i was noticing the striking similarities of a select few businesses around the US to that of worker's self-management and i decided to study these businesses in detail. i will present my notes to you so that you can do your own studying and comment on what you think of their business structures, but first i will start by explaining in short, all the different types of cooperatives:
Worker Co-op - a businesses run and owned by the workers that may or may not have a flat (non-hierarchal) structure.
Collective - a form of Worker Co-op that has a flat structure.
Consumer Co-op - a business owned by members who shop from them and are encouraged to attend annual meetings in which they are allowed to give their opinion on any changes for the business. a large scale example of this form of co-op is REI, the mountaineering equipment store.
Supplier Co-op - a business owned by the people that supply them with their goods. a large scale example of this is Ace Hardware.
Producer Co-op - mostly found in the agriculture industry. producer co-ops are owned by the people who produce the products sold by the cooperative.
co-ops are often, though not exclusively, watched over by co-op unions.
i am particularly interested (in specific order from most to least interest) in specific types of non-flat Worker Co-ops such as Rainbow Grocery which, in many ways, resembles anarcho-syndicalism (i feel it is the only way to follow this business model and expand into a larger business), and collectives, which make for great small businesses. i am not particularly interested in consumer, supplier or producer co-ops because my biggest interest is dissolving hierarchy and that seems to be of little concern for these forms of cooperatives.
Although Rainbow has always operated cooperatively, we only incorporated as a cooperative in 1993. California didn't have a corporate statute for worker cooperatives when Rainbow was founded in 1975.
It's true that many people use the terms "co-op" and "collective" interchangeably, but there are some distinctions. A collective is a business that operates exclusively or almost exclusively through direct democracy (i.e. "flat structure," "no hierarchy") whereas "cooperative" is a term that encompasses collectives as well as member-owned and operated businesses that use representative democracy and/or managers. It could be said that Rainbow is a cooperative made up of collectives (our individual departments). Unlike 'Consumer' Co-ops we are not owned by our shoppers, but by our workers. Many people ask us, "How can I join your co-op?" The only way to join is to become a worker/owner. If you are interested in working here and becoming a member, feel free to check out our Job Application.
Structure
In many ways Rainbow runs as if it were a union between several smaller individual cooperatives: our departments. Membership in the department in which you work is essential for Membership in the store and most day-to-day decisions such as hiring, scheduling, buying are made at a department level. We have 14 departments, some represent sales categories such as Produce, Bulk, Cheese, Bakery and Refrigerated. Others are support departments such as Cashiers, Maintenance and the Office.
The Board of Directors
Legal and financial decisions are made by our Board of Directors, which is elected annually from the Membership. Anyone who is a Corporate Member is eligible to run for the Board of Directors. Unlike traditional corporations where the Board of Directors is a powerful body of individuals who may be out of touch with the bottom rungs of the hierarchy, our Board Members can be the same people who stock shelves, clean the floors and work the registers. Our seven-member Board handles requests for large financial expenditures, reviews the department income statements and deals with outside contracts and legal issues. The Board also has the power to create policies for the store, some of which must be ratified by the Membership at large.
Storewide Steering Committee
Another elected body, the Storewide Steering Committee, coordinates and deals with matters that cannot be handled successfully by a single department. The seven-member body meets weekly to deal with departmental conflicts, questions about floor-policy, and other day-to-day issues.
Membership Decisions
The most important decision-making body of all is the Membership. Simply stated, anyone who is a member/owner can make decisions at our monthly Membership meetings. Certain types of policies that affect wages and benefits, major changes in store operations, and a few other issues must be voted on by the Membership. We have guidelines for the way proposals for policies must be drawn up and explained. But at a meeting that can have anywhere from 30 to 80 or more people, it's important for the meetings to run smoothly.
