TFW you wake up late, pull up your favorite blog to check on the days events...and see your own article at the top of the page 😮
@Matt_Noyes Thanks. Yves and the commetariat are even harsher on the bill than I am. I'll at least allow that the authors may be well-intentioned, but Yves just isn't buying it.
@GuerillaOntologist The delivery workers in NY, farm workers in CA, gig workers in CA, this new bureaucratic hybrid of pseudo-cooperativism and pseudo-unionism needs to be called out. Your post on GEO deserves a longer treatment.
@Matt_Noyes Agree. Unfortunately, I've gotten the distinct impression that none of leadership at the "big name" co-op orgs (DAWI, USFWC, SELC, etc) have any appetite for criticizing unions. Ricardo and Jay from SELC basically told me on twitter that I was over-reacting...and they both seemed rather distressed that I had the audacity to even bring it up. smh.
@GuerillaOntologist That's the problem, people coming from the NPO world don't bring the same indiignation when confronted with undemocratic progressive leadership as rank and file workers sometimes do. The same thing happens in unions -- staffers and academics can support bureaucrats, but there are just enough members who rebel against the usurpation of their rights and powers to keep the union democracy flame lit.
@GuerillaOntologist So don't back down. ;-)
@Matt_Noyes @GuerillaOntologist I appreciate your analysis and will explore the text more closely myself. I have been in some touch with the architects of this, and they are people who have been involved in the co-op world, including Camille Kerr.
@Matt_Noyes @GuerillaOntologist I am also not seeing the lack of autonomy that you are. The control of the federation after the first meeting is worker-determined. That the federation negotiates terms for member co-ops is similar to how a purchasing co-op operates.
We definitely need to organize a discussion of this. It seems like a repeat of the hyper-centralization and bureaucratization that took place in unions like SEIU and the Carpenters in the 1990s and 2000s, using federated structures and amalgamation of locals, with appointed business managers, to gut worker control. Using the cooperative form is innovative and definitely needs to be carefully analyzed and understood.
@Matt_Noyes @GuerillaOntologist
I agree on the need for a discussion for sure. This is also an important opportunity to build worker/co-op power. Scale always requires some sort of bureaucratization; the devils are in the details.
They're not details, to my mind, but fundamental principles. Is the bureaucracy created and imposed by a few people at the top of the hierarchy, based on what they think is best for the majority of us down here in the base?
Or is that bureaucracy created by those in the base -- the ones actually doing the work -- and does it arise from their needs and their agreements?
If the workers aren't involved in conceiving it, it can't be the latter.
@GuerillaOntologist @Matt_Noyes the workers are electing the controlling board. It would probably be more accurate it to describe it as a single cooperative with multiple subgroups.
The members elect the board, right? The members are not workers but the various cooperatives.
The members are cooperatives. Cooperatives get more or less votes according to the size of their membership.
@GuerillaOntologist @Matt_Noyes And workers vote 1p1v in their co-ops.
Yes, and the voting structure mirrors that of USFWC in some ways. Members have different numbers of votes based on the kind of org they are, and worker-owners ostensibly vote on how their co-op votes in Federation questions...but the USFWC doesn't set wage and hiring policies for members.
@GuerillaOntologist @Matt_Noyes I definitely wouldn't put it in the USFWC box. It's really not a federation of independent co-ops. It's a network of conjoined businesses indended to operated on a cooperative basis. And that core business, it's true, looks a lot like union-style collective bargaining.
By way of highlighting the differences only, I assure you. 😁
@GuerillaOntologist @Matt_Noyes The enormity and stakes and possibility of this: If it were to happen, and be anything like a legit co-op, it would be pretty quickly the biggest worker co-op in the country by far.
@ntnsndr @GuerillaOntologist This is exactly the shiny object wielded by the advocates of SEIU's bureaucratization. "anything like" is not a great standard, no? -- If this meal is anything like safe to eat, it will be great! If this pilot has anything like the necessary experience, it should be a great trip. ;-)
@Matt_Noyes @GuerillaOntologist I come with the bias and tolerance that not even the most official co-ops are ever perfect, esp. when they reach large scale. I think we agree that the most critical question here is worker power to shape the organization.
