3 ms·

Which is very interesting to consider how it relates to capitalism today, and how in essence you are paying some amount of rent to your employer, in the form of

by pvdoom 3y ago

Which is very interesting to consider how it relates to capitalism today, and how in essence you are paying some amount of rent to your employer, in the form of the profits of the work - the leftover after salaries are paid and expenses covered.

jaclaz 3y ago
I am not getting it. In sharecropping (with a lot of nuances depending on the specific countries and even different regions in a same country) the landowner and the tenant were some sort of partners, both had all the interest in having a better/larger crop (or raise more cattle, etc.). In a normal capitalistic employer/employee relationship, the employees have no particular interest in the final outcome, they are only scared of being fired if they don't meet some (often arbitrarily set) "productivity goals".
- runamok 3y ago
  I'd argue they trade receiving the full fruit of their labor for increased safety/stability. I know I do at least. The owner of a business still needs to make payroll even when the business is doing well with legal consequences iiuc if they don't. If you are a sole proprietor your billable rate goes up but now you are marketing, IT, accounts receivable, janitor, etc. etc. Additionally different company's have different ways of incentivizing employee "ownership". Everything from RSUs, Employee stock purchase plans, a Christmas bonus for a good year, etc.
  - jaclaz 3y ago
    Still this is a different kind of contract. A bonus (or other forms of incentives) are additional to the base salary. Until you are fired (or if the company does not pay your wage anymore) your salary/wage is fixed, and you get it no matter how the company is going. In sharecropping the year you (as a tenant) got a bad crop, you wouldn't have anything to eat, and would have basic survival problems.
    - runamok 3y ago
      I'd assume unless it was REALLY bad you'd get food but no money (due to no extra crops for sale) but a fair point. Some professions like sales are very much feast or famine but agree most employees are insulated to a degree from company performance.

by pvdoom 3y ago

jaclaz 3y ago

I am not getting it. In sharecropping (with a lot of nuances depending on the specific countries and even different regions in a same country) the landowner and the tenant were some sort of partners, both had all the interest in having a better/larger crop (or raise more cattle, etc.). In a normal capitalistic employer/employee relationship, the employees have no particular interest in the final outcome, they are only scared of being fired if they don't meet some (often arbitrarily set) "productivity goals".

runamok 3y ago
I'd argue they trade receiving the full fruit of their labor for increased safety/stability. I know I do at least. The owner of a business still needs to make payroll even when the business is doing well with legal consequences iiuc if they don't. If you are a sole proprietor your billable rate goes up but now you are marketing, IT, accounts receivable, janitor, etc. etc. Additionally different company's have different ways of incentivizing employee "ownership". Everything from RSUs, Employee stock purchase plans, a Christmas bonus for a good year, etc.
- jaclaz 3y ago
  Still this is a different kind of contract. A bonus (or other forms of incentives) are additional to the base salary. Until you are fired (or if the company does not pay your wage anymore) your salary/wage is fixed, and you get it no matter how the company is going. In sharecropping the year you (as a tenant) got a bad crop, you wouldn't have anything to eat, and would have basic survival problems.
  - runamok 3y ago
    I'd assume unless it was REALLY bad you'd get food but no money (due to no extra crops for sale) but a fair point. Some professions like sales are very much feast or famine but agree most employees are insulated to a degree from company performance.