"We determine what proportion of the surplus is reinvested into the co-op, what proportion is directed to socially beneficial projects outside of Loomio, and what proportion is distributed to co-op members. Being a member makes you eligible to receive the distribution, but does not mean any distribution will necessarily be made."
So you have all of the responsibilities of an owner, but you may or may not even get any distribution of the overall profits, if the company sells.
These decisions are also above the heads of the members. This means it's technically not 'worker-owned'.
"Members are the ultimate decision-makers for Loomio. While we often delegate decision-making, such as to diretors, coordinators, and leaders of work areas, all mandate traces back to the members."
Another important aspect to owning anything, is being able to make a decision. It seems most decisions are delegated to a directory/coordinator, which isn't much different than having a manager/boss above you.
This isn't much different than a standard corporate setup in a startup, with the hopes that your small percentage of the company will pay out.
I look at actions rather than words and although you call it 'worker owned', the details in your handbook don't really portray this.
The members appoint the Board[0], and the Board makes decisions about surplus. If the Board distributed surplus in a way not in accordance with member wishes, we would just fire the Board.
Members also appoint the coordinators[1]. Coordinators are not bosses - they serve to operationally implement the strategy set directly by members. If a coordinator started acting like an overlord, we'd just remove them.
There is no decision in the co-op ultimately "above the heads of members". Our co-op is literally owned by the members. We appoint directors, set the strategy, and also carry out the day to day operational work with a lot of individual autonomy in our area of focus.
There are a few mandated delegations made by members (such as directors, coordinators, etc), but the ultimate responsibility and power is held by members. It's not effective to have everyone involved in every decision, and delegation by consent is very important for effective governance and operations.
Think that's a sensible approach (to looking at things) but there's a difference between how you work together with someone that you and your coworkers have decided are good at coordinating work, and a traditional boss. The coordinator is working for you, not the other way around, if that makes sense? Like the difference between having an elected president and a dictator.
This is correct. Coordinators do serve some of the same functions as a manager, but the difference is they are appointed by the people they are managing. We call this "dynamic hierarchies by consent". Coordination also rotates, and many members have been in the role and then moved on from it.
The requirement is that the workers are the owners of the business, legally and in terms of responsibilities and powers. All Loomio worker-members own the company together, equally, and no one who isn't a worker has any powers as an owner.
"We determine what proportion of the surplus is reinvested into the co-op, what proportion is directed to socially beneficial projects outside of Loomio, and what proportion is distributed to co-op members. Being a member makes you eligible to receive the distribution, but does not mean any distribution will necessarily be made."
So you have all of the responsibilities of an owner, but you may or may not even get any distribution of the overall profits, if the company sells.
These decisions are also above the heads of the members. This means it's technically not 'worker-owned'.
"Members are the ultimate decision-makers for Loomio. While we often delegate decision-making, such as to diretors, coordinators, and leaders of work areas, all mandate traces back to the members."
Another important aspect to owning anything, is being able to make a decision. It seems most decisions are delegated to a directory/coordinator, which isn't much different than having a manager/boss above you.
This isn't much different than a standard corporate setup in a startup, with the hopes that your small percentage of the company will pay out.
I look at actions rather than words and although you call it 'worker owned', the details in your handbook don't really portray this.