What about Making LMG an "Foundation" (Worker Cooperative?)?

[Mihle]

Note; I dont know all the specifics or if its different in different countries.
(I hope Foundation is the right word in English, but I dont think it is, and organization that is self owned by its employees)

I know about a company that is basically a Foundation(Self owned organization) where the Foundation owns 100% the stocks (No external owners, its goal is to run itself sort of).
Basically, all employees would sort of count as owners of it. (As in, have voting power, not as in actually having stocks.)

On a regular interval, all people working for the company vote in between themselves to elect board members or whatever you call them.

That board can then decide things, but in this case, they decide who the Director/Daily boss of the company is or isnt.

In this case they do profit sharing but that isnt needed.
The Foundation is made in a way that its not possible for it to end up not being an Foundation anymore by just the board saying so.
(Or, if it can be bought, it has to go through a vote with all employees that count as owners I think?) 
This exact company I am talking about is doing really well at the moment, without specifying its name(Its not in tech).
 

I am guessing you could possibly have it in the rules/papers of the Foundation that you(Linus)/Yvonne are the Directors until you step down or die.
Could probably also word it in a way were the children get some spots in the board automatically, or not.

[Avocado Diaboli]

So you mean LMG workers should seize the means of production? Because that's basically what that phrase means if you actually read and understand Das Kapital. That would pretty much go against everything Linus holds dear if his constant admissions of love for capitalism are anything to go by.

[Mihle]

In other words, a "Foundation" that serves for its own company and employees.

[Mihle]

10 minutes ago, Avocado Diaboli said:

So you mean LMG workers should seize the means of production? Because that's basically what that phrase means if you actually read and understand Das Kapital. That would pretty much go against everything Linus holds dear if his constant admissions of love for capitalism are anything to go by.

I have not read that.

It would not be a communist company If that is what you mean, it would be an indirect democracy.

I don't get why you think this would go against capitalism in any way, as the company is still fighting against other companies and not owned by government?

[lesilent]

I currently work for a privately held US company where the original owners have been slowly divesting ownership to the employees over the years through a structure called Employee Stock Ownership Plan (ESOP) as they retired. It keeps the company private without having to sell it to soulless third party. I don't know whether this will work on Canada or not, but I think it's something LTT should consider looking into. ESOP's are one of those business structures that not many people know about.

[Mihle]

11 minutes ago, lesilent said:

I currently work for a privately held US company where the original owners have been slowly divesting ownership to the employees over the years through a structure called Employee Stock Ownership Plan (ESOP) as they retired. It keeps the company private without having to sell it to soulless third party. I don't know whether this will work on Canada or not, but I think it's something LTT should consider looking into. ESOP's are one of those business structures that not many people know about.

That sound similar but not exactly what I I talking about, but yes, I don't think many knows about these kinds of ways to structure companies.

[lesilent]

1 hour ago, Mihle said:

That sound similar but not exactly what I I talking about, but yes, I don't think many knows about these kinds of ways to structure companies.

I get what you mean, but I believe foundations primarily give money to charities, so I'm not sure that exact kind of structure would work.

[Mihle]

30 minutes ago, lesilent said:

I get what you mean, but I believe foundations primarily give money to charities, so I'm not sure that exact kind of structure would work.

I know about a company here that works like that, maybe "foundation" is not the right word in English, but that's what translation sites gave me trying to translate the word. For whatever I know, the specific organization form of this company might not be a thing in Canada. 

[LogicalDrm]

LMG and FPM are currently owned by holding company which is owned by the founders of LMG. If I get your thinking correctly, you thats about same thing. Except when trying to expand, you are suggesting to ask all the employees to fund company buy buying into it. That can help, but I don't think that much where this would actually matter. Only if each employee would give considerable amount to company.

[Kronion]

3 hours ago, Mihle said:

Basically, all employees would sort of count as owners of it.

