Proposal to Board: Owner Discussion Groups

So. I attended a Board Meeting of Weaver Street Market Co-operative this past Wednesday. The first I have attended since the Vision 2020 meetings last year.

I was struck by the comment from the Board Chair (worker-owner Curt Brinkmeyer, who works in the WSM admin office finance dept) that the WSM Board was constantly looking at ways of getting WSM workers and owners more engaged in the workings of our co-op. But that they (the Board) couldn't work out for the life of them why their ideas never found fruition.

Um. You're the Board. Be the Captain Jean-Luc Picard. Just tell the General Manager to make it so. No? Hmm. You guessed it. Time for a letter to the Board:

"Dear WSM Board,

Please regard this as a formal e-mail to the WSM Board, and please present it to a Board Meeting.

I am writing because I was genuinely confused at this past week's WSM Board Meeting by the response of the WSM Board Chair to my suggestion that the Board needed to find more ways to get owners and workers involved in the workings of our co-op.

You will remember he said that the Board considers this the whole time. But that there seems to be a disconnect between the Board considering it, and something happening.

I am genuinely confused because I don't understand why you don't just make it happen. You are the Board of WSM. The supreme authority in our co-op, in that you get your authority from the owners, who are supposed democratically to control all of the activities within the co-op. Just instruct the General Manager to give effect to your suggestions.

Ok. That was the short version. Let's have a look at the longer version:

I have been attending WSM Board Meetings on and off for about eight years now, not least when I was a serving member of the WSM Elections Board Task Force, back in 2008. Finding ways to create proper communication with and involvement by owners has always been a topic of conversation.

As indeed it should be. The primary role of the Board, in my opinion, is to give substance to the ICA definition of a co-op, namely that it is a business entity whose activities are democratically controlled by its owners.

You can't be democratically controlled by owners unless owners are given regular opportunity to exercise that control through engagement beyond the annual election of a Board Director.

The secondary remit of the Elections Task Force was itself to examine ways of getting owners more involved in the workings of our co-op. Indeed, we made several suggestions as to how this could be accomplished. Yet none found fruition.

This lack of follow through seemed to find echo in the response to my suggestion about including owners, both worker and consumer, in the decisions to be taken with regards to changing our sales strategy.

Ruffin made a very compelling presentation at the Board Meeting in question (Wednesday, May 14) about sales trends within the natural foods retail industry. And ways in which WSM could improve its sales.

Two of the most important matters canvassed were focusing our attention on a smaller selection of fare, and addressing the pricing of our goods generally.

With regards to the former, Ruffin made the point that it would be increasingly more difficult to compete with the likes of Trader Joe's and Whole Foods on generic grocery items, since we all pretty much now get those items from the same distributor, namely UNFI.

The suggestion was that we consolidate the range of items we have for sale, and focus our attention on those items that we could offer more competitively than others.

There were some comments about our pricing. But I think for the most part even Ruffin was a little stumped as to how to deal with consumers and owners who complain about our higher prices.

I took and take the view that this possible new approach to sales strategy offers the perfect moment to do what we have singularly failed to do up until now - truly get our owners and workers engaged in the workings of and decision-making within our co-op, as our own co-op policy demands.

Who better than our consumers know what it is they want to buy? Who better than our shopfloor workers know what sells in the units?

We could spend (and we have spent, in various venues) hours debating the best vehicle for getting owners and workers engaged - Board Committees, task forces, advisory groups, whatever.

Why don't you just cut through all of that, and create two fully-supported discussion groups, one for consumer-owners, one for worker-owners?

By fully-supported I mean make them official. Hire rooms for them to meet. Provide them with staff support. Publish their discussion minutes on our web-site - as we did with the Elections Task Force.

You have room in the your Board budget. You reported at the last Board Meeting that you have $39,000 left, in this fiscal year alone.

Set up the discussion groups. Begin with discussing the new sales approach. And then, with a little guidance perhaps from a Board Liaison, let them go where they go. Allow them not only to report their minutes online, but have the Board Liaison report recommendations back directly to the Board.

Maybe, they could have joint meetings? Maybe they could recommend the setting up of specific Board Committees? Like the one I suggested last year for monitoring progress with WSM's Vision 2020?

There would be so many benefits.

