What is Demand Coop and why tech workers should join one

What is Demand Coop and why tech workers should join one(cahootzcoops.com)

21 points by DeonRob 1 hour ago | 9 comments

aiisahik 10 minutes ago |

Dumbest idea i've ever seen. Complete misunderstanding of how the tech world works.

The idea is: if sufficient consumers banded together and coordinated their spending power, they can drive decisions in the executive suite of the companies.

Nothing could be further from the truth. It's neither the spending of consumer nor even the spending of business that drive decisions. The only thing that drives decisions at that level is capital allocation - not spending allocation. Wealth drives these decision - not spending.

So if all these tech workers want to band together and do something about it, they would create their own ETF or mutual fund, and put all their wealth into that fund and then have the manager of that fund direct that capital based on their mission.

Of course you will see that this won't work because there just isn't enough capital here to move the market compared to the other capital allocators who are just trying to maximize returns.

kaashif 7 minutes ago | |

Also, if you are doing something other than maximising returns then you'll be outcompeted and irrelevant in the long run unless you attract many billions in inflows, or the government tips the scales in your favour e.g. ESG.

Aurornis 41 minutes ago |

> In many existing demand cooperatives, such as rotating savings groups, there is often a trusted central coordinator — frequently an older community member — who helps maintain accountability and keep the interests of the group aligned.

Aligned with what? Whenever a central position is formed with power over something, even if it’s only a steering power, it will be sought out by power-hungry people and manipulated.

This thin proposal would be more interesting if it could give any discussion about the difficult points and how they’d address them rather than waving it all away under the guidance of a benevolent individual at the center.

To say I’m skeptical of an organization that wants to choose how to spend my money for me is an understatement.

bonsai_spool 42 minutes ago |

Essentially, we need more unions - I'm not sure we have to invent new names for these things. These won't be your parents' unions, or the union boogeyman you may have seen on TV—the union can do exactly what you wish it to do.

I've been (unintentionally) part of two union drives in my own life and have seen friends in an unrelated field participate in a third. They make perfect sense in moments like our current one, where owners can hire dozens of attorneys to jeopardize your job while you of course are limited to whatever legal representation you've been saving up for.

asdfasgasdgasdg 1 minute ago | |

> the union can do exactly what you wish it to do.

There is no such thing. A problem with a union is that everyone's going the same place, and you're not driving. Maybe that place is better than where you could get to on your own, or maybe not. But one thing that is definitely not true is that your union is going to do exactly what you want.

Hupriene 3 minutes ago | |

My only experience with unions was as a low level employee while I was in high school. It consisted of certain employees trying to drum up willingness to unionize through a combination of unrealistic promises and threats of violence. The company I worked for at the time was in trouble and went out of business before the unionization effort came to a vote. I don't know how representative my experience was, but it definitely soured me on unions for a long time.

These days I definitely believe that something needs to take up the role of fighting for the rights of labor, but I remain skeptical that unions, at least as they exist in the US, are the right tool for the job.

hackthemack 37 minutes ago | |

Agreed. The best time to form a union was 20 years ago (Especially because Tech Workers had leverage because they were in demand). The second best time to form a union is today.

fragmede 4 minutes ago | | |

Call it an association or guild or something other than a union. Lawyers and doctor have unions but they don't call it that.

SilverElfin 38 minutes ago | |

I wouldn’t mind unions except they get involved in all sorts of political battles that I would get opted into. I would rather they focus on the barebones of negotiation for compensation instead of taking it over like it’s their personal nonprofit.

nick__m 21 minutes ago | | |

It really depends on the union, mine concentrate on less hours for a salary that follow inflation, parental leaves and a gold plated drug insurance. I work 32.5 hours per week in the summer, have 24 days off, 2 personal days and 12 statutory holidays; that's 36 paid days off !

bluefirebrand 23 minutes ago | | |

The cool thing about a union is that you actually can have a say in what political battles they fight

You just can't do that if you only want to be a passive member

ajb 33 minutes ago |

Interesting, but - it says it's a co-op, but this is a word with a legal definition. Every co-op I know publishes what it's legal entity is, how voting is done, etc. This just has "click to join". If your pitch is that you have more integrity than typical companies then you have to, you know, "walk the walk".

Also in some jurisdictions, calling yourself a co-op without actually being one will get you into legal difficulties. Companies that don't quite fulfil all the requirements are careful not to call themselves once. Igalia, for example, are very serious about being worker owned and run, but they made the choice to have a slightly different structure so they don't call themselves a co-op.