends will be divided? By comparing contribution? How will you compare contribution of different specialties inside the company?
Who will decide?
What to do if workers decides to go away? Take his share? But what if he made half of what factory has? What about all his money he chose to invest in his factory? Just forget about it?
What to do if worker becomes disabled or just too old and can't work anymore?
9) What if worker dies? His children get nothing from his share, right? Because they, obliviously, don't work at the factory

[Loud Whispers]

Inb4 communists

[Askot Bokbondeler]

can't reply for eagleye, but i'll reply for myself. we differ in that i trust less in democracy and the competence of the average person

1) Decision making? Direct democracy or factorysized micro-government?

a committee of elected managers make the decisions. another elected committee of factory workers can veto the decisions. workers can at any time issue complaints requesting the demotion of any elected representative or manager, and can at any time cancel their complaint. the manager would be fired if more than half the workers demanded it for more than a month, or immediately if 80% of the workers demanded it.
the general public should also have a say via surveys given out to clients and end-users

3) If Universal suffrage, don't you think that less skilled workers will rule here, while 1 skilled worker can be far more important for factory success than 10 unskilled workers

a skilled worker isn't necessarily a skilled decision maker.workers vote based on workers rights being respected and manager performance. senior workers have a better understanding of how well the factory is doing compared to how it was, so only workers of a certain seniority can vote

4) If some weighted voting, who will determine ratios?

no weighted voting. i will.

5) What to do with new hirings? Let's say factory had 100 workers, hired 50 more. Reelections\revoting? Maybe that 50 have no right to be represented till the next scheduled election\voting?

no. newly hired workers get no votes until they lose the escaped lunatic status

6) What if factory hired 200 new workers and they, using majority, decided to kick out those 100 who built it with their sweet and blood?

they can't. elected manager of human resources is the one that fires people. newly hired workers get no votes until they lose the escaped lunatic status

7)  How salaries\dividends will be divided? By comparing contribution? How will you compare contribution of different specialties inside the company?
Who will decide?

equal pay for every hour of work.

What to do if workers decides to go away? Take his share? But what if he made half of what factory has? What about all his money he chose to invest in his factory? Just forget about it?

yes. there could be a factory fund, where a percentage of the profits get siphoned to and is later used for expenses with the factory. the factory could refund the worker of the money he invested in it, but over a period of time depending on the profits of the factory, so as not to bankrupt the business

What to do if worker becomes disabled or just too old and can't work anymore?

he retires. the government pays him a pension.

9) What if worker dies? His children get nothing from his share, right? Because they, obliviously, don't work at the factory

yes. the government pays them a pension till adulthood.

[Ukrainian Ranger]

a skilled worker isn't necessarily a skilled decision maker.workers vote based on workers rights being respected, and manager performance. senior workers have a better understanding of how well the factory is doing compared to how it was, so only workers of a certain seniority can vote

Utopia thinking...
You know what will happen? Elections:
Candidate A programme) Let's pay skilled workers $100 and unskilled workers $500
Candidate B programme) Let's pay unskilled workers $300, and skilled workers $100
Quess, what will get more votes in a real world?

no. newly hired workers get no votes until they lose the escaped lunatic status

How sweet... Neophytes to be exploited by regulars!

they can't. elected manager of human resources is the one that fires people. newly hired workers get no votes until they lose the escaped lunatic status

OK, year, two, three, five later, new workers kick out  the original ones, fine for you? 

[qoute] equal pay for every hour of work. [/quote]
WHAT? No matter what skills worker posses? No matter how well he works?

he retires. the government pays him a pension.

That will lead to huge preference of immediate profits by near retiree people
In fact most peoples will chose immediate profits, that's how people think...

[Askot Bokbondeler]

neophytes would be treated the same as veterans, they would only not be given a vote for the election of managers. a factory is not a state, they would still have to abide by their country's laws

[qoute] equal pay for every hour of work. [/qoute]
WHAT? No matter what skills worker posses? No matter how well he works?

yes. not everybody performs the same, a minimum threshold should be set to ensure a decent performance, and no incentives should be given for people to overwork themselves. it's a real problem, you know? it ruins healths, relationships, childhoods...

he retires. the government pays him a pension.