Membership Requirements
We expect anyone who works at Rainbow to become a member. However, it can be a rigorous process. We require that workers complete a set amount of hours as well as attend a number of financial, historical, safety and customer service orientations. Workers must also attend meetings of decision-making bodies and pass a test in order to complete their membership requirements. Once you've jumped through all these hoops, bought your first share (a mere $10!) you're a Member. You can now run for committees, vote at Membership Meetings and share in the financial surplus after taxes are paid. Despite the rigorous process, most workers become members during their first year.
Self-Managed Work Teams
The majority of work is done here in what some call self-managed work teams: groups of people who agree to work together on a project or ongoing responsibility. Some duties that are not taken care of by hired positions are taken care of by other elected committees. Annually, we elect new members to our PR, Donations, Grants, Ecology, Security and Effective Meetings Committees. These groups redefine their goals each year and request a budget from the Board. Throughout the year they take care of various responsibilities and meet with the Board from time to time to report on their progress.
And sometimes we have random responsibilities that are taken care of on a volunteer basis. Most of our work is done here with the attitude that you take on extra tasks outside of your job description, because you want to, not because there are supervisors to make you.
The Rewards
The essence of what is so rewarding about working at Rainbow is that each member has a voice in the way we operate. We may not always agree on how to solve a problem, but everyone has the chance to formulate policies, create committees, propose new ideas or effect change. We are a constantly changing organization and are always learning new ways to do thing
Information From Missing Link Bike Shop's Site:
The Missing Link began in 1971 when a group of former Berkeley High School students attending UC Berkeley formed three collectively run businesses on campus; a record store, an art supply store, and a bicycle shop.
The Missing Link incorporated in September 1973 as a non-profit mutual benefit corporation located in the basement of the Student Union building. In 1978 the Missing Link moved off campus to it's present location at 1988 Shattuck Ave.
In July 1994, we became a California cooperative corporation, but made no change in our operational structure. we are still collectively run by the people who work here. We are a 'worker co-op' where employment at the store is a condition of membership in the co-op, and members hold equal shares in the corporation and are paid the same hourly wage. We currently have 18 members, all of whom are members of the board of directors, and are all responsible for the operations of the store. This structure preserves the founding collective principles of the business.
A worker co-op is different from a consumer co-op. In a consumer co-op, such as a grocery store or REI, the consumers shopping at the store are the members. A profitable consumer co-op can return co-op profits to the members based on their "patronage". For consumer co-ops, patronage is usually considered the members' purchases at the store. At the Missing Link, the employees are the members of the co-op, and their patronage is the hours they work at the store. If we have a profit at the end of the year, we can return the surplus of income to the members based on the number of hours they worked. This "patronage refund" is in addition to the hourly wage paid to all the members.
There are many types of cooperatives. There are co-ops that combine the consumer and worker co-op models. Other Avenues Food Co-op in San Francisco is an example. Since the early 1970's, the store has operated as a consumer co-op. Last year the consumer board voted to allow the employees of the store to run the business as a worker co-op. Other co-ops are supplier co-ops. Ace Hardware is the most recognized version of this type of co-op. Producer co-ops are common in the agricultural industry.
It's nice to see, but under capitalism if they get too big they will be crushed eventually, it makes me sad Only one thing to do...REVOLT! Abolish hiearchy, abolish power, abolish greed!
for being within the capitalist power structure these businesses are doing quite well. there are a multitude of worker co-ops and collectives in the Bay Area alone and Rainbow Grocery, in particular, has over 200 workers with full benefits that get paid good money and the prices remain low. according to the ICA there are 800 million people represented by co-ops worldwide. it's growing steadily and many are doing exceptionally well even in capitalist countries whose economies clash with their style of business.
I'm glad to see at least some of us know how to beat the system without getting beat in retalliation...but I'd still feel a little bit more comfortable if it were more plentiful.
You do know it won't just happen spontaneuosly (spelling? ) though, yes?
of course, but even with effort it won't happen overnight. that is why i am using my early adult years to study so that i can be effective later and when the time comes we can defeat them with our expertise that we gained, in part, by studying.