A worker cooperative is probably what you mean. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Worker_cooperative

 

At least it sounds like it to me. Cooperatives are somewhat common in Germany. The banking system in Germany includes a lot of them (the "Volksbanken" and "Raiffeisenbanken" are technically owned by their members - not all customers are members, but many of them are).

[Mihle]

9 minutes ago, LogicalDrm said:

LMG and FPM are currently owned by holding company which is owned by the founders of LMG. If I get your thinking correctly, you thats about same thing. Except when trying to expand, you are suggesting to ask all the employees to fund company buy buying into it. That can help, but I don't think that much where this would actually matter. Only if each employee would give considerable amount to company.

If you are asking me:

No, employees wouldn't have to buy anything, the parent foundation/organisation own everything itself, but has no single person or another company as it's owners.

Employees indirectly can control the company by voting on people to be on the board for the organisation. 

Usually the board would them decide who should be the day to day director/manager whatever you call it. If Employees want another board members, then can vot on that on the yearly or whatever vote.

 

This is not ment for any way of getting funding, it's ment for a way for the company to continue to run without ending up getting sold to shareholders or another company, if Linus retires or whatever.

[Mihle]

8 minutes ago, Kronion said:

A worker cooperative is probably what you mean. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Worker_cooperative

 

At least it sounds like it to me. Cooperatives are somewhat common in Germany. The banking system in Germany includes a lot of them (the "Volksbanken" are technically owned by their members - not all customers are members, but many of them).

Yeah, thats what I ment really.

[Mihle]

I listened more to WAN show, and he mentions it and tax problem if its gifted that way, but I think at least here that depends on how you do it, if you actually give it to employees, yes tax probably, but if you just gift the ownership to an organization that have no owners, but has rules about employees voting for board members, would that also make some tax happening?

If an employee left, it will take no part of the company with them, or nothing would have to be bought/sold, as the parent organization owns itself.

[Kronion]

5 minutes ago, Mihle said:

but if you just gift the ownership to an organization that have no owners, would that trigger tax?

I think that's why you were thinking of foundations. Foundations do indeed not belong to anyone but themselves - at least under German law - but they cannot be solely a profit-oriented organization and would have to give some of their capital to charitable causes of some kind. Some major companies in Germany are actually owned by charitable foundations - Bosch and Carl Zeiss are probably the most prominent examples. It should be noted though, that in these cases the companies themselves are still private enterprises - the foundations are separate entities that own a majority or all of the shares.

 

Whether something like this would work somewhere else - no idea.

[LogicalDrm]

1 hour ago, Mihle said:

If you are asking me:

No, employees wouldn't have to buy anything, the parent foundation/organisation own everything itself, but has no single person or another company as it's owners.

Employees indirectly can control the company by voting on people to be on the board for the organisation. 

Usually the board would them decide who should be the day to day director/manager whatever you call it. If Employees want another board members, then can vot on that on the yearly or whatever vote.

 

This is not ment for any way of getting funding, it's ment for a way for the company to continue to run without ending up getting sold to shareholders or another company, if Linus retires or whatever.

Ok? Usually family-run companies just change to next generation when previous retires. Or promote someone from inside the company as lead if the current lead decides to leave. But like I said, Linus, Luke, Yvonne and Edzel are the current owners (or were, maybe others have bought in too) of the two companies. It would mean that all of them leave at once that company could be forced to be sold to someone because of monetary problems.

[Mihle]

3 hours ago, LogicalDrm said:

Ok? Usually family-run companies just change to next generation when previous retires. Or promote someone from inside the company as lead if the current lead decides to leave. But like I said, Linus, Luke, Yvonne and Edzel are the current owners (or were, maybe others have bought in too) of the two companies. It would mean that all of them leave at once that company could be forced to be sold to someone because of monetary problems.

They could still be employees and stuff, they wouldnt just leave if they dont want to.
This whole thing is because If Linus and Yvonne suddenly die, tax would probably make the company end up being sold, rather than being owned by someone in the company currently, and it was a suggestion to stop that.