That will lead to huge preference of immediate profits by near retiree people
In fact most peoples will chose immediate profits, that's how people think...

what makes it different from the current system?

[pisskop]

ptw.

[Alastar]

Governments will be bureaucratic and inflexible.
Private enterprise will be greedy and irresponsible.
You won't get either to stop sucking, mix and match depending what sucks less in context.

Equal pay for unequal work can work in some contexts, if the more demanding work is rewarding in itself (more interesting, carries some prestige etc).
The beauty of a market economy is that it allocates resources to things that aren't sexy but need to be done... regardless of how well socialist economies do overall, they tend to have embarrassing commodity shortages. In a free market, a shortage is a great business opportunity so clever and industrious people will try to fix it (you need to make sure that really clever and industrious people don't orchestrate shortages... but for legislators, stopping people from doing something is an easier problem than getting them to do something).

I'd like a government allowance for everyone that one could live on if needed... replacing all kinds of government benefits including pensions.
It doesn't stifle activity like any systems where beneficiaries are essentially "paid to not work", doesn't require unwholesome safeguards to prevent exploits, and administration is very very easy. Aim: less exploitable system in both directions... can't be milked, harder to fall through the gaps.

If that's met, a free market should work well.
How a factory is run isn't something I want prescribed from the government. Some people want to work for a fair wage for as long as convenient, and please stay out of my business.
Others want a more collective approach... sort of like a family-run business only a larger scale. I don't think either is better or worse in itself, but I'd like there to be choice.

[Ukrainian Ranger]

neophytes would be treated the same as veterans, they would only not be given a vote for the election of managers. a factory is not a state, they would still have to abide by their country's laws

Regulars can and will set rules to benefit themself in expense of Neophytes. It may be limited by the government, but never removed.
Also, system like that forces people to not leave current place of work way more than current contracts system. Because if you'll mover jobs, you lose in status

yes. not everybody performs the same, a minimum threshold should be set to ensure a decent performance, and no incentives should be given for people to overwork themselves. it's a real problem, you know? it ruins healths, relationships, childhoods...

If you take motivation to get better away, few will thrive to become better.
Why spend years learning in university learning complex profession if in the end you'll get an equal share? Why do the job good, if you can do it mediocre? Because of high morality and altruism? Ha! Utopia like that doesn't work with real humans

he retires. the government pays him a pension.

That will lead to huge preference of immediate profits by near retiree people
In fact most peoples will chose immediate profits, that's how people think...

what makes it different from the current system?
[/quote]
In current system :
1) Person that owns the factory(part of factory) knows that he\she can leave that to children or use that funds when he retires
2) Person can sell his part, and buyer will not buy a bad factory for a good price

[Morrigi]

inb4 clusterfuck

[Sheb]

Just going to point out that workers-owned enterprises do exist. They're just called cooperative.

 A friend of mine work in one, and the way they do it is that to get in, you have to buy a share of the company (A couple thousands euros I think, but if you don't have the cash, they can hire you on a temporary contract first so you can win the money to buy your share). They get paid a basic, low salary, plus dividends, so they get more in good time, but the company doesn't have large, fixed labor costs when the times are bad. Plus dividends are less taxed than salaries in Belgium. They all get the same.

If a worker leave, the company buy back the share, at the same price (Although no one left yet, so that's just what they decided). Since the company is pretty small (I'm not sure, but I'd say round 15 people), decision-making is consensual. Officially, they're all share-holders, so if a rift happened, it's be decided by a majority vote with one vote per share (so one vote per person).

Larger cooperatives do exist, like the Mondragon Corporation that employ 84,000 people. They works on slightly different rules (they do have different wages for exemple), but they're still worker-owned.

[Morrigi]

Doesn't Valve work on a similar principle?

[MetalSlimeHunt]

Valve is non-hierarchical, but beyond that I don't think so.

[Askot Bokbondeler]

neophytes would be treated the same as veterans, they would only not be given a vote for the election of managers. a factory is not a state, they would still have to abide by their country's laws

Regulars can and will set rules to benefit themself in expense of Neophytes. It may be limited by the government, but never removed.
Also, system like that forces people to not leave current place of work way more than current contracts system. Because if you'll mover jobs, you lose in status

what status?they don't lose nothing, regulars get a say on how well the company is being run, not how things should be done, and no special benefits for seniority.
if it is sufficiently limited by the government it may be good enough, if it is not good enough, new legislation is passed.

yes. not everybody performs the same, a minimum threshold should be set to ensure a decent performance, and no incentives should be given for people to overwork themselves. it's a real problem, you know? it ruins healths, relationships, childhoods...