We have so few examples, and many of the ones we do have aren't well known. Everybody knows Mondragon, but there are other large scale co-ops that operate very differently in South America, for instance, that hardly anyone ever talks about. CECOSESOLA is one
https://issuu.com/cecosesolaorganismo/docs/_ltima_version_collective_mind_
@GuerillaOntologist @Matt_Noyes I am mostly thinking of walking out of large Italian worker co-ops with North American coooperators who were saying, "Was that really a co-op?" Or even our beloved local Namaste Solar here, which is now only ~50% members.
I've just never seen a co-op that perfectly reflects the co-op principles, and most systematically violate at least one. Not that that's an excuse or a good thing. But I wouldn't wish those co-ops away.
Another argument that needs to be addressed. If co-ops are cracked vessels in practice, does that excuse the purposeful creation of a cracked vessel?
@Matt_Noyes @GuerillaOntologist A good question. I think we'll find in many ways this proposal is a response to an imperfect situation. The ideal, of course, is co-op platforms for all, and amazing collective bargaining rights at the federal level. Employee status! We have none of these. This is an attempt to intervene where we are and to bring cooperation to bear on a problem whose terrain has already been shaped by formidable opponents.
I'm not even convinced that platform co-ops are the answer, tbh. The whole "ride-share" (since when does sharing involve money?) model is borked. Using personal vehicles to provide cab service isn't something anyone should have to do. We need more taxi co-ops with apps, imo, not a "cooperative Uber."
@johnnymac has a good take on this, here:
https://workersparadise.org/2020/01/23/no-a-co-op-version-of-uber-or-lyft-isnt-possible/
@GuerillaOntologist @ntnsndr @Matt_Noyes cab driving is a public conveyance and regulations are there to protect drivers, passengers, and the general public. A co-op that doesn't consider the effect of its business on the larger community (and make adjustments to protect and nurture that community) is a co-op in name only. #coops
@Matt_Noyes @johnnymac @GuerillaOntologist @ntnsndr Interesting from the Glassdoor talk, "The main problem, he says, is company hiring policies that routinely ask for higher-skilled or more highly educated workers than they’re willing to pay for." One often wonders if companies act against their best interest because they want more outsourcing (visa or out of country) or strictly through ignorance (in actual job needs or worker relations).
@Matt_Noyes @lwriemen @johnnymac @GuerillaOntologist you should talk to Ra, the main architect: https://platform.coop/people/ra-criscitiello/
@ntnsndr @Matt_Noyes @lwriemen @johnnymac
Just finished watching this, and a couple of thoughts:
1) None of the other examples discussed bear much resemblance to what's being contemplated for gig workers. Specifically in scale and centralization of control.
2) Towards the end, someone asks about union co-ops bringing more democracy to the unions, and Lyz says she thinks this is likely. My worry is that the opposite will happen and co-ops will become less democratic under the influence of unions
@GuerillaOntologist @Matt_Noyes @lwriemen @johnnymac it's a valid worry. I also worry (given experience with typical CUs, REAs, etc) that co-ops will make co-ops less democratic. We need to unite those demanding more democratic unions *and* co-ops, not assume one will poison the other. For now, unions still represent more far more worker power than co-ops, and I struggle to see a better base to build from.
@ntnsndr In her keynote for CASC today, Jessica Gordon-Nembhard had some great comments re this: Co-ops are not automatically part of the co-op economy so we should focus on the ones that are and build them as the dominant model.Tom Webb's axiom that "there is nothing about a co-op that puts a halo on anyone's head. Of course, the Fabians distrusted worker co-ops in general as collectivizing capitalism with the false assumption that collective ownership will "fix" capitalism.
@johnnymac absolutely. There is the co-op legal structure and the co-op movement. They are not the same.
@lwriemen @johnnymac @GuerillaOntologist @ntnsndr
Update: a former SEIU official characterized the bill to me as "SEIU's attempt to leverage the authority of the state to create a centralized employment/labor contracting agency for gig workers.'"