I’ve always wondered, what prevents creating a corporation to hire every worker possible, makes them proportional owners, and then negotiates wages and benefits on their behalf?
One enormous corporation that has all of the benefits of a union.
If it operates like an agency, it’s already at a disadvantage because the real profit is being made by someone else anyway. Otherwise it’s a neat idea.
You don’t hire an agency to break even, you hire an agency to work on projects you assume will bring you profit. In my industry in particular, you might hire some agency employees, spend a few hundred thousand a year, to help finish a product that will rake in tens of millions a year, or to create some internal tooling that saves you millions in employee productivity.
I think a major issue is that if the corporation cannot find work for all of its employees, how will it pay them? And since, presumably, there will be admin staff required who also need to be paid, the amount this corporation will charge the employers of the workers will have to be more than is paid to the workers. If this amount is significant, employers can poach employees from the “union corp” by offering more money, while still saving themselves money.
I’ve always wondered, what prevents creating a corporation to hire every worker possible, makes them proportional owners, and then negotiates wages and benefits on their behalf?
One enormous corporation that has all of the benefits of a union.
So a co-op?
Like Mondragon?
Not the exact same thing, but is a step in moving society that way, but read up on Germany’s co-determination laws.
THIS right here. Mondragon is exactly what GP Is asking about.
If you’re reading this and thinking about starting an LLC, non-profit, co-op, or union shop, please give this a look too.
you mean like free market syndicalism
Yes, but strictly created to take advantage of all benefits afforded corporations via modern laws and political influence.
Corporate espionage and competition. It would not be allowed
Interesting. Even if it operated like an agency?
If it operates like an agency, it’s already at a disadvantage because the real profit is being made by someone else anyway. Otherwise it’s a neat idea.
You don’t hire an agency to break even, you hire an agency to work on projects you assume will bring you profit. In my industry in particular, you might hire some agency employees, spend a few hundred thousand a year, to help finish a product that will rake in tens of millions a year, or to create some internal tooling that saves you millions in employee productivity.
What advantages do you think a corporation would have that a union doesn’t?
I think a major issue is that if the corporation cannot find work for all of its employees, how will it pay them? And since, presumably, there will be admin staff required who also need to be paid, the amount this corporation will charge the employers of the workers will have to be more than is paid to the workers. If this amount is significant, employers can poach employees from the “union corp” by offering more money, while still saving themselves money.
I think this model exists. waitrose in UK might be one of them, not sure though.
The co-op is also one of these, surprisingly