1274
"Labour Market" (lemmy.ml)
submitted 2 years ago by to c/microblogmemes@lemmy.world
222 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 4 points 2 years ago* (1 child)

The negative product isn't the employees' problem. That is part of the problem. The workers are jointly de facto responsible for using up the inputs. By the tenet that legal and de facto responsibility should match, they should jointly appropriate the negative product and be the party that makes the contracts with the input suppliers. The workers are jointly de facto responsible for producing the output, so should jointly own 100% of the output. Workers have a right to the fruits of their labor

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] -3 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    So, if im reading this right - I make this, therefore I should get all the profit from it? So then who buys the equipment you used to make it?

    Should every banker receive all the interest from money, that is not theirs, that they loan out?

    Likewise, the employee isn't responsible for the output, the business is. Does the employee bear the cost of warranty repairs, refunds, products recalls and complaints? Does them employee pay the fine if it doesn't preform as advertised, or legally responsible if it injured someone? If i make a burger at a restaurant and the order is wrong, do i now have to pay for the burger myself? If the customer refuses to pay, do I then have to foot the bill?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 2 years ago* (1 child)

    Not necessarily that you should get all the profit. You should get the whole (positive and negative) product. The workers would have to jointly buy or lease the equipment as they're responsible for using up its services in production.

    Banks should be structured as democratic worker coops.

    The workers are jointly de facto responsible, the "who did the deed" sense of responsibility, for the output. The pure application of the tenet I mentioned is to purposeful results of deliberate actions

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago (1 child)

    Ah, so in order to have a job you have to buy a place in the company and partial ownership along with all the risks that entails. It would be fairer once you are employed, but can you see the issues that would result is? Do employees get to vet new employees as their investment would also be at risk, what you you get when you leave the company, especially if its value is rising or falling rapidly, what if some want to invest in a core piece of equipment and others don't, how much does each role require you to buy and how do skills increase or decrease this amount? What happens if you get fired?

    On banks, co-op and joint ownership banks do exist.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

    Vetting new workers can occur during the interview process.

    It would depend on the particulars of your membership contract. The law would mandate loss of voting rights for fired and leaving workers.

    Each worker coop would have a system of internal capital accounts giving each worker a recoupable claim on their investments into the firm. Workers can invest different amounts.

    1 worker 1 vote is the principle. Non-voting preferred stock can be free floating property rights as is the case today

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent