Ownership Culture

This is the second part of my commentary on a thread of discussion on OrangePolitics about the decision by the Board of WSM to replace consumer-owner point-of-sale discounts with an end-of-year dividend (in years of profit):

First, welcome back WeaverGuy! Now that I know who you are...

David [Beck], thank you for your comments. Of course, you can shop where you like [makes mental note: come the revolution, David's on dishwashing detail...]

Mind you, David, "If WSM had not listened to members..." Ouch! Where's the primacy of owner authority in that statement...?

But your point about the size of the Board underlines what this whole maneuver should really be about - namely, changing the nature of the relationship between the co-op and its owners, so as to encourage loyalty (on both sides).

This is a concept that's been doing the rounds of the national co-op movement for a few years now. It's known either as "Economic Linkage" or "Ownership Culture."

The idea is that, since the rest of the world is beginning to catch up with what used to be a co-op preserve (locally-grown, organic food), co-ops need to find a way to develop owner loyalty.

The premise is simple. Take all those co-ops that introduced discounts in the Seventies and the Eighties (so that they could compete with the likes of Costco and Sam's Club), and replace the discounts with a dividend system, that makes reward dependent on the co-op's performance.

But there is a second important element to this concept - which, bless our eternal hearts, was notably missing from all our pronouncements this week.

Namely that, in return for telling our owners their return will now be dependent on our performance, owners will be given more say in judging and monitoring our performance.

But how? Well, the funny thing is that we don't have to look too far for the answers. Just a year ago, another Task Force met. It was called the Elections Task Force, and it was charged with finding ways to improve turn-out in WSM Board Elections.

I was one of its members. And we quickly took the view that the best way of getting more owners to vote was to give them good reason to believe that voting would make a difference.

So, we widened our remit to include looking at ways of making the governance of WSM more accessible to and more meaningful for its owners.

I have a personal interest in WSM governance, being a worker-owner. My pet governance change, arising out of the Task Force, would be to allow all workers (not just worker-owners) to vote for their two representatives on the Board.

Workers have sacrificed much this past year to keep WSM afloat. We have taken cuts in our wages. We have worked harder for less. We are the folks on the cutting edge of keeping you folks (the customers) happy.

For all these reasons, I think that all workers should have meaningful input into the big decisions that are changing the face of our co-op.

Frankly, I think that some of those decisions would have been quite different (and better) if our in-house experts had been fully involved in their making.

I also believe that no worker should have to pay ($500 for a worker-owner share) to vote for their representatives in a worker-consumer co-operative.

We came up with a number of other ideas to introduce more democracy into decision-making in WSM.

From term limits for Board members, and more of them, to the not-so-radical notion that the Board would be more representative of the views of its owners if all of its voting members were elected - at present, three out of seven are appointed.

In addition, some of us felt that accessibility would be enhanced if there were active consumer-owner and worker-owner discussion groups, and an online forum, not dissimilar to OrangePolitics.

In fact, one of your consumer-owners has already created the forum. It exists, just waiting for the Board to adopt it, and attach it to the WSM web-site.

The bottom line is this: what's done is done. The discounts are gone. Now, let's focus on letting the other shoe drop, and agitate as best we can to encourage our co-op's Board to introduce the other half of the concept of "Ownership Culture": mechanisms, systems and procedures that allow for more meaningful owner involvement.

I have already asked the Board (more than once) to set up a new Task Force, to make recommendations for changes to WSM Governance.

Fill in those little slips of paper in the stores asking for the same thing, why not? Or write to the Board. Or turn up at the next Annual Meeting.

Better still, make it a condition of voting for a candidate in this year's Board Elections. Don't leave it to the person standing next to you in line. Why don't you be the one to take the initiative on this?

Oh, a P.S. To Mark [Chilton]. I agree with you about the Hillsborough store. And forecasting the economy.