First, the Board and the General Manager would have direct input from those who know best what could be done with designing and implementing a new sales approach. Not least by choosing, item by item, which to keep and which should go.

Secondly, you would have a group of owners invested in communicating about the new sales approach (not least prices), since they would have been a part of its creation.

Thirdly, you would be meeting the requirement that this co-op and its activities be democratically controlled by its owners. Owners and workers would be directly involved in the designing of new co-op strategy and its implementation. As they should be. All the time.

Finally, you would be offering owners opportunities to make a contribution to their co-op.

One of the other issues raised at the last Board Meeting (again, not least by me) was that the only opportunities afforded owners to be involved are the Board itself, or the Elections Committee and the Community Grants Committee.

What if owners want to be involved in other areas of co-op activity? What if they don't want to make the leap to the Board in their first step? If you begin with these discussion groups, not only are we offering an easier, less intimidating first step, we are also providing a generic discussion vehicle which can itself design other ways for owners and workers to become involved. It becomes self-generating.

Our Board Chair wondered about the disconnect between an idea and its implementation. My solution (or at least a first step) is for the Board to do the implementing itself, directly. Who is going to stop you?

All the best,
Geoff"

The Hunt for a Foreword ...

My horoscope this week said I could both have my cake and eat it. And it was right.

I thought my good news was done when I found a publisher for my book (The Hunt for Margaret Thatcher's Assassin).

But oh no. There's more. A respected Minister in the current UK LibCon Coalition Government (no names yet!) is now corresponding with me about providing a message of support for the book.

Nnnnnnnnnnnnnnn ...

Ok. I tried really hard to do my impersonation of visionary thinker, gazing into distance thoughtfully, nodding in sage wisdom at some snippet of intellectual epiphany suddenly descending.

I failed. I am, in fact, running around my work breakroom, doing the happy-clappy dance, interspersed with the Jim Carrey hip-thrust of victory, all the while screaming like a six-year old girl.

I have a long way to go before they let me on The Tonight Show ...

The Hunt for Margaret Thatcher's Assassin

After some twenty-six years of intense blood, sweat and tears, and who knows how many letters of rejection, this morning I changed my resume from 'writer' to 'author.' I have a publisher.

The gentleman's name is Kris Millegan. He is a wonderful soul, who has made it his mission to publish books the world's governments would rather the people did not see. And he plays washtub bass in a touring roots band in his spare time. What's not to like?

Kris trades under the imprint 'TrineDay,' and my book's current title (for those of you who don't already know!) is "The Hunt for Margaret Thatcher's Assassin."

I will have oodles of opportunity to thank the many good people who made this possible. But I'm going to single out now my sister, Maggi Gilson, who never stopped believing, and David Wayne, who became my one-man promo machine these past few years, and introduced me to Kris. Thank you, with words unspoken, because none of them suffice.

Right. Well, I'm tickled stupid. I'm going to go compose a song. With a dance that involves a quill pen, some cha-cha moves and a dozen helium balloons ...

Dividend At The Weave - 2014

I don't think I have ever, ever found myself writing two posts about Weaver Street Market Co-operative on the same day. But I made a mistake. I know, I know. Made you choke on your muesli and prunes. But that is where the good news ends.

I do all this worker-owner advocating within WSM, trying to get management and the WSM Board to comply with co-op policy, and involve owners and workers in decision-making, I do all of this on my own time. And the post earlier today I wrote on a half-hour work break. And I missed a whole wedge of info tucked away in some 3rd Quarter figures.

It starts with three figures. Our profit to date, after three Quarters, is only $47,324, compared to $509,119 for last year. Well, that's two figures to start with. But it brings me to one of the points I missed earlier.

We have been told with much fanfare over the past few weeks that our sales are doing fabulously well. Hmm. So, why is our profit so bad? For the reason I've been trying to make with equal fanfare over the same period of time. Sales matter for squat if you're deeply discounting product. It's profit that matters, not sales.

But let's leave that point on one side for a moment. Where the heck has a whole $500,000 in profit gone to? The answer to that is found in the third figure. Our asset value has increased by $541,975.

How come? Well, because we can add the cost of the Carrboro Refit (including its overrun) to our asset position. And the cost of the Refit (to date) is some $983,000. And leaving aside some depreciation and the cost of closing Panzanella, we are left with that net increase in asset value of $541,975.

