What if wages for everyone in a company are regularly voted on by the rest of the company? For example, if the manager isn’t doing their job, their wages are lowered by vote. If the manager tries to lower the wages of the workers to a horribly low level, it could either a) be overruled by the majority, or b) the manager’s wages are lowered suit, pressuring them to increase it.

This is probably a really stupid idea that is extremely prone to corruption, but why?

edit: yep this really is a stupid idea

  • Libra00@lemmy.worldEnglish
    182·
    2 days ago

    If you want a more egalitarian workplace I’m afraid the only solution is to remove the capitalists siphoning off the surplus value created by the labor of the workers. Co-ops are one way to do this on the small scale, but especially in the US they will have a hard time competing with giant corporations which is why they aren’t common anymore: they’ve largely been driven out of most markets by much larger entities.

    • grue@lemmy.world
      11·
      1 day ago

      they’ve largely been driven out of most markets by much larger entities failure to enforce antitrust law.

      FTFY.

      • Libra00@lemmy.worldEnglish
        3·
        1 day ago

        Indeed. It’s frankly surprising that they’re pursuing antitrust cases against Google and Meta now, cause since the break-up of AT&T we’ve spent a lot of years not giving a shit about how anti-competitive giant corporations are.

          • Libra00@lemmy.worldEnglish
            1·
            14 hours ago

            And Walmart isn’t? I bet Kroger and Aldi would have something to say about their entry into the grocery market.

            • FuglyDuck@lemmy.worldEnglish
              1·
              14 hours ago

              remember, the google and meta things are about advertisng tech.

              It’s hurting walmart, kroger, and several others who are- basically- monopolies on their own. (and have many, many in congress paid off.)

              I’m not saying any corpo is somehow magically benevolent. No, I’m saying if you stick your hand in a tank full of hungry sharks… yer gonna get bit.

              • Libra00@lemmy.worldEnglish
                1·
                14 hours ago

                Yeah and my point is that any monopoly is harmful and should be busted, but the trust-busters seem to only care about the ones that affect their rich patrons.

                • FuglyDuck@lemmy.worldEnglish
                  1·
                  14 hours ago

                  the trust-busters seem to only care about the ones that affect their rich patrons.

                  so we agree. because that’s my point. They’re not breaking up google or meta because it’s good to break up monopolies. They’re breaking them up because the oligarchs told them to.