It's nice to see, but under capitalism if they get too big they will be crushed eventually, it makes me sad
Not really Mondragon still exists and still strives whit the same business model alongside millions even billions of such examples trough out the world . Adopting a Mutualist approach could be deemed as " reformist " by hard line anarchists but the old anarchist ways of insurrection and propaganda of the deed are long gone the world changed we must go back to our working class roots form revolutionary labor unions , workers cooperatives , workers councils , organizational platforms etc. Revolting whit out the support of the working class whit out the support of the masses is suicidal. Whit out a revolutionary labor union as the CNT-FAI the people in Spain wouldn't revolt and whit out the support of the masses of Spain the CNT-FAI wouldn't work. Despite the common stereotype anarchists have tons of ways of organization we are not disorganized as they call us we must show them the true side of our ideas .
Quote (eboyd)
Worker Co-op - a businesses run and owned by the workers that may or may not have a flat (non-hierarchal) structure.
Thats the usual misconception. Workers cooperatives as they were envisioned by Sam Dolgoff , Robert Owen , Mikhail Bakunin etc. are NON-HIERARCHICAL and DEMOCRATICALLY OWNED BY THEIR WORKERS . The original concept as intended by anarchists which actually created this concept is NON-HIERARCHICAL binded trough free agreement and free association and democratically controlled by the workers. This concept of workers coop was after WW2 cooped by capitalists and turned in a completely different way you might heard of terms such as "participation," "democratization," "co-determination," "consensus," "empowerment" etc. Capitalists so an opportunity in this to boost their profits trough giving the workers freedom because they saw how workers become more economically efficient when they have creative control in their workplace but while the workplace is "owned" by the workers in one way or another the capital of the entire workplace is actually owned by a pair of outside investors yes the workers control their workplaces but workers don't own the actual capital of the workplace that's the difference between our model and their model. For example all businesses that are part of the International Cooperative Alliance are as you might call " collectives ".
Quote (eboyd)
From Rainbow Grocery in San Francisco's Site:
This is what i was talking about a merger of quasi capitalist quasi anarchist organizational model the " The Board of Directors " shouldn't even exist . The Board of Directors is invested whit too much power here i mean we don't need a board of directors to take care of the day to day policies working groups can do that . Delegates have no decision making power over no one delegates from various working groups and coordinating committees meet up for exchange of information and policies that are coming from below from working groups and coordinating committees these informations and policies are then sent below by delegates and decided collectively by these various working groups and coordinating committees which these delegates came from .
Naturally, but in the U.S. here most of the working classes are either idiots that trust in idiots like Obama administration or the right. I don't know if we have a chance here At least you got some help where you at
They are idiots because as Rosa Luxembourg said they are not politically nor socially trained for example in the 20's the American working class in front whit revolutionary labor unions as the Industrial Workers Of The World known in popular culture as the " Wobblies" nearly brought the US in brick of social revolution they were ultimately decimated by brutal force by the US government the same in the 60's . When hard line organizations rise people rise whit them the lack of such organizations is the reason why the American working class has no class consciousness.
Thats the usual misconception. Workers cooperatives as they were envisioned by Sam Dolgoff , Robert Owen , Mikhail Bakunin etc. are NON-HIERARCHICAL and DEMOCRATICALLY OWNED BY THEIR WORKERS .
yes, but as the capitalists have taken part in this concept as well they have created their own forms of hierarchal cooperatives and, unfortunately, i cannot leave them out if we are discussing co-ops.
Quote (Menace)
Capitalists so an opportunity in this to boost their profits trough giving the workers freedom because they saw how workers become more economically efficient when they have creative control in their workplace but while the workplace is "owned" by the workers in one way or another the capital of the entire workplace is actually owned by a pair of outside investors yes the workers control their workplaces but workers don't own the actual capital of the workplace that's the difference between our model and their model. For example all businesses that are part of the International Cooperative Alliance are as you might call " collectives ".
yes, and that is why i am only interested in those forms of co-ops.