Well, that's good isn't it? Not really. You see it is no co-incidence that it almost matches the amount by which our profit is down. You see, we are told that the capital fund only paid for about $600,000 of the Carrboro Refit. The overrun came from ... guess where? ... yup, our operations budget. In other words, our profit.

So. Er. Who cares? I care. And you should too. Our worker-owner annual dividend comes from the profit. Do you want me to say that again?

However good our 4th Quarter may be, it won't be better than last year, and we will be heading into that 4th Quarter with $500,000 less for our dividend than we had last year.

Senior management carefully omitted to tell us that in this week's 'Market Messenger.' And I missed it first time round.

But. It gets worse. You see management are all happy-clappy about the huge sales being generated by WOW (some $400,000 - $500,000 to date). But remember, even though we have that sales cash in hand, we have yet to pay for the stuff we sold.

Think about that carefully. If our profit margin is about 40%, we still have bills to come of about $300,000. Which raises questions as to whether or not we are technically even making a profit.

Which brings me to the next missed point. Well, misinterpreted point. The table suggesting we were increasing profit with WOW. Leaving aside all of the above, I checked the table again. It doesn't say Profit Improvement (my bad). It very clearly says Margin Improvement.

Sigh. There is no way any sales event ever invented caused an improvement in Margin. It's impossible.

I'm going to be generous, and assume it was a mistake. But it goes to the general tenor of the manner in which we are being made aware of matters important to us.

So. Again. Who cares? Hmm. Time and again, I have had people (usually managers) ... er ... take me to task for being negative. Look, they say, senior management know what they are doing, they make good decisions, they make us a profit, and they pay us a big dividend. Who cares about democracy and conversation?

Well. Leaving aside the fact that it is we workers who make the co-op's profit. Leaving aside the fact that co-op policy demands that we workers be involved in major decision-making, including the setting of our dividend. Leaving all that on one side, what if senior management are making bad decisions? Which cause our profit to fall? Which affects our dividend? Would you want a conversation then? Would you be glad someone is fighting to ensure that conversation is taking place? Hmm ... ??

Finances At The Weave - Redux

More confusion in this week's WSM employee Market Messenger. But also some rays of hope.

Page 1 tells us, once again, that we are making record sales because of the WOW weekend deep discount program. But again, it doesn't mention the impact on profit margins.

Deep discount programs have their place in any marketing exercise. As a way of focusing customers' attention on something. But that only works on an ongoing basis if you explain to customers what you are doing and why, and you have some sort of follow-up element to keep them interested.

We have neither. What we have is a messload of unconnected, unexplained discounts, week after week, which are deeply impacting profit margins, with no other discernible impact or benefit.

But, you say. But the Market Messenger says that last week's strawberry WOW deep discount sale was specifically to promote local organic fruit. Great. But it was immediately followed by a deep discount sale promoting mangoes.

This doesn't educate customers. It confuses them.

Ok. So I flip to 4, which deals almost exclusively with WOW employee feedback, to see if there is any further explanation to be found here.

Well. First thing. Yay for the fact that there is some employee feedback. Not so much for the fact that it is almost all gushing in favor. When I know I am not the only one with expressed doubts.

Yay also for the fact that a couple of folks have also mentioned the points about there being narrative for what we are doing, and more follow through.

But, I would be even more impressed if management would comply with WSM Employee Co-op Policy, and actually involve employees before these decisions are made, not after. But feedback is a ray of hope.

Another ray of hope is that management encourages we workers to engage with customers to find out what they want. At least someone is beginning to understand that the purpose of a co-op is to provide for the needs of the owners.

But, I am still left wondering why we have to engage in all of this indirect, expensive marketing gimmickry. When we could simply ask our owners and customers what they want, on an ongoing and regular basis, by means of blogs, an online forum and discussion groups?

Then, I am completely floored by the suggestion in a table that WOW is actually improving margins. This is a nonsense.

I used to be a marketing and management consultant, back in my bad 'ol corporate days. There is no business discipline in the world that teaches that volume of sales over strict adherence to margins is good business practice.

Of course, we have sales. We know they affect margins. But the sales efforts are carefully designed. Spread over time. And marginal. They are not every week, deep discount, profit-hammering giveaways, with no narrative and no clearly-explained purpose.

