Employee-owned companies

[Elok]

Down in FL they have a grocery store called Publix, which doesn't exist in MD AFAIK. It's 100% employee-owned, and supposedly that changes the whole work environment. They train their people better, consistently groom good ones for management, and even offer benefits. Or so it goes. I only know for certain that the last one is true, the rest is hearsay. Every time I've visited a Publix so far, the people have seemed reasonably upbeat. What's your experience with employee-owned companies, folks?

[pchang]

They are much like Democracies. All employees are owners, but some employees own more than others.

[rah]

Publix is my favorite chain. I wish they had them in Illinois.

I will admit that their employees seem more genuine when helping you.

[C0ckney]

a great idea. workers in worker owned enterprises, cooperatives, etc. are generally better paid, better treated, happier and more secure than workers in traditional companies, even when the jobs they do are fairly menial. this of course is no surprise. if workers are given a say then they won't choose to be poorly paid, badly treated etc.. it's the future for service industries in my opinion.

[rah]

Yeah back in the old days it wasn't uncommon for most companies to have stock as part of their profit sharing plans.
Granted, it wasn't much but I think it helped morale and that sense of being part of the big picture.

Modern 401k accounts don't cut it, in those terms.

[C0ckney]

yeah, as you say, it's something at least. although of course the real prize is democratic worker control, i.e. the workers making the decisions about the company in a democratic way. i'm not sure if publix operates in this way.

[OneFootInTheGrave]

Should work in theory, and I come from a country that used to be setup this way (certainly was better than now).

However I do not know enough about the reasons why this form of enterprise is failing in the west, as by now - more than half a century after WWII, this should have succeeded already. Other than John Lewis (Waitrose), I cannot even think of a company whose services or products I used, which was worker owned.

[rah]

The main problem is that there has to be oversight.
It's similar to why democracies have problems.
Once the people figure out that they can vote things for themselves that they don't have, it usually heads downhill.

[OneFootInTheGrave]

Such enterprises probably need regular management structure where the management makes the decisions and gets bigger parts of the pie, while collectively everyone still gets to share.

Valve has an interesting company set-up without management at all, but I would expect that this cannot get very large, and even being mid-sized as they are, it is a surprise that they are managing to continue this way.

[pchang]

Historically, SAIC was one of the largest employee owned companies in the world (it was worth at least $2 Billion) at the time. Around 2005, they admitted that business model was failing and they went public. https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20.../0216231.shtml. Employees wanted to cash out and there just wasn't enough money to buy them all out.

In general, the main players at employee owned companies do not cede enough shares to lose control. This makes the "shared" management approach of an employee owned company meaningless. Thus, the only benefit left is the profit sharing. For this to be meaningful, the profit shared by even the lowest employee must be enough to "make a difference".

[C0ckney]

i think that a lot of the 'problem' is simply the fact that people see the 'necessity' of having some kind of authority to keep the unruly workers in their place. however, most of the problems that workers are supposed to have are a direct result of the sort of power structure that prevails in companies. give people a real say - change the power relationships - and most of those problems will disappear, and new ways to resolve problems will emerge.

i mean, of course there needs to be some kind of the structure, some means of making day to day decisions, depending on the nature of the business, but why not elect mangers for that purpose?

[rah]

Valve has an interesting company set-up without management at all, but I would expect that this cannot get very large, and even being mid-sized as they are, it is a surprise that they are managing to continue this way.

It's a little like Communism. The theory is ok and in small situations it can be quite effective but doesn't scale well.

[pchang]

yeah, as you say, it's something at least. although of course the real prize is democratic worker control, i.e. the workers making the decisions about the company in a democratic way. i'm not sure if publix operates in this way.

All corporations are democracies. 1 share = 1 vote.

[C0ckney]

[rah]

In theory yes, but in practice no.
A few major stockholders control.