The thing is, the world has now changed. That is why, at the last Annual Meeting, I proposed a motion that an Owners' Committee be established to review the entire financial picture at WSM, and to make recommendations on the sustainability of our now some $11m in debt.

The motion was passed. The Board then, in its infinite wisdom, took the view that it knew best, and decided not to create the Committee.

Funny thing. Do you know how many votes were cast for the winning consumer-owner candidate in the 2008 Board Elections? About 70.

People. It really doesn't take much to change the way WSM functions - if you really want it...

Anyway, back to Mark's two points. I wonder if the time has not come now to take the view that we will best save that which we have created (a Hillsborough store and a central food processing facility in Orange County) by inviting the residents of Hillsborough to take over the financing of their own store, and to set the Food House free, to become a stand alone unit, able also to attract investment from sources other than just WSM owners in Chapel Hill and Carrboro?

Discounts to Dividends

What follows is my comment in response to a thread of discussion on OrangePolitics about the decision by the Board of WSM to replace consumer-owner point-of-sale discounts with an end-of-year dividend (in years of profit):

Hands up anyone who thinks Obama's got everything right so far? Right. Hands up those who think we should impeach him?

Same with Weaver Street. I've stood for the Board twice now, and I'll be doing so again this year. Why? Because I don't think we get everything right.

Everyone who has written on this thread so far says that, like me, they don't want WSM to go under. Good. Then the first thing to do is support the stores. Stop shopping at Fresh Market and Trader Joes and Whole Foods.

You can't have it both ways. You can't say it would ruin this area to lose the co-op, and then do the one thing that will lead to its ruin - stop its cash flow.

But we need more than your money. We need your involvement.

All of you who complain about the decisons that were taken, and the way they were taken, how many of you turn up to the Annual Meeting? Or to Board Meetings. Or to vote?

A co-op is like a love affair. It has its ups, it has its downs, but most of all it needs work. All the time.

Those of you who know me will know that I can be the strongest critic of the Board and senior management of WSM. But I turn up. I care. I get my hands dirty. And I do what I can to make things better. Do you?

I will be blunt. I do not think the Board should have made this decision without first consulting the consumer-owners. Co-operative values state: "the primary source of all authority in the co-op is its owners."

I do not think the hole in our finances is caused by the consumer-owner discount, but by the over-arching cost of the Food House and the new Hillsborough store.

But I do not throw my hands up and run away. I make my point. And I then knuckle down. I work hard to make the money we need. I work hard to make the decisions work. And I will work hard to get elected, so that I can then work hard to make better decisions.

Don't sit on the sidelines and carp. Join me in working hard to make our co-op work - for everyone's sake. Please.

**********

On a lighter note...so, a customer comes up to me and says, 'what does it all mean about discounts, then...?'

I grab a dollar bill in my left hand, and an owner card in my right, and I say: 'well, dis counts, and dat doesn't...'

Oh come on. I'm joking! You've gotta laugh at life...

Board Elections 2009 - My Candidacy

I will be standing for the position of Worker Director in the Weaver Street Market Co-operative Board Elections of 2009.

We are one of the very few (if not the only) worker-consumer food co-operatives in the United States. Co-operators around the nation look to us to see how the model works.

It is no secret that many wonder if we can truly reflect the full spirit of co-operation in our business if the authority for making decisions in our co-op is split between consumers and workers.

The thinking goes that, in this situation, it may well be management that ends up calling the tune. And there may be some in this co-op who feel that is exactly what has happened. And that it has not been in the best interests of the co-op.

Workers have been called on, by management, to make many sacrifices in this past year. Without being offered very much in return. Or being offered any meaningful opportunity to have a real voice in the affairs of this worker's co-operative.

I believe that, in return for our many sacrifices, that should now change.

I am standing in the Board Election 2009 too allow workers to have a real voice on their Board. To assist the Board in returning our co-operative to being the best co-operative and business it can be.

