4 ms·

Equal payment is definitely not the norm for co-ops worldwide. Workers realize they should be paid for their contribution. For example at Mondragón, a network o

Equal payment is definitely not the norm for co-ops worldwide. Workers realize they should be paid for their contribution. For example at Mondragón, a network of cooperatives in Spain which employs 75,000 people, workers established a scheme that distributes profits in line with contributions. The difference between this co-op and other businesses is that workers decided to collectively absorb the impact of the Recession, taking a 5% pay cut and shifting jobs between co-ops as needed such that zero workers were fired despite an economic downturn. What you will see is that, for example, instead of top managers of a co-op making hundreds or thousands more than the median employee as in a public corporation, they make a more sensible amount which still attracts and sustains the best talent in the enterprise.

maksimum 9y ago
> make a more sensible amount which still attracts and sustains the best talent in the enterprise. Who should be in charge of how 'sensible' is defined? And how can you argue that it attracts the best talent? Most people outside Spain probably have never heard of Mondragón, but they've almost certainly heard of Google, Facebook, Amazon, AliBaba or Baidu.
- fancyfish 9y ago
  The workers decide the pay scale. As long as they're satisfied with the performance of the company then there is no need to push for greater and greater pay to the CEO. If they are not attracting talent, they raise the pay scale just as a normal publicly owned company. I agree that those tech companies have greater name recognition.
  - deleted 9y ago
    [deleted]
golergka 9y ago
> What you will see is that, for example, instead of top managers of a co-op making hundreds or thousands more than the median employee as in a public corporation, they make a more sensible amount which still attracts and sustains the best talent in the enterprise. And why, do you think, shareholders don't pursue that strategy? They're giving their own money to CEOs - are they doing it just because they're feeling charitable? In other words, your argument supposes that a LOT of individual actors, independently, pursue a strategy (overpaying execs) that isn't optimal, and you don't even bother with an explanation as to why does it happen. This logical fallacy happens all the time when exec compensation is discussed, and it really bothers me that everyone just assumes that shareholders and board of directors of so many different companies are just plain stupid.

maksimum 9y ago

> make a more sensible amount which still attracts and sustains the best talent in the enterprise. Who should be in charge of how 'sensible' is defined? And how can you argue that it attracts the best talent? Most people outside Spain probably have never heard of Mondragón, but they've almost certainly heard of Google, Facebook, Amazon, AliBaba or Baidu.

fancyfish 9y ago
The workers decide the pay scale. As long as they're satisfied with the performance of the company then there is no need to push for greater and greater pay to the CEO. If they are not attracting talent, they raise the pay scale just as a normal publicly owned company. I agree that those tech companies have greater name recognition.
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]

golergka 9y ago

> What you will see is that, for example, instead of top managers of a co-op making hundreds or thousands more than the median employee as in a public corporation, they make a more sensible amount which still attracts and sustains the best talent in the enterprise. And why, do you think, shareholders don't pursue that strategy? They're giving their own money to CEOs - are they doing it just because they're feeling charitable? In other words, your argument supposes that a LOT of individual actors, independently, pursue a strategy (overpaying execs) that isn't optimal, and you don't even bother with an explanation as to why does it happen. This logical fallacy happens all the time when exec compensation is discussed, and it really bothers me that everyone just assumes that shareholders and board of directors of so many different companies are just plain stupid.