Adding co-op details

co-op.org

@@ -0,0 +1,184 @@
+* Background
+
+Many software opportunites today are focused on building companies or
+products focused on short-term stock-market gains or raising venture
+funding rounds. This, along with other factors, has lead to precarious
+employment opportunities focused on a person's existing skills, with
+little-to-no emphasis on long term stability and individual growth,
+and long hours and stressful working conditions.
+
+I desire to work somewhere that focuses more on providing a
+high-quality, stable environment where everyone is able to learn and
+grow and earn an income over the long term. I would also like to work
+somewhere that emphasizes collaboration over command-and-control
+structures.
+
+My ideal workplace would be one where, eventually, members only need
+to work 3-4 days per week and are able to earn a living wage with a
+stable income over many years and where responsibilities are shared
+across all members equally. This would be somewhere that people learn
+and grow and strives to create a more equal workplace without
+discrimination.
+
+I have worked at many different companies and held many different
+positions over the years and based on that experience, and the people
+I have worked with along the way, I am convinced that this vision is
+possible. Individually, I have experience in all of skills needed for
+building companies, products, and managing teams, which also gives me
+confidence in this vision and also inspires me to share what I have
+learned with others.
+
+The realization of this goal is to create a worker owned software
+product cooperative. What follows are my working ideas on how this
+cooperative would be built and function, although I plan to get as
+much feedback on these ideas as possible from potential members!
+
+* Structure
+
+- Worker control: 1 worker = 1 vote
+
+  This means that every member of the co-op has equal say in the major
+  decisions affecting the co-op. There can be no "bosses" except those
+  voted for by the members themselves (who can then also be removed by
+  those members). This also means that regardless of how much capital
+  a member invests, they will have equal say to all other members.
+
+** Decision Making
+
+I envision all major decisions being made by consensus of all members,
+falling back to majority vote only if absolutely needed. The goal
+would be create an environment in which all members are empowered to
+have equal control over their own working environment and the future
+outcomes of the co-op.
+
+** Capital Investments
+
+The co-op may opt to correlate end-of-year profits to amount of
+capital investment. The idea is that all members get paid a
+living-wage and provided good benefits via standard W2 employment, but
+any additional money beyond that required to pay its member's salaries
+and run the operations of the company, and that is not elected to be
+re-invested back into the company, would be distributed back to
+members on an annual basis based on their capital
+investments. Effectively, this means that early co-op members, or
+members that invest more direct capital, would be eligible to receive
+a larger proportion of any potential profits under the assumption that
+they may have take on more risk.
+
+** Formation
+
+The legal vehicle by which the co-op operates is yet to be
+determined. Likely a lawyer will need to be consulted before any
+decision is made. Possible options:
+
+- California provides a legal framework for creating, running, and
+  operating worker-owned co-operatives.
+
+  This appears to be a decent option with many advantages including it
+  is very cost-effective both in terms of corporate fees and tax-pass
+  through schemes. The likely big downside is that few companies use
+  this structure so the legal environment is less defined. This may
+  not matter if outside investment is never considered/desired.
+
+  More resources [[https://cccd.coop/co-op-info/co-op-types/worker-co-ops][here]]
+
+- Standard Delaware Corp or LLC
+
+  It sounds like some co-ops have been able to form under more
+  standard business vehicles. This would provide the advantage of a
+  much more developed legal framework and services but may not provide
+  the same level of protections for members as a legal regime created
+  specifically for co-ops.
+
+** Positions
+
+Ideally, members can freely rotate between skilled, unskilled,
+professional, administrative, and managerial roles as desired. My
+experience is that siloing individuals into very specific roles often
+leads to unequal work environments as people are not able to gain the
+experience they need to make good decisions in all areas and people
+can then use their knowledge over people. One option would be to have
+a program that helps all members spend some amount of their time
+involved in all roles at some point, not just solely focused on their
+primary skill.
+
+** Membership
+
+As per existing corporation and co-op law: membership would be
+accomplished by buying at least one share in the company. The cost of
+a share would be set by the members. A member could buy more than one
+share but that does not entitle them to any benefits outside of
+potential extra profit earnings. When a member leaves the company, the
+company must reimburse the member for all of the shares they
+own. Shares therefore act as a means of documenting ownership and as a
+vehicle for members to invest capital into the company.
+
+What should the process be for accepting new members? I think a good
+starting place would be to initially hire people "on probation" for a
+set period of time, maybe 6 months. After the probationary period, the
+members can vote on whether or not to extend a membership
+offer. During the probationary period the person would not be eligible
+to vote with the members but they may be allowed to participate in
+discussions around decisions made by members.
+
+* Workplace
+
+My preference would be a "remote-first/virtual" workplace with at
+least two in-person meetups per year. A good starting place may be to
+look at how GitLab organizes their "transparent", "remote-first"
+workplace in their public [[https://handbook.gitlab.com/handbook/][handbook]], specifically their [[https://handbook.gitlab.com/handbook/teamops/][teamops]]
+section.
+
+* Product
+
+I strongly believe in the value of all people and in this context that
+includes the co-ops members but also potential users and customers. I
+would want the co-op to always choose to empower its users vs attempt
+to exploit them. This likely means things like:
+
+- providing high-quality and easy data export options to prevent
+  vendor lock-in
+
+- providing program source to customers (likely under an AGPL license)
+
+* General Goals
+
+- worker control: 1 worker = 1 vote
+- long-term, stable sustainable job's for members
+  - prioritize less work hours over growth/profit
+- voluntary and open membership
+  - no discrimination including:
+    - gender
+    - social
+    - sexuality
+    - racial
+    - political
+    - religious
+- provide a safe and inclusive work environment
+  - members must feel safe to make mistakes and voice different
+    opinions
+
+  - communication should be direct and specific
+  - expectations must be explicitly communicated
+  - boundaries must be listened to and respected
+  - members must not speak to or cooperate with law enforcement
+- provide opportunities for members to learn and grow
+- remain independent and autonomous
+  - outside capital, if any, may not have control
+- cooperate with other cooperatives
+- concern for community
+  - actively engage with local communities
+  - actively manage environmental impacts
+  - seek out, involve, and learn from diverse groups
+
+** Bylaws
+
+- Impactful decisions and bylaws can only be made by a vote of all
+  members (consensus)
+
+- Hiring and firing of a member can only be made by a consensus vote
+  of all members
+
+- The co-op and its members may not enter into any agreements that
+  would cause the change of worker control
+