In that regard, and believing that we workers should be a more vocal element in co-op decision-making, because we are the ones at the sharp end of producing the profit, I will be making the primary plank of my candidacy the proposal that, in all Worker Director elections, every single worker (not just Worker-Owners) should be allowed to vote for their Worker Directors on the Board.

I do not believe that the right to vote for a representative should be dependent on our having $500 to pay for that right. Not in this economic climate. Not when so many of us have seen our paychecks reduced by management in this past year.

No worker in a co-operative should have to pay for the right to be heard. The reward for paying for a Worker-Owner share should be financial, not electoral.

It is important to me that the voice that is heard on the Board reflects the very real concerns of the workforce. I want to know what you are thinking. Please do not hesitate to contact me at: geoffgilson@hotmail.com. About anything.

Better Than What?

Something tells me that, in the coming months, we @ The Weave are going to be told by senior management that we should be happy with what is happening (or not happening) in our co-op because "we're doing better than..."

Better than what?

Better than other grocery stores? Better than other co-ops? Better than other businesses in Orange County? Better than conventional capitalist big-box stores?

Better than what?

What is the measure by which we should be measuring the sanity of the decisions being made in our co-op? And what standard should we apply to the manner in which those decisions are being made?

Since we are told, over and over again, that we are better than conventional capitalist enterprises, I think it fair to make the comparison between strict capitalism and the sort of social entrepreneurship I believe we espouse.

And frankly, I'm troubled that we are not seeing a lot of difference between the way our senior management is responding to the troubles facing us, and the manner in which conventional grocery stores are reacting:

1) We're seeing a lot of decisions being driven by fear. When instead we should be spreading the responsibility for decision-making, and enrolling our owners and workers. So that the burden does not rest on just a few shoulders.

2) As a consequence of the fear, we're seeing a lot of knee-jerk, short-sighted reactions. Instead of calmer, more long-term planning. Which can only be engaged in if you have on board with you all those upon whom the long-term planning will depend. Namely, our workers, our owners and our customers.

3) Too many decisions are being made incommunicado. The support that we seek for the long-term answers can only be forthcoming from people who are fully informed of the real situation.

4) The biggest asset we have over conventional capitalist corporations is the loyalty of our workers, owners and customers. You can only retain that loyalty with communication. You will lose it if you poison it with measures that upset your owners (such as removing the Consumer-Owner Discount) and your workers (being made to work harder and more days, for less money - with no incentive at the end of the year).

So. At the moment, and in my opinion, we are acting like any other conventional capitalist chain store. We may be acting a bit better than Wal-Mart. But is that what we want to be the measure of our success in dealing with these challenging times?

Or should the measure be that we are acting as the best co-op we can be? And in that regard, could we @ The Weave - as a co-op - be making better decisions, in a better way?

More co-operative decisions, in a more co-operative fashion?

SEVEN DAY WORK WEEK @ The Weave

A little bird tells me that senior management are thinking of making more efficient use of staff in this recession by introducing reduced shifts and a seven-day work week.

Of course, I could be wrong. I hope I am. I was enjoying my little moment of retirement after this past year of contribution to the governance of our co-op for free.

If, however, I'm right, then respectfully it is time for all workers and their department managers to join as one and say to senior management: Enough is Enough!

Enough of this nickel-and-diming. Enough of squeezing the workers, without asking them what they think. Enough of asking us to work harder for less money - when I see no evidence that one senior manager has taken a similar pay-cut.

Enough of trying to make minute savings at our expense, when not one sensible thing is being done to reduce the two enormous costs that are sinking our co-op - the operational costs of the Food House, and its attendant debt.

It is time to wake up and smell the roses. Expansion was a mistake. It is time to stop, take breath, and then devise a plan to split up what we have created, and spread the cost around more manageable chunks.

Frankly, if we do not decide to do this right now, then before the end of this year, our creditors will be forcing it upon us.

In any event, if my information about this latest nonsensical move is correct, then I will be demanding that we have a full meeting of the co-op, where all of the financial information is put before us, and we can quiz the people who are making these idiot decisions.

