Optical Cooperatives

[Kujiradesu]

I have recently been reading an interesting book: Democracy at Work: A Cure for Capitalism by Richard D. Wolff

The heart of Professor Wolff's thesis is that Worker Self Directed Enterprise (WSDE) should replace Private Enterprise as a transition away from Capitalism and its societal ills (economic inequality, worker exploitation, the decline of democracy, etc).

Cooperatives as many of you might know are WSDEs where the employees are the labor and the boss all rolled into one. Decisions about the direction of the enterprise, and what to do with profits etc are made by the employees by democratic vote. As I read this book the more I thought that this model of organization would be a good fit for an optical dispensary, an optometrists office or both.

So, I wanted to ask the community: if anyone has experience working for a cooperative- optical, optometrists office or other vision care enterprise? Does this method of business organization hold appeal for any of you? Why/why not?

(I also invite anyone curious about the issues raised by this post to check-out Professor Wolff's website.)

[pknsbeans]

If the "profits" are voted on, how do you decide how to fund startup? Is that an equal expense among all of these "queen/worker bee" hybrids? So then isn't it just a form of corporation in which all the members are shareholders and vote to decide what to do with earnings. I guess they could decide if they want to reinvest or declare a dividend. I've done this but i was the only member. Had to quit. The boss was a real pain.

[Kujiradesu]

While not comprehensive this video illustrates the structures and possibilities of a cooperative:

[Tallboy]

The only thing I know of that could be considered an "optical cooperative" in the sense you are mentioning is Walman Labs, they seem to be doing alright I guess.

[pknsbeans]

... Still doesn't address startup. And it still looks like a corporation in which the shareholder, employee, management, and board of directors are all the same people just different accounting.

And it's certainly still capitalism. Non-slave labor and unforced exchange of goods and currency. Capitalism.

[Kujiradesu]

One of the defining criteria of Economic Capitalism is appropriation of surplus. Surplus is the extra value produced by a worker that is not returned to said worker in wages. (i.e. I hire someone as a worker for $10/hr. The value of their labor to me is $15/hr. The surplus to me the employer is $5/hr.) The surplus is the bedrock of capitalist wealth and is by its very definition exploitation. Cooperatives still have surplus, but by distributing it equitably and democratically they remove the exploitive element.

Non-slave labor and unforced exchange of goods and currency. Capitalism.

Non slave labor is only an absence of slavery, and not a requirement of Capitalism. Many proto-capitalist societies also had slavery is some form. Markets, it has been said are a sign of Capitalism, but markets are just a way of distributing goods and markets do not capitalism make.

[Tallboy]

Lol you are nuts. Talk to me after you have your life on the line owning a business... I earn every penny. I make the decision on where "surplus" goes. Then again I probably care about my employees a lot also

[Lab Insight]

One of the defining criteria of Economic Capitalism is appropriation of surplus. Surplus is the extra value produced by a worker that is not returned to said worker in wages. (i.e. I hire someone as a worker for $10/hr. The value of their labor to me is $15/hr. The surplus to me the employer is $5/hr.) The surplus is the bedrock of capitalist wealth and is by its very definition exploitation. Cooperatives still have surplus, but by distributing it equitably and democratically they remove the exploitive element.



Non slave labor is only an absence of slavery, and not a requirement of Capitalism. Many proto-capitalist societies also had slavery is some form. Markets, it has been said are a sign of Capitalism, but markets are just a way of distributing goods and markets do not capitalism make.

Cooperatives really only work when the group members invested are of like status, profession and in need of same products/services.

The worker bees doing the grunt work are normal paid employees. The products produced still have to be sold back to the members at a discount but not at a rate of cost as the 'coop' still needs to generate some profit to cover staff wages, overhead and any operational expenses.

At the end of the year, any surplus is given back to the members as a dividend - this is where the 'extra' discount makes it worthwhile. I've tried on numerous occasions to start one up and have the capital to do so. The only issue is everyone loves the idea pitched but when it's time to ante up, they're trigger shy.

No risk, no reward.

[Quantrill]

One of the defining criteria of Economic Capitalism is appropriation of surplus. Surplus is the extra value produced by a worker that is not returned to said worker in wages. (i.e. I hire someone as a worker for $10/hr. The value of their labor to me is $15/hr. The surplus to me the employer is $5/hr.) The surplus is the bedrock of capitalist wealth and is by its very definition exploitation.

I disagree 100%. The employers are the ones being exploited. Think about how many benefits outside of the hourly wage that employers are legally required to provide to full time employees. The employees are riding the coattails of the employer and are thus able to provide for their families due to the opportunity given to them. How many employers only work 40 hours per week? How many of them take a paid 15 minute break every few hours? The employers take on risk, expenses, handle legal matters, advertising and so much more.

I've been extremely appreciative of every single job that I've ever been able to get. When you take entrepreneurial risks, you are absolutely entitled to the fruits of your labor.