You’re right, private owners who care are better than private owners who don’t care.
Worker owned and controlled companies are preferable (not just ESOPs where decisions are still not made democratically) because democracy allows for error correction. Even the most benevolent king still has a limited amount of attention, information and decision making ability.
Also being at a worker coop doesn’t mean you have to sit in company meetings all day. For large organizations like Mondragon workers vote for representatives in an assembly, which then appoints a general manager.
Also also, an owner who cares is a single point of failure/leverage. If they fall on hard times personally or just want to retire, they can decide to sell the business out from under workers to a venture capital firm, or just to another business with a less benevolent owner.
I think the best option is for workers to be able to get shares in the company they work at via an optional salary sacrifice scheme (so that it reduces the tax you pay, rather than letting you buy them with your after tax income)… If you care about the business, you can get a stake in running it, if you don’t you can collect your paycheck and go home.
The stock market shouldn’t exist however - when you leave the business you can either keep the shares, or return them to the business for “a fair price” (the amount you paid after inflation? or maybe just the current purchase price). Shares bought like this shouldn’t be able to be sold - only those owned by the founder(s) can be, with the caveat that they must be offered to workers at a reasonable price.
That system eliminates both forcing “responsibility” on people who don’t want it, as well as removing people parasites who want to destroy the business to make a quick profit, as well as allowing people who’ve worked there longer to have more of a stake.
You’re right, private owners who care are better than private owners who don’t care.
Worker owned and controlled companies are preferable (not just ESOPs where decisions are still not made democratically) because democracy allows for error correction. Even the most benevolent king still has a limited amount of attention, information and decision making ability.
Also being at a worker coop doesn’t mean you have to sit in company meetings all day. For large organizations like Mondragon workers vote for representatives in an assembly, which then appoints a general manager.
Also also, an owner who cares is a single point of failure/leverage. If they fall on hard times personally or just want to retire, they can decide to sell the business out from under workers to a venture capital firm, or just to another business with a less benevolent owner.
I think the best option is for workers to be able to get shares in the company they work at via an optional salary sacrifice scheme (so that it reduces the tax you pay, rather than letting you buy them with your after tax income)… If you care about the business, you can get a stake in running it, if you don’t you can collect your paycheck and go home.
The stock market shouldn’t exist however - when you leave the business you can either keep the shares, or return them to the business for “a fair price” (the amount you paid after inflation? or maybe just the current purchase price). Shares bought like this shouldn’t be able to be sold - only those owned by the founder(s) can be, with the caveat that they must be offered to workers at a reasonable price.
That system eliminates both forcing “responsibility” on people who don’t want it, as well as removing
peopleparasites who want to destroy the business to make a quick profit, as well as allowing people who’ve worked there longer to have more of a stake.