Quote (Menace)
This is what i was talking about a merger of quasi capitalist quasi anarchist organizational model the " The Board of Directors " shouldn't even exist . The Board of Directors is invested whit too much power here i mean we don't need a board of directors to take care of the day to day policies working groups can do that . Delegates have no decision making power over no one delegates from various working groups and coordinating committees meet up for exchange of information and policies that are coming from below from working groups and coordinating committees these informations and policies are then sent below by delegates and decided collectively by these various working groups and coordinating committees which these delegates came from .
i think you are misunderstanding. i agree that more power should be solely given to the people, but the Board of Directors in this business is a part of the common workforce as well. a cashier, janitor, etc. -- anyone -- can become a member of the BOD and they are only one group within the organization. the entire business is made up of separate organizations that make up, pretty much, syndicates within the organization. the BOD is just another syndicate. they just happen to handle things like finances and other decisions within the business that wouldn't be appropriate to be handled by the entire collective. they specifically handle the business decisions. these are the people that would have shown a business savvy, and so when a business decision comes up that needs a speedy and wise conclusion that only people who know about business can handle, they handle it. they, however, have no more power than any other organization within the corporation.
yes, but as the capitalists have taken part in this concept as well they have created their own forms of hierarchal cooperatives and, unfortunately, i cannot leave them out if we are discussing co-ops.
They hijacked anarchist ideas as an anarchist i can't consider them cooperatives they are not even worth to be called a cooperative they are a disgrace
Quote (eboyd)
i think you are misunderstanding. i agree that more power should be solely given to the people, but the Board of Directors in this business is a part of the common workforce as well. a cashier, janitor, etc. -- anyone -- can become a member of the BOD and they are only one group within the organization. the entire business is made up of separate organizations that make up, pretty much, syndicates within the organization. the BOD is just another syndicate. they just happen to handle things like finances and other decisions within the business that wouldn't be appropriate to be handled by the entire collective. they specifically handle the business decisions. these are the people that would have shown a business savvy, and so when a business decision comes up that needs a speedy and wise conclusion that only people who know about business can handle, they handle it. they, however, have no more power than any other organization within the corporation.
I understand but everything must flow from below based on the slogan " from each according to his ability to each according to his need " everything is based on need in a cooperative and who better knows their needs then the mass of workers . I understand that these people are workers themselves but everything from economic redistribution to day to day policies are decided by the workforce rather based on individual working groups in case of day to day policies or collectively in case of economic policies , working time ,business decisions etc. This is not the anarchist way this is not even at vibe whit the ICA principles and forms of workers organizations . Let me tell you why we don't need such a model. There is a risk that those in authority in the organization and / or that the tasks of the particular service makes them more available to more training / information so inherently gives them more authority to exert greater influence over decisions, even in democratic councils, which shows that the councils themselves do not ensure participation of equal members in terms of information and influence. That's why we use more decentralization and that's why some of us in special those in the PARECON system use balanced job complexes .
I understand but everything must flow from below based on the slogan " from each according to his ability to each according to his need " everything is based on need in a cooperative and who better knows their needs then the mass of workers . I understand that these people are workers themselves but everything from economic redistribution to day to day policies are decided by the workforce rather based on individual working groups in case of day to day policies or collectively in case of economic policies , working time ,business decisions etc. This is not the anarchist way this is not even at vibe whit the ICA principles and forms of workers organizations . Let me tell you why we don't need such a model. There is a risk that those in authority in the organization and / or that the tasks of the particular service makes them more available to more training / information so inherently gives them more authority to exert greater influence over decisions, even in democratic councils, which shows that the councils themselves do not ensure participation of equal members in terms of information and influence. That's why we use more decentralization and that's why some of us in special those in the PARECON system use balanced job complexes .
interesting. i wouldn't say they have any sort of "authority" though. they just have authority over their specific duties. but yes, i do agree that these business ideas are easily attributable to the people that work there because i did notice that the workers even at that business go through rigorous education before being allowed to become a member.
) though, yes? 