This isn 't good business protocol. It is recklessness.

And it matters not if last week the heavens intervened and improved the overall profit figure (very slightly - $800 or so, on an improvement in sales of some $100,000).

We were told two Market Messengers ago that some weeks we made a small overall improvement in profit, but many weeks we made a loss.

This is playing with figures. To what end? I don't have a clue. We're not being told.

Finally, Page 2. We are told there has been a slight improvement in our overall asset versus liability position. But again, we are not told the whole story.

We are still some $7,000,000 in debt from the ill-fated expansion project of 2008. We were told that debt was going to be fully paid off by about 2015. We are nowhere close.

Why is it not being paid off? Because management would rather be using the money for new ill-fated capital projects (cf. overrun on the Carrboro store refit).

Why does this matter? Because it means that we workers are still having to bust ass each and every year to find some $500,000 in bank interest to service that debt. And management don't tell you that in their 'Market Messenger.'

Why does any of this matter? Because a co-op is not supposed to look and act like WalMart. A co-op is supposed to be a model of business based on democracy, not top-down management.

It's very simple. Consumers are supposed to decide what they want to buy. And employees are then supposed to decide how to sell it to them. This is what is set out in the ICA definition and principles of co-operation. It is what is in our WSM Mission Statement. And it is what is contained in our WSM Employee Policy.

The only reason I keep writing these posts is to remind WSM management of these facts.

But. Rays of hope. We are bring told at least some of the financial information. We are being given some opportunity to provide feedback. And we are being encouraged to ask customers.

What we now need is a fuller, more democratic conversation, where we are allowed to vote alongside management on important decisions. Hmm. Methinks more pressure needed ...

Where Is The 'Moolah'?

Ok. It's a very old British slang term for 'money.' But I had to find some sort of cheesy way to use a picture of Moulin Rouge as the illustration for a very dry post on margins.

Right. As y'all know, I've been concerned at the maybe dickey state of the finances within my very favorite co-op; the extent to which this has been caused by senior management's latest misguided foray into DIY capital projects (Carrboro Refit running over budget); the possible reaction (the give-it-all-away WOW weekend discount sales); or whether the latter are just a further example of the WSM corporate office management team's rather experimental approach to business finance.

Well. I want to give the management boys and girls every opportunity to explain. So. I have written (again - no time to rest) to our General Manager, to ask if we are going to see the monthly margin figures. I want to know just how much effect these wild WOW sales are having on our margins of profit. Whether it's all worth it. And if so, how?

So:

"Hey Ruffin,

In the past few months, I have grown accumstomed to seeing posted on our Kitchen noticeboard the margin figures by department and store for the previous month. They seem to be posted at the beginning of each month. I was wondering when the margins for April were going to be posted? I'd like to see the effect of WOW on our margins.

Following the article in the 'Market Messenger' about WOW, the increase in sales in April and the average profit per WOW weekend of $183, I checked into the sales figures for last year. Last year, we were averaging about $600,000 a week in co-op sales. This year, something over $700,000, which is what you seemed to be getting so happy about on the front page of the 'MM.'

The inference was that the difference was due to WOW. But are we really saying that we are averaging $183 in profit on that extra $100,000 in sales? If not, what are we saying?

All the best,
Geoff"

Inner Voices ...

There's a lot of clutter in the world. It's sometimes difficult to hear your own inner voice. But when you do, hold onto it. Nurture it. Believe in it. Celebrate it. And share it. It is a voice to be found only in you. Only you can give it the majesty you both deserve. It doesn't matter if a million people hear it; or one. It doesn't matter if you get a million hits; or none. If you give expression to your voice. If you invest your heart, your soul, your true you in sharing your magic. Then you have made the world a better place. You have made you a more complete you. And that is reward enough.

New Web-Site A-Coming

Well. I learn that there is a new web-site in the works. Yay. Lots going on. Need to communicate about it. Yay. Might be some blogs. Yay. Bit of an argument about whether there will be full commentary allowed in connection with said blogs. Huh? Any chance of an online forum? Er. What about ...

Hang on, hang on. Forget what I think. What I might want. What is even more important than that? Anyone? Anyone? Bueller? C'mon. All together. Are we owners and workers going to be given an opportunity to provide input on the web-site design, interactivity and content?