I would remind senior management one more time of the decision-making process that exists for employees. Important decisions that affect our workplace are supposed to involve us. So. Involve us. Re-institute the full co-op meeting you canceled earlier this year.

Board Election 2008

Democracy has spoken. And I congratulate Jacob on his victory in the Election for a Worker-Owner Director.

The voting figures were:

Jacob Myers - 42

Geoff Gilson - 20

I am truly delighted that we managed to increase the number of Worker-Owners who chose to vote this year, as compared with last year.

I thank all of you who voted for me - and everyone who took part in the democratic process. It is that democratic process that sets us apart from conventional capitalist corporations.

Every single vote cast is a statement. And I know that Jacob will ensure that the voice of every Worker-Owner - and every Worker - is heard on the Board.

I would like also to thank all those on the WSM Elections Task Force, the WSM Elections Oversight Committee, and everyone in the Marketing Department, all of whom worked so hard on this Election.

Yes Weave Can @ Chatham Marketplace

It's the last week of all sorts of election seasons, and the following excerpt from Lyle Estill's "Small is Possible" serves as a timely reminder that...well...yes, we can! And it also reminds us all of what we love so much about "The Weave":

"Weaver St. is an established food co-op, which has been highly successful at building not only its brand, and balance sheet, but also the community in which it resides.

It has spawned cooperative housing projects, and a community radio station, and it has become a remarkable anchor for the Town of Carrboro.

To their credit, the folks at Weaver St. wrapped their arms around Melissa as Chatham Marketplace took shape.

Somewhere in the Co-op creed is the idea that startups should get an assist from the established, and Weaver St. Market did just that.

Instead of worrying about competition, or about whether or not they would lose valuable organic food eaters if a new grocery store were formed, Weaver St. Market lent a hand to Chatham Marketplace.

Their founders offered free advice, and they had a feasibility study on a Pittsboro location sitting on the shelf collecting dust, which they passed along.

Weaver St. freely gave power away to Melissa, and as a result they became more powerful.

Now Chatham Marketplace exists in the world, and for that Weaver St. Market deserves a large slice of credit."

"The Weave" is a treasured icon within the national co-operative grocery movement - particularly, when it demonstrates the unity and democracy of purpose that is co-operation at its best.

At this tender moment in our own affairs, it doesn't hurt any of us - me, at the top of the list (!) - to remember that, and to draw strength from it.

[I have never met Lyle Estill. I have no clue how to get a hold of him. I hope he will not mind my printing this excerpt - bearing in mind I link to a place where you can buy his book!]

Yes Weave Can @ Online Forum

The overriding theme at the 2008 Annual Meeting of Owners of Weaver Street Market, held last Sunday (October 19), was the creation of more ‘vehicles’ to allow Owners and Workers to be heard by their Board and by senior management.

Funny you should all mention that…!

One of our more active Consumer-Owners, Jamie Bort, and his wife, Sarah Kahn, have spent the past couple of months putting together the basis for an Online Forum for Weaver Street. I’ve been helping.

You can see the bare bones right here.

What is needed now is for the WSM Board formally to adopt this Online Forum as an official communications vehicle for the Owners and Workers of WSM.

Once again, look what can be achieved by a couple of committed ‘outsiders,’ who understand the desire of other Owners to be more involved, and better informed about their co-op.

Imagine what could be achieved if one of them was on the Board, helping to make these desires a reality…

Yes Weave Can @ Annual Meeting

The 2008 Annual Meeting of the Owners of Weaver Street Market supported my call last Sunday (October 19) for the Board to establish an Owner’s Committee to review the finances of WSM, in the light of our Worker-Owner Dividend not being paid this year, and in view of the level of WSM’s debt and its debt repayments.

This is what one voice, speaking out for you, can achieve as an outsider. Imagine what that same voice, speaking up for you, could achieve if it was on the Board itself…

*******

[Update - November 5, 2008]

It is the day after the Board Election Count. Senior management have just announced a co-op wide reduction in worker hours, along with a freeze on hiring.

