4 ms·

It's almost certainly a better for the people who are working somewhere they actually care about for more than minimum wage with performance potentially tied to

It's almost certainly a better for the people who are working somewhere they actually care about for more than minimum wage with performance potentially tied to income.

TylerE 3y ago
Except that looking at the two linked here (Seward and the pizza place) both are struggling - raising prices, cutting hours, and both are essentially begging the community to fund them so they continue to exist.
- afavour 3y ago
  There are plenty of non worker owned restaurants doing the same in today’s economy, of course. Non-chain restaurants are kind of weird businesses, really. Owner owned or worker owned they’re rarely big money spinners and often owe a lot to the community around them to keep them viable.
- hot_gril 3y ago
  Idk how Cheese Board is doing. They were fine last I checked. Just probably would've done way better as a corp. The Avedisyan couple turned their cheese shop into a coop decades ago, and it was basically an act of charity when they could've kept ownership instead. The store didn't expand much despite decades of exceptional work and high popularity, which is a missed opportunity for profit, but that wasn't their goal. I do wonder where they got the initial investment for the shop.
  - sdenton4 3y ago
    Arizmendi spun out of Cheeseboard in 1996 and now has six locations... Also, Mondragon exists. Coops can expand.
    - deleted 3y ago
      [deleted]
    - hot_gril 3y ago
      Arizmendi and Cheeseboard are separate companies though, same with Cheeseboard and Sliver (which is btw not a co-op). Not sure about Mondragon's structure since it's headlined as a corporation/federation of co-ops, which sounds like the workers don't collectively own the entire business and there's a higher level that's just a regular corp. Anyway, I'm not saying co-ops can never expand while still maintaining collective ownership, only that it's harder. Also harder to start, or to exist in general.
hot_gril 3y ago
Just because the employees own the store doesn't mean they pay everyone above market rate. If they do, then yeah, some lucky employees will get paid extra at the previous investors' expense. Meanwhile a regular corp restaurant could offer the same pay but fill the spots with higher skill to match, and some do. Same thing except the corp more likely thrives.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]

It's almost certainly a better for the people who are working somewhere they actually care about for more than minimum wage with performance potentially tied to income.

TylerE 3y ago

Except that looking at the two linked here (Seward and the pizza place) both are struggling - raising prices, cutting hours, and both are essentially begging the community to fund them so they continue to exist.

afavour 3y ago
There are plenty of non worker owned restaurants doing the same in today’s economy, of course. Non-chain restaurants are kind of weird businesses, really. Owner owned or worker owned they’re rarely big money spinners and often owe a lot to the community around them to keep them viable.
hot_gril 3y ago
Idk how Cheese Board is doing. They were fine last I checked. Just probably would've done way better as a corp. The Avedisyan couple turned their cheese shop into a coop decades ago, and it was basically an act of charity when they could've kept ownership instead. The store didn't expand much despite decades of exceptional work and high popularity, which is a missed opportunity for profit, but that wasn't their goal. I do wonder where they got the initial investment for the shop.
- sdenton4 3y ago
  Arizmendi spun out of Cheeseboard in 1996 and now has six locations... Also, Mondragon exists. Coops can expand.
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
  - hot_gril 3y ago
    Arizmendi and Cheeseboard are separate companies though, same with Cheeseboard and Sliver (which is btw not a co-op). Not sure about Mondragon's structure since it's headlined as a corporation/federation of co-ops, which sounds like the workers don't collectively own the entire business and there's a higher level that's just a regular corp. Anyway, I'm not saying co-ops can never expand while still maintaining collective ownership, only that it's harder. Also harder to start, or to exist in general.

hot_gril 3y ago

Just because the employees own the store doesn't mean they pay everyone above market rate. If they do, then yeah, some lucky employees will get paid extra at the previous investors' expense. Meanwhile a regular corp restaurant could offer the same pay but fill the spots with higher skill to match, and some do. Same thing except the corp more likely thrives.

deleted 3y ago
[deleted]