And so. You guessed it:

"Hey Ruffin,

[Little intro] ... One of the things I think is of paramount importance (once again!) is that owners, consumers and employees have an opportunity to be included in the decision-making process that designs the finished product [the web-site]. I'm wondering if there are plans to allow us to see the beta site, its content and to comment on both before final decisions are made?

All the best,
Geoff"

Alright. Now I'll do some commenting. I get that the folks in the WSM corporate office management team might well want this web-site up and running in time for the Annual Meeting. But that should not preclude owners and workers being involved in commenting on the design.

Now, maybe this is already in the works, In which case, yippee. We'll see.

My only other comment is that I would love to see an online forum. We were discussing this back in 2008. At the very least, I hope there will be full commentary and immediate feedback permitted on the blogs. Otherwise, what's the point? We just end up with yet more one-way communication.

What Happens To WSM Profit?

As promised yesterday, I have written to the WSM General Manager, asking if he intends to comply with co-op policy regarding disposition of any WSM profit this financial year:

"Hey Ruffin,

The guidelines agreed by the workforce in 2007 to cover when employees should be included in the decision-making process specifically identify setting the worker-owner dividend (and by extension, what should be done with WSM profit). Will that be happening this year, and if so, how?

All the best,
Geoff"

We'll see ...

Are We Running A Loss, Or Not?

Does it matter? Well, aside from the obvious answer – duh. It matters on a more complex level.

You see, senior management within Weaver Street Market Co-operative perennially argue against those of us requesting that we actually behave like a socially-minded co-op by saying, well, we need to be a good business first.

In other words, we are told to trust them to make good business decisions, so that we then have the space to ‘play’ at being a good co-op.

Which is all fine and dandy provided (1) They are making good business decisions, and (2) We do then get to ‘play’ at being a good co-op.

But what if all the evidence suggests they are making bad business decisions, leading to us running a loss or a tight profit, leaving us no space to be a good co-op?

I would say that requires that we demand they be accountable to us (the workers and owners), so that we can ensure that they make better decisions.

Which is essentially what I try to do. By banging on the table. And making noise. Er … cf. this co-op blog.

Now, I shouldn’t have to be banging on the table (quite so much), since (A) The Board of Directors exists to hold management accountable (um … but the Board, in my opinion, isn’t doing its job), and (B) There is a co-op policy that demands that management include employees in all major decision-making (which they haven’t been doing).

All of which neatly brings me to today’s employee Market Messenger, which is twice as big as usual, in order to communicate a lot of news.

Bottom line: we’re running a tighter profit than last year; (because) senior management have been making bad decisions; they are, however, starting to include us in decision-making (cf. noise, maybe?); and we have an opportunity to start changing Board membership.

So. A mixed bag. Let’s get to the nitty-gritty:

PAGE ONE – Sigh. The WSM corporate office management team try to blind-side us with a whole page telling us we’ve made better sales figures in the past three weeks than we’ve ever made before.

Double sigh. Without mentioning the price increases of the past year. And without highlighting the fact that sales figures count for nothing, without reference to profit margin. We can sell a gazillion pineapples, at a loss, and go out of business (cf. Panzanella).

I'm not being idly tendentious. Over the past month senior management have been running a somewhat controversial deep-discount program called WOW, which by their own admission has "sacrifice(d) most of the profit."

So, we move onto …

PAGE TWO – Where we are informed (in the Third Quarter financials) that our profit to date is roughly $50,000. Last year, it was running at $220,000. So, down on last year. And not because we workers haven’t been busting ass!

Excuses are made that Carrboro store sales were down due to the store closing for the store Refit. Without mentioning the fact that the store did not fully close. Nor the fact that a lot of folks went to the other stores instead. Nor the fact that a lot of customers simply didn’t like the way the Refit ended up looking (cf. did we use acknowledged outside experts; or (treble sigh) did we rely on the ‘inhouse’ experts, again?).

What is also not set out is the budget for the Carrboro Refit. The fact that the Refit overran schedule and budget. How this contributed to the lower overall profit figure. And the fact that all this is about spending, not sales. And that makes it the responsibility of senior management.

Here is where it gets murky. And to be honest, the senior management of WSM are pretty good at murk. Quadruple sigh.