This will mean that we workers will be working harder for less take-home pay.

I can't help but wonder what effect this announcement might have had on the Election if it had been released the day before voting ended?

We are told that the reason for these savings is that there is a lack of sales growth.

Er...last time I looked, the Southern Village store had never recorded less than a constant 5% sales growth.

I'm not sure we're being told the whole truth.

Sure, there's competition. Sure, we're now in a severe recession. But another major contributor is the fact that we consciously eviscerated our foundation store in Carrboro in order to accommodate the new Food House and the new store in Hillsborough - and our customers are now voting with their feet.

Don't believe me? Check the sales figures for all of the stores. While Southern Village is registering a 5% increase, it is Carrboro that is suffering a double digit drop in sales.

This isn't because the competition is tougher in Carrboro, or the recession any more severe. Nor is it due to any lack of diligence on the part of our work colleagues in Carrboro. It's because we took away the tools workers needed to maintain the level of customer service they were used to giving to consumers.

Plus - and let's be honest here - the food from the Food House is still not pleasing our consumers. And their vote on that is being registered with their checkbooks!

This is especially true with Carrboro, where our customers were used to prepared food of the highest quality, because it was prepared on site, by artisans, who got to meet their clients, face-to-face, every day.

More to the point, the real reason that our books are out of balance is the huge ongoing cost of the Food House-to-Nowhere and its attendant $10 million debt.

Instead of nickel-and-diming we workers, we should be doing all that we can to reduce these enormous costs, while striving to rescue what we can from what is now being seen as nothing more than a vainglorious adventure in empire-building.

If we are to survive the difficult circumstances in which we find ourselves, we will need to do all that we can to maintain the loyalty of our workers and our consumers. Instead, senior management seems to be hell bent on doing all it can to upset us.

I'm a total sucker for 'hey, we're all in this together.' But, we're not.

There is an established process for including all employees in major decisions that impact our workplace environment. Where was the employment of this process before these recent decisions were made by senior management?

I'm guessing much the same place as all of the other vehicles by which we workers are supposed to have a voice in the affairs of our self-styled worker-consumer co-operative (can we truly go on calling it that?).

In these past couple of years, every single avenue by which we workers are entitled to input into co-op decision-making has been closed down, curtailed or rendered impotent.

I'm talking about the employee decision-making process, the open forums, the Worker-Owner Program, the Annual Co-op Employees' Meeting, and last but not least, the Elections for Worker-Owner Directors.

How on earth can we claim to have a free and fair elective system, that is supposed to put a genuine worker representative onto the Board, when that system allows managers to operate a veto over the result?

Who on earth ever heard of an elective system that includes both workers and managers anyway? Isn't it time for workers and managers to have separate representation?

The fact is that, while we are all supposed to be equal in our co-op, there are some who consider themselves to be 'more-than-equal.' Don't blame me for saying this. I'm not the one who created this 'them-and-us' situation.

And if you think I'm dancing with the facts, let me ask this: are senior managers going voluntarily to reduce their salaries, in line with the reduction we workers are having to suffer?

And when I say 'senior,' I wish to differentiate from junior managers, who are getting hit as hard as we workers.

They have all been put on fixed salaries this past year. And now, they are the ones having to make up the lost hours.

The fact is that we workers have been and will continue to be kept as far away as possible from the important financial decisions being made in our co-op. Decisions that impact our daily lives. Those decisions will continue to be made by senior management - on their own.

Which is why now, more than ever, it is of paramount importance that the Board heed the call of the Annual Meeting to set up an Owners' Committee to get a handle on the overall financial picture.

That Committee needs to be given access to all of the documentation that provided the rationale for the Food House and the Expansion - if any exists. And all of the documentation giving an accurate picture of the current financial situation.

