Workers.coop
This wiki page was created following a discussion at the first workers.coop gathering in Birmingham, October 2023.
workers.coop
When CoTech was created there was no worker co-op federation, there is now one, workers.coop
In 2022 workers.coop was discussed in Glasgow and in January 2023 a proposal was posted to Loomio which was passed with 12 in favour and 1 abstention:
CoTech to work towards merging with workers.coop, as its Tech and Digital industries member circle, with the following to be used as a basis of dialogue with workers.coop and then drafting of a Memorandum of Agreement.
Summary:
Seven years ago, when Outlandish called for a co-op of digital co-ops, there was no digital or independent worker co-op network in the UK. CoTech was established in 2016 for worker owned co-operatives providing digital or technical services.
In November 2022 an independent federation for all worker co-ops was founded. Called workers.coop, it is now in its first year phase of recruitment, formation and planning. Its high level purposes and objects are set out in the founding document. Broadly, its aims are to mobilise, educate and organise worker co-ops and their members across all industrial sectors, to meet our organisational, commercial and advocacy goals; and to spread knowledge of the worker co-op system among new generations and sectors of workers.
workers.coop intends to keep evolving as a ‘member animated’ network – “the members do the work” – with a mixture of volunteer, co-op member donated and paid-for inputs to deliver its strategy. workers.coop’s governance is sociocratic, and in addition to its working circles (e.g. communications, tech infrastructure, mobilisation, coordination, member services, mission/elected board) the aim is to develop industrial member circles.
The benefit to CoTech members of joining workers.coop - and of CoTech itself becoming a section of workers.coop - is that it will give us access to new channels for mutual support, learning, solidarity and business generation while saving on CoTech overheads. Apart from simply enhancing its membership base, the benefit to workers.coop of such a merger are that it demonstrates cooperative unity (Principle Six), attracting support from and opening up the potential for collaborations with a wide range of domestic and international bodies and networks, including possibly funders.
More on the proposal
We propose that CoTech, while largely retaining its autonomy and identity, should merge with workers.coop and operate as the Tech and Digital industrial circle of the wider federation.
Suggested features and aspects of the merger (which would need to be worked out with workers.coop’s board):
· CoTech would retain its own branding and organising culture. It’s alignment with workers.coop can be a ‘secondary brand’ if it so decides.
· CoTech has its own circle finances and operations, but now as a cost centre within workers.coop. For instance:
· if CoTech raises money to pay for its own coordinator, the coordinator would be accountable to the CoTech circle. However the contractual relationship and financial admin could be done through workers.coop and since workers.coop is doing this it would reduce the duplication of effort. The same would apply if CoTech wanted to run events or programmes resourced independently by CoTech. However in time there would almost certainly be opportunities to co-resource worker time and activity between CoTech and other workers.coop circle budgets.
· Potentially CoTech and workers.coop could blend their admin and infrastructure e.g. Nextcloud instances, forums, wiki, comms, web presence.
· The CoTech circle could continue to involve non-contributing members, and non-members of workers.coop, in its own activity and sub circles. However:
· The governance members of the CoTech circle would need to be direct members of workers.coop. This would give those members access to all of the features and benefits of workers.coop membership, just like any other worker co-op member, as well as governing the relationship with other workers.coop circles including its board (mission circle).
· Although CoTech would be very largely autonomous in its own fields of activity, CoTech members of workers.coop would also be working within the terms of their membership agreement with workers.coop and therefore consenting to workers.coop’s policies as they evolve. It would therefore be necessary to make sure CoTech’s internal and workers.coop’s general policies were compatible.
· The governance relationship between workers.coop and the CoTech circle would need to be set out in a domain and decision-making competency description, in line with sociocratic practice and culture. There might need to be a single or double link between the CoTech circle and other circle(s), for instance with workers.coop’s coordinating circle.
At the first workers.coop face-to-face gathering in Birmingham in October 2023 there was a session on CoTech and the notes from this are on the workers.coop Birmingham 2023 page.
In August 2024 a further vote was opened on the same Loomio thread with a background document File:CoTech and workers.coop - background.pdf and the proposed File:CoTech workers.coop MoA for decision.pdf was agreed with 15 votes in favour, none against:
This vote is to approve the terms of the formal association of CoTech and workers.coop, with the aim of reducing duplication of organising and fundraising effort, amplifying our collective impact and capacity, while conserving CoTech’s culture and much of its operational independence.
The terms of the association are contained in the attached Memorandum of Agreement (MoA) which has been worked on by CoTech members over the last few months. It has already been approved by the Board of workers.coop, so it will come into effect if it receives consent here.
Some background to the discussion leading up to this proposal is in another PDF attached. The MoA is the culmination of 8 months of discussion here and back-and-forth on the terms and wording.
Leaving this open for voting until September 10th, to get as close to full CoTech governance member participation as possible.