If you take motivation to get better away, few will thrive to become better.
Why spend years learning in university learning complex profession if in the end you'll get an equal share? Why do the job good, if you can do it mediocre? Because of high morality and altruism? Ha! Utopia like that doesn't work with real humans

if mediocre is good enough why demand a better? if mediocre isn't good enough, raise the standards and demand better. the standards should be low enough to be fair and high enough to maintain satisfactory productivity. people work for a living, they shouldn't live for work. also we're talking about factory work, why spend years in university to work in a factory?
also, in the current system most people who go to university don't get much higher pay than people who don't, even when they land on a job that requires university education. they are often aware of that, and still do it, at least in countries with free or affordable higher education. why spend years working on a factory when you can spend them on university?

he retires. the government pays him a pension.

That will lead to huge preference of immediate profits by near retiree people
In fact most peoples will chose immediate profits, that's how people think...

what makes it different from the current system?

In current system :
1) Person that owns the factory(part of factory) knows that he\she can leave that to children or use that funds when he retires
2) Person can sell his part, and buyer will not buy a bad factory for a good price

yet what happens in the current system is the opposite, shareholders orchestrate bankruptcies for quick gain and when they're thinking long term it's usually by building monopolies.
people who work on a company and help build it will often invest a lot emotionally, they'll think of it like they think of their football team and they'll have an interest in seeing it grow. that happens even now that companies are owned by others.

[Ukrainian Ranger]

Well, closed joint stock company can and do work (closed here that you can sell stocks only to company itself )
It's just a subtype, when workers are both owners and, well, workers and obliviously decision making can be done in the same way as in any other joint stock company. 

But all problems listed by me remain and will become larger and larger as you move to more complex and diverse systems, the only solution if you make cells that doing similar job and have quite few workers (I'd say under 500, I think that Basque company doing exactly that) ... In fact, If companies have quite low max employee limits that will work, all problems with politics and quasi states become solved.

[Eagle_eye]

So, Eagle_eye says that all factories should be jointly owned workers...

Some questions to you, Eagle_eye...

1) Decision making? Direct democracy or factorysized micro-government?
2) Voting method? Universal suffrage? Weighted?
3) If Universal suffrage, don't you think that less skilled workers will rule here, while 1 skilled worker can be far more important for factory success than 10 unskilled workers
4) If some weighted voting, who will determine ratios?
5) What to do with new hirings? Let's say factory had 100 workers, hired 50 more. Reelections\revoting? Maybe that 50 have no right to be represented till the next scheduled election\voting?
6) What if factory hired 200 new workers and they, using majority, decided to kick out those 100 who built it with their sweet and blood?
7)  How salaries\dividends will be divided? By comparing contribution? How will you compare contribution of different specialties inside the company?
Who will decide?
What to do if workers decides to go away? Take his share? But what if he made half of what factory has? What about all his money he chose to invest in his factory? Just forget about it?
What to do if worker becomes disabled or just too old and can't work anymore?
9) What if worker dies? His children get nothing from his share, right? Because they, obliviously, don't work at the factory

A little late, but:

1. Both. For actual government, everyone. For the policies of an individual factory, the workers in it.

2. Universal Suffrage

3. Skilled workers are not inherently more valuable. A factory would fail just as much without the manual laborers. The only reason they're payed better is because there are fewer of them, and that's not a valid reason for depriving people.

4. No weighted voting.

5. Well, obviously they can't vote on things that have already been voted on, just like people who turn 18 this year can't vote in the last election.

6. Well, that would be very unfortunate. It isn't a very smart thing for either side to do though.

7. Divide it proportionally to the time people work, because there's no way to actually measure how much effort someone is putting in compared to how much they could.

8. If they stop working in the factory, they shouldn't get a share of the income. One individual can't make half a factory on their own, and presumably the factory would be financed first from a communal account, and wages would be payed out after.

9. Nope. There should be a 100% inheritance tax on liquid assets, but there should also be a strong enough social safety net that there's no reason to actually save money.