4 ms·
I'm confused but maybe I didn't explain it clearly. I'm not suggesting to give equity to people who are currently official employees of Twitter or people who wi
by jimkleiber 5y ago
I'm confused but maybe I didn't explain it clearly. I'm not suggesting to give equity to people who are currently official employees of Twitter or people who will become official employees. I'm suggesting to give equity to people who might not be considered employees or even contractors and may never be considered employees under US law.
What I was imagining was a way to have more representative democracy in tech companies, not just limited to the corporate shareholders, but perhaps through a cooperative structure that gives decision-making rights to the many stakeholders of the service, not the 1 share 1 vote model.
I guess overall I look at the document in the US that so many of us Americans revere and fight for—the Constitution—and see it as representative democracy and then wonder why we have private companies that don't have similar principles.
- nradov 5y agoIf you're doing work for financial compensation such as wages or equity then legally you're either an employee or a contractor. Calling that relationship by some other label doesn't change reality. It's totally possible to found a B Corporation with a charter that formally gives decision making rights to stakeholders other than shareholders. Many such corps exist and anyone could found one as a competitor to Twitter. However this structure makes it more difficult to attract capital from outside investors. https://hbr.org/2016/06/why-companies-are-becoming-b-corporations https://hbr.org/2016/06/why-companies-are-becoming-b-corpora...
- jimkleiber 5y ago> If you're doing work for financial compensation such as wages or equity then legally you're either an employee or a contractor. Fair point. Apparently AirBnb petitioned the SEC to allow it to give equity to its hosts while still being a private company because that is currently illegal. > However this structure makes it more difficult to attract capital from outside investors. Another fair point. Outside investors seem to like to have 1 share = 1 vote, rather than 1 person = 1 vote, because then those with the most financial shares owned (typically investors) can have more decision-making power. [0]: https://sites.law.berkeley.edu/sustainability-compliance/the-gig-economy-and-the-modern-corporation-how-airbnbs-host-equity-sec-proposal-is-putting-shareholder-primacy-advocates-to-bed-2/ https://sites.law.berkeley.edu/sustainability-compliance/the...