We need to be able to determine if, in the changed economic circumstances, we still need all that we have built. And to decide what can be saved, and how we can make the financial equation work.

And we need to find a way forward that does not continue to penalize workers and consumers.

We need to be able to determine what caused the near $500,000 (or more?) over-run on the Food House and Expansion, which was the real reason the Worker-Owner Dividend was wiped out.

Let me just back up there. You will remember we were all told that the near $400,000 loss in 2008 was due to 'once-off' costs associated with Expansion and the Food House (the Monitoring Report presented to the Board talked about 'personnel') - as if this was planned.

Um...hmm. For reasons that are still not clear (and the Committee needs to find out), Expansion and the Food House ran over its budget. A lot.

The money that had been borrowed for Expansion and the Food House ran out. And without telling us what was happening, senior management then just dipped into the Operating Budget, and took out our Dividend Money to pay the difference.

And remember this, the loss of that Worker-Owner Dividend is now being used as the excuse to get rid of the Consumer-Owner Discount.

If Expansion and the building of the Food House had been undertaken by independent contractors, we would have been able to enforce some sort of penalty. As it is, the only people being penalized are we workers. And, if plans go forward, our consumers as well.

Back to the Financial Overview Committee. Once the Committee is in possession of all of the facts, it will then need to consider options as to how best to return us to financial sustainability.

I've said before, when we're talking about a $400,000 loss and a debt of $10 million, with debt repayments that balloon to $1.5 million in 2013, it's not nickel-and-diming nonsense that is going to do the trick. We will need tough decisions about major re-structuring of the co-op.

I think, among other possibilities, we may have to prepare ourselves for the Committee considering one or two of the following:

1) Selling the property on the West side of Greensboro Street. This could raise about $800,000.

2) Asking the good people of Hillsborough to take over the store there, along with the attendant debt - remember, we borrowed a large sum of money to buy the freehold.

They can still call it whatever they like. But if they want it, they need to pay for it - not we workers, with our lost hours and lost Dividend; and not our consumers, with their lost Discount.

Otherwise, we should sell the store. Or at the very least, sell the building, and get a Lease back.

That way, Hillsborough gets to keep its downtown grocery store; jobs are not put at risk; and Hillsborough gets to choose the manner in which their grocery store is saved - it's entirely up to them if they wish to keep it as a co-op.

3) Set the Food House free to be a separate Producer/Worker/Consumer co-operative. That way, it can go out into the market place and sell its wares wherever it can get the best price.

We can all continue to get our food from them. Jobs will not be lost. And it is more likely that the Food House can more quickly become financially viable - and look after its own debt and operating costs.

Nothing would be lost. It would merely be re-structured. With the debt and costs broken up into more manageable chunks. Rather than it all falling onto the shoulders of a few.

All of the various component parts could still choose to be co-operatives. That would be their choice. And we could all continue to co-operate with each other. By way of strict commercial relationship. Rather than the vague, unwieldy and rather unhappy inter-relationships we have at the moment.

With careful thought and sensitive consultation (and nothing should happen without the agreement of workers and owners), we can come up with ways to re-structure what has been created, so as to make the separate parts more sustainable, while allowing them to work together, and allowing us to save as much as we can of the original benefits - not least, peoples' jobs and their pay.

As drastic as this may seem, I would prefer that we be the ones to formulate whatever plans we need to make to save what we can. Rather than burying our heads in the sand, and waiting for someone else to come in and do it to us - in ways that we may all dislike...

*******

[Update - November 21, 2008]

A couple of further wrinkles.

First, the property on Greensboro Street is up for sale. But it's not going to realize any cash any time soon. And this is one of the major factors behind what some of us might regard as the short-sighted moves to save money by cutting operational costs.

Now, you might well ask: why on earth would something which is designed merely to reduce our outstanding debt cause so much fluster over our daily operational costs?

The answer appears to be that our plight is now so dire that the proceeds from the sale are likely to be used for shoring up operational costs, rather than paying down the debt.

