Letters to LIFE
reprinted with permission

On worker run co-ops and Guaranteed Livable Income
by Russ Christianson - April 2005

[After an email enquiry from LIFE prompted by a viewing of the documentary "The Take", Russ Christianson wrote back and shared his knowledge of co-ops in Canada.]

Over the years, I have often thought about, and read many articles about guaranteed incomes. Our current political and economic systems are clearly out of balance - in almost every way, using any measurement. And, your argument re. providing the physiological basics required for life (including sustaining the natural resources that all life here on earth is supported by) is the starting point. So, providing a livable income to all is a basic way to re-distribute wealth and begin closing the ever-widening gap between rich and poor.

However, I will comment on your two main questions: 1. Are worker co-ops "the answer to poverty?", and 2. How would a "guaranteed income" change the dynamic of worker co-ops?

1. I don't think there are any single answers to poverty. And worker co-ops are often relegated to the margins in the North American economy. There are a few successful models of worker co-ops that have (against all odds, and with little support) become sustainable businesses that provide living wages, but there are also many that have failed to do so. I think it is a dangerous message to state that co-operatives (worker, consumer, housing, producer, etc.) are a solution for poor people. For co-operatives to be successful, they have to find a way to capitalize themselves. This is often done through "sweat equity" (often a form of self-exploitation), and has sometimes been done with limited (in $ amount and duration) government
support. It is simply unrealistic to expect poor people to organize themselves and somehow gain access (through "lawful and peaceful" means) to the resources (intellectual, emotional, and economic) required to successfully develop something as complex as a well-functioning co-operative organization while they are dealing with basic survival issues every day.

Society has a shared responsibility to find creative ways to care for people who are having trouble (for whatever reasons) taking care of themselves. We cannot simply leave it up to individuals to "pull themselves up by the bootstraps."

So, there is a web of solutions that must be applied to share the wealth that our planet provides to all living creatures. From a human society point of view, this would include significant changes to many systems, including: the tax system (that is quickly growing the wealth gap - and is one of the keys to creating a "livable income" for all); the education system (that currently pushes the idea of competition as the natural way of being to absurd extremes); the economic system - the measures of success need to be significantly redefined - moving away from Generally Accepted Accounting Principles and GDP to something like Daly and Cobb's "Genuine Progress Indicator" - a system that takes into account all the unpaid important work, as well as the natural environment.

2. From my point of view, a guaranteed wage would allow people to follow their passions and purpose in life. This may include their art, work, taking care of children and others unable to care for themselves, growing and making good food, etc. etc. It would also allow people to co-operate in many ways (including worker co-ops) as the mythology of competition for scarce resources was slowly broken down. It would likely lead to new, innovative organizational models (beyond the current co-operative models) that would encourage responsible co-operation - i.e. there have to be ways to ensure each person is making a meaningful contribution to the work of the group, without the creation of undue hierarchy, rewards and punishments, etc. People would need to be encouraged to find and continually nurture their internal motivation, something that would be more possible if they didn't have to worry about where their next meal or rental/mortgage payment was going to come from. Ideally, all people would find a way to express their unique gifts, and make a positive contribution to the group and society through a web of self-reliance and community.

This is a utopian vision for a co-operative society, and of course many people would argue that it is completely unrealistic. Well, so what?! I would rather work towards this positive vision than become buried (prematurely) by our current, highly stratified economic and social system - something that people used to call a "class system".

A quick reality check - co-operatives, individuals, and groups all have their problems, challenges, and dysfunctions. For example, consumer co-ops have a built in, structural, or inherent conflict between capital (consumer provided) and labour - thereby often resulting in poor labour practices. Individual self-interest (from whatever motivation or social/psychological determinants) can, has and will de-rail co-operative efforts. The questions is, do and can co-operatives and co-operation help ameliorate destructive social, economic and environmental interactions over the long term more effectively than individual and global competition? I think the answer is yes. Otherwise, I wouldn't be wasting my time trying to develop them.

Russ Christianson

Over the past twenty years, Russ Christianson has helped launch over thirty co-operatives in a wide variety of sectors, including travel, housing, retail, distribution, food processing, energy, health, construction, forestry, and manufacturing. In 2003, he was given the "Outstanding Contribution to the Ontario Co-operative Association Award" for his dedicated service to the co-operative movement.