They get all happy-clappy about sales. But the figures themselves say quite clearly that we are way off budget on margin. No doubt because we’ve been running those ridiculous discounts (more on that a little later). Which I say we probably have been running in order to raise cash. To cover the fact that senior management made a bit of a Horlicks (English expression!) of the Refit. And don’t want to admit it.

And it doesn’t end there. Because there are still two major aspects of the Refit which senior management completely overlooked, which they themselves have now finally admitted, and which could cost in the hundreds of thousands of dollars. I don't know for sure. They don't tell us that much.

That part of the Refit has been postponed until the next financial year, so as not to cause a loss in the current financial year. Which is why I ask the question, are we actually running a loss, or not?

Still with me? If not. Don’t blame me. Blame the murk.

So. Quick recap before we move on. WSM employees doing a brilliant job producing lovely food and selling the bejesus out of it. Yay for us!

Senior management doing a pretty crap job of wisely spending the money we sweat to earn.

They’re trying to cover that up. One of them (no names) bluntly told me in the past few weeks that there had been no overrun on the Carrboro Refit, and that the overrun had had no deleterious effect on our overall finances. Hmm.

[And I hasten to add, as I have done before, that I fully support the Carrboro Refit; long overdue; I just wish senior WSM management would stop thinking they are experts at capital projects, and then screwing them up.]

Who knows where this will leave us at the end of the 2014 financial year. What I do know is that I may well ask some pointed questions at the Annual Meeting this year. Which is a good thing. Senior management forget that the Annual Meeting is a part of the governance process, and not just a meet ‘n greet.

The other good news is this: if we remain on course to make the end-of-year profit senior management are predicting (some $500,000 – last year we made $830,000), then (good news) co-op policy demands that workers be involved in the decision as to what should be done with that profit. A fact which I will be bringing to the attention of our General Manager, in another of the e-mails he loves receiving from me.

In the meantime, some kudos to senior management for at least sharing some financial news. Even if it only followed my bellowing at them for a while.

And even if it does confirm what I have been wondering aloud since Christmas. Namely, that the Carrboro Refit ran into problems; those problems have been seriously impacting our financial picture; senior management didn't want to admit the problems or the impact; so, they have been taking steps to 'rectify' the impact, without consulting owners and workers; and that 'rectification' (deep-discount sales?), while producing immediate cash (record sales in the last three weeks - $300,000 up on same three week period last year), may be having an even more deleterious effect upon our overall profit ("sacrifice most of profit").

PAGE THREE and FOUR – I’m going quickly to skip ahead. These two pages set out at enormous length what we have been doing with our new WOW Weekend Special Discount Sales, introduced just this past month.

Now, I know I wrote a couple of e-mails to our Merchandising Manager, James Watts. Along the lines of, what the heck is this all about? But I’m sure other folks had questions too. So, I don’t think I’m the sole reason for all this information.

But. Please note. We ARE getting all this information, for which I and others had been asking. AND. Get this. They (senior management) are finally asking us formally what we think. We are (finally) being included in at least some of the decision-making process. So, kudos to senior management again. Although, I think I am allowed to take a teeny-weeny bit of the credit.

I’m not going to comment at length on what James has set out. I’m only going to say this: I don’t care what he says; it’s screwing up margins; our figures prove that; it’s affecting our profit; there still seems to be no simple rhyme or reason; the marketing logic offered is nonsense; it just seems to be a glorified and misguided exercise to get a hold of cash. But I’ll leave you to make those comments …

… which you are able to provide, ‘cos they have actually asked us for our opinion!!

Which is the very essence of accountability. Putting senior management to the trouble of explaining what they are doing. So we can see nonsense for what it is. Bad decisions for what they are. And we can be involved in the process of designing a better future for ourselves, both as a business, and as a co-op.

But, but, none of this is about creating space to discuss how we can be a better co-op. Aha! Back to PAGE TWO …

… where the Market Messenger announces the annual call for Candidates to run for the WSM Board of Directors.

It is my opinion that the primary responsibility of the Board is to ensure that workers and owners are involved in the decision-making process that designs the character of our co-op, and sets business and co-operative goals for our future.

For one reason or another, I think the current Board is failing in that responsibility.

I have attended Board Meetings on and off for nine years now. Increasingly, the Board has allowed itself to be marginalized into becoming and acting as nothing more than a benign advisory committee.