You see, in a normal situation, if there's a temporary gap between income and expenditure, rather than turning the whole operation upside down (as we seem to be doing at the moment), it is much more prudent either to use some reserves or use a credit line.

The problem is (here we go again...) we don't have any reserves. We were supposed to have started them some years ago, but I'm guessing Expansion and the Food House used them up.

We don't have any more credit worth talking about, either. Why? You guessed it. We used it all up on Expansion and the Food House. And the Auditor has told us to stop borrowing money.

So. We are left paying our bills out of ready cash. And it ain't so ready at the moment. In fact, we're having problems keeping up with some of our bills.

Hence, the shift in how we're intending to use the proceeds of the Greensboro sale.

Once again, I'm saying "we," when I should be saying "senior management" - who, once again, are doing all of this without consulting the owners of the assets we're selling (namely, us).

The problem with this shift is that it will likely leave us, at the end of the year, with more liabilities than assets. This is not good. It will make our Auditor very unhappy.

Besides, I'm worried about just how close we're getting to the technical definition of insolvent, which I recall as being a situation where a company's liabilities are greater than its assets, and it is unable to meet in full all bills that are due and payable.

Once more, I am driven to say that there is a way forward, but it requires creativity and the need for some to put ego to one side.

I say the latter because we will not make any sensible progress until those in charge are prepared to ask for help. And that first of all requires that they admit they need help.

What would I suggest to improve out immediate liquidity?

1) Continue with the sale. On whatever terms. Get the cash. Ask the Auditor to sign off on some arrangement whereby we can use some part for immediate operational costs. Internal loan, whatever. Call a Pre-Board Meeting. Advertise it in the local papers. Get the support of owners and workers for this and the other moves mentioned below. Speedy action is possible, but not if we keep all of this a big secret. We have to tell people the state we're in. If we're too proud to do that, then we will go under.

2) Create a special, one-off call-for-capital. That's the proper way to get cash if you need it in a hurry. Offer every existing owner the opportunity to take out a second share, on the same terms as their first share, provided we have their money by this Christmas (or, in the case of Worker-Owners, have begun to pay their installments by Christmas). We want to be encouraging more owners to give us more money. Not finding ways to make them keep it, or take it elsewhere - by, for instance, taking away their Discount.

3) In the same vein, we want to be doing all we can to inspire our workers to work that little bit harder. We won't do it by taking away their Dividend, making them work harder for less, and offering them no opportunity to share in the decisions being taken. I would suggest that we announce that there will be no Dividend for two years. That instead, there will be a gainshare offered to every worker, with slightly more being given to Worker-Owners. The gainshare to be based on an increase in sales - from where we are now. If it is not possible to pay it from operational funds, then we should borrow it from asset sales or from the Worker-Owner Central Account. And again, we should get the consent of workers before going ahead with this idea.

Anything and everything is possible. But not if we put pride before common sense. We need to be open with the world about the trouble we are in. And we need then bluntly and loudly to ask for help.

If those in charge are too proud to admit that mistakes were made, and instead, seek to cover their tracks by making consumers, owners, and workers pay the price, while keeping them in the dark as to why, then those in charge will end up being the death of this co-op.

*******

[Update - November 23, 2008]

In the middle of the recent Board Election, a member of senior management vociferously took issue with me over my claim at the Annual Meeting that, during the Board's conversation with the Auditor, I had heard the Auditor suggest to the Board that they draw up a comprehensive plan to deal with our $10 million in debt.

The substance of that discussion with the senior manager has continued to bother me. I know that Auditors are sometimes not direct. They speak in circumspect terms. It could well be that I misunderstood what the Auditor had said.

But even if I did, are we seriously suggesting that we don't need a comprehensive plan to pay down the debt - soon? Are we seriously suggesting - as has been stated to me - that this is no business of owners, and certainly not a committee of owners?