When, in fact, it should be vigorously monitoring WSM senior management, to ensure it is complying with co-op policy and making good business decisions.

I already have my Candidate Packet. And one way or another I will do all that I can to ensure that there is at least one Candidate for worker-owner Board Director who truly represents workers in our co-op, and who has the best chance of gaining victory against the Candidate management have perennially recruited themselves every year since 2007.

In the meantime, if you are not already a worker-owner, become one now, by contacting Brenda Camp (Owner Services Co-ordinator) at Brenda.c@weaverstreetmarket.coop.

It costs only $3.85 a paycheck. You will build up dollars for your annual dividend (probably not until next year now). And. You will get to vote in the Board Election this year (August-September), and help to choose a worker-owner Board Director who will advocate vigorously for worker and owner rights, and who will work to create the space where all of us can discuss how we can be a stronger business and a better co-op.

[As always, WSM Employee Policy demands that I make it clear that these are my personal views. I will just add that, if you've got as far as reading this caveat, you deserve a drink or three ... !!]

The Democratization of Decision-Making

What does it all mean, Geoff? What do you keep bleating on about? Well, what I want, in a nutshell, is for my very favorite co-op to comply with the precepts of co-operation and, indeed, with its own stated policy, and make decision-making in our co-op more democratic by involving owners and workers in the making of the important decisions.

And here’s the thing. As this linked article from the London Guardian newspaper makes clear (in 2008), this isn’t some pie-in-the-sky weirdo hippy freak utopia; even corporatist businesses are beginning to understand that, if you engage owners and workers in important decision-making, this makes them more invested in the successful implementation of the decisions. Kind of makes curious sense, doesn’t it?

But in a co-op, democratization of decision-making isn’t just some cute idea to make us more productive. It is the very essence of our business model. What sets us apart from corporatist commercial entities. It is the bedrock of the International Co-operative Alliance definition of co-operation (which WSM merrily quotes all over our co-op web-site), namely that we are only a co-op if we are democratically-controlled by our owners, both worker-owners and consumer-owners.

And here’s the thing. The definition doesn’t stop at ‘democratically-owned.’ It says ‘democratically-controlled.’ And not democratically controlled by just a few owners (say, the ones in our corporate office management team). No. All owners. And not just the Board. It doesn’t say ‘democratically-controlled by representatives.’ It says. Sigh. ‘Democratically-controlled.’

But there’s more. In the case of workers, we actually have an Employee Policy which states very clearly that we get to be democratically involved as the decisions are being made.

There has been some confusion about this. Let me clear it up. Find a copy of the Employee Policy Handbook. First page. At the bottom. Board Policy: ‘Treatment of Staff.’ It states:

“With respect to treatment of paid and volunteer staff, the general manager … may not:

4) For paid staff, cause or allow a decision-making standard that is not transparent or does not allow for opportunity to participate in decisions and shape the guidelines for decisions.”

That’s it. It’s as simple as that. We workers are supposed to be involved in decision-making. Not told about it afterwards, not asked for our comments, but involved in the making of the decisions themselves.

That’s what makes us Weaver Street Market Co-operative, half-owned by its workers, who are supposed to be directly involved in decision-making.

And not WalMart Corporation, owned by a few, who make the decisions without any reference to their workers at all.

Yeah, yeah. Ok. Big deal. So, I get to choose the color of Ruffin’s drapes. But who cares? Why should I want to?

Well, it’s a bit more than choosing the curtains. We are supposed to be directly involved in making decisions, for example, about where we are heading. How projects are undertaken. What we do when they go wrong. In fact, the whole point of being involved is to try to prevent them going wrong.

Like that happens. Er. Yes, it does. It is happening right now. Did you feel involved in the decision-making that set our goals for the next ten years (‘Vision 2020’)? Were you involved in the decision to raise our department margins by 50%? Do you even know why that happened? Who made the decision about Panzanella? You?

And here’s the one that’s most relevant. First, a quick caveat. I am beyond delighted that my mates in Carrboro are finally getting their long-overdue store refit. If there had been an opportunity to have a vote on that project, my hand would have been the one highest in the air.

But. It became obvious that, as the project was underway, things were not going as the few in the corporate office had planned (on their own – yes, I’m making the point). How did we know? Well, not because we were told (heaven forbid). But because some of us ain’t stupid, and we saw the signs.

I made some … um … gentle yet insistent enquiries (hey, I’m a pussycat!). And the answer was that nothing was wrong. The last employee Market Messenger makes clear this is not the case at all. There were two huge matters that had been completely overlooked. And which will now involve more work, more expense, and likely more interference with normal store operations.

This is not the first time this has happened. It happens all the time. It happened with the last exercise in capital projects, back in 2008, when we built the Hillsborough store and the Food House. And the miscalculations by a few put us $10 million in debt – a debt which is still $7 million, and which costs us $500,000 in bank interest payments each year.

WSM and the money that we workers make with the sweat of our brow is not some convenient piggy bank for a few somewhere to spend or misspend on whatever takes their fancy.

We are a co-operative, where all are equal, where we choose to entrust a few with making decisions that are supposed wisely to husband our funds. And. The policy that demands that we workers be involved in the decision-making that spends our money, that rectifies mistakes and holds accountable those who made the mistakes. That policy is our safeguard that the entrusted few behave themselves.

When we, each one of us, not just me, when we insist on compliance with that policy, we act to ensure that these cock-ups do not occur. That is why I keep bleating on about the democratization of decision-making. It involves us. And it protects us.

Oh, and when you check up on Employee Policy, in that same section ‘Treatment of Staff,’ you will find the policy statement that we workers are allowed (without retaliation) to report to the Board of Directors whenever management are not in compliance with the policy that demands they include us in decision-making. Which policy (reporting management - you can find the specifics of how in Section 5.J) I have been merrily employing these past few months – http://tinyurl.com/kpwo4cn and http://tinyurl.com/mpclsxx.

And you know, I don’t have to be the only one. You can do this too. At the very least, why not vote for a candidate in the autumn election for a Worker-Owner Board Director who actually states baldly that he or she will enforce democratization of decision-making in our co-op?

In the meantime, after some more gentle head-bangi … I’m sorry, I misspoke, after some more gentle encouragement, I have been told that in the next few weeks we will see the figures for the end of the Third Quarter. I have specifically asked that those figures address the true financial situation within our co-op, including that relating to the Carrboro Refit overrun.

And again, let me make this clear. I want the very best for my Carrboro friends. But I want US to be making the decisions about how we deal with the overrun. Not just the few who made the errors of judgment in the first place.

In which regard, I have also asked that, if there are decisions that need to be made arising out of our current financial situation, we workers start to be involved in the making of them. We’ll see.

Oh. And two final heads-up:

1) You won’t see that Carrboro Refit overrun in the 3Q figures. Nor in the 2014 Annual Report. All further Refit overrun work has been postponed until after June. June is the end of the 2014 Financial Year. So, the overrun has been postponed until the 2015 Financial Year. Clever, eh?

2) If 3Q reports a truly healthy profit on the way, remember this, the Employee Policy on inclusion in decision-making specifically states that workers should be involved in the decisions about what WSM does with its profit.

Bet you didn’t know that, did ya … ?

Elections In Our Co-operative

In 2008, I had the good fortune to serve with an engaged, lively and intelligent group of WSM owners on the WSM Elections Task Force, whose remit was to design rules for elections to the WSM of Directors, and more widely, to explore what could be done to increase owner involvement in democracy within WSM. That work is now carried forward by the WSM Elections Committee.

At the beginning of May, that Committee will issue a formal call for candidates for the election in 2014 of one Consumer-Owner Director and one Worker-Owner Director to the WSM Board. A good time to reflect on co-operation, democracy and elections within WSM.

I submitted a document to the Task Force at the beginning of its deliberations with some thoughts of my own. I think the Introduction ('What is a Co-operative?') is as relevant today as it was then, in terms of wondering what sort of co-op WSM is, and how we would like to see elections, democracy and decision-making operate within WSM.

The full document can be found here. As to its title, ah, you had to be there!!

The full discussions of the Task Force are minuted here. Yup, those Notes from an Individual would have been from me.

I am especially happy I took the time to submit the first Note. It set out how I believed the Task Force should operate in terms of openness, transparency and inclusivity.

To a very great extent, we succeeded in the latter regard. And I think the template that we established continues to serve as an excellent example of how our co-op should operate, when doing so at its best. Whether it is operations, the corporate office management team, the Board or the standing Elections Committee.