Well, in any event, I wrote an e-mail to Jacob - as Board Chairman (with a copy to the senior manager concerned) - making what I thought was a very reasonable suggestion to attempt sensibly to clear up the whole matter.

Now, I'm beginning to wonder if I wasn't right in the first place. You see, I've still to get a response from Jacob...anyway, here's my e-mail:

"Hey Jacob,

Well, that was probably one of the most lively Worker-Owner mornings we've all seen in a while [The discussion involving the senior manager had occurred as Jacob and I were on our way to one of the Candidate Forums].

There is only one thing that troubles me, though. I am genuinely concerned at the level of debt. And more specifically, the level of debt repayments. I don't want all the gains to be endangered by a debt we can not sustain.

For that reason, in any event, I would want someone, some body immediately and comprehensively to examine the level of debt, and confirm that it is ok.

For myself, I can see no reason why it should not be the same sort of task force that we had for the Elections. But that's my input.

I also, very genuinely, believe I heard the Auditor say (and Auditors speak round-a-bout) that the debt level should be addressed, that this did not need to await the next Audit, and that there should be a comprehensive plan (of some sort).

Again, even if the Auditor had not said anything remotely like those things, I would be concerned, and as someone with experience of management consulting, I would ask the Board to get specific input from the Auditor about those very points.

Indeed, Jacob, you know that I did write in almost exactly those terms as the Audit was underway. And, to be fair to me, those questions were not answered. And, to be fair to me, [name of senior manager deleted], this is why I wrote to both Jacob and Ruffin before the Annual Meeting requesting that they address these issues at the Meeting. They did not. So, I raised them - as an Owner.

All of this is fine and dandy. We can disagree to and fro about my concerns, my expression of them, my candidacy, the vehicles I create to talk about my candidacy.

The one thing with which I have a problem is when my honesty is called into question.

So. I would like to suggest to you, Jacob, that you and the Board please find out precisely what the Auditor recommends WSM do about its debt in this next year.

I will accept what he says. And if there is no mention of 'comprehensive plan,' then I apologize. I mis-heard. But the mis-hearing was genuine.

Best,
Geoff"

*******

[Update - December 11, 2008]

All workers at The Weave today received a 4-page Blue Document from Ruffin Slater, General Manager, asking us all to work more for less, to help balance the books. What follows is based on the response I sent to my department manager, with a copy to Ruffin, other senior managers, and the Board:

I regard the Blue Document in my mailslot as an invitation. A request. Asking me to work yet harder, for even less.

In light of the fact that:

* No incentive is being offered to me in return.

* I have not been consulted on this alleged Turnaround Plan, either as a worker-owner, nor under the existing process for inviting feedback from employees on decisions that affect the workplace.

* Indeed, every single avenue that used to exist to allow workers and worker-owners meaningful input has been either disbanded or put in abeyance.

* It is now clear that the recent Board Election was an undemocratic process, beset with manipulation and intimidation - including of me personally.

* The Blue Document itself is riddled with inaccuracies and distortions. For example, the drop in sales in Carrboro makes no mention on the effect of customers of having their store eviscerated, the continuing poor quality of food from the Food House, nor the movement of sales to outside stores like Southern Season to the Food House figures.

* The alleged Turnaround Plan provides us with no hard and fast figures, about which we can make meaningful judgments.

* We continue to finance a capital project out of operating cash, when we ought to be considering the possibility that we are in over our heads.

* We are continuing to borrow, when the Annual Report said there was no more room to borrow.

* The Blue Document singularly fails to take responsibility for mistakes of the past - such as the enormous overrun on the Food House.

* The Blue Document doesn't mention the fact that the big hole in our finances is occasioned by the cost of the Food House and its attendant debt. Forget talk about recession and competition. We became over-extended the minute we (secretly) borrowed $10 million, on the back of a profit margin of 1% - $300,000. And we are in a hole because we are over-extended.

* The Blue Document offers no action with respect to lowering that cost and debt (where the repayments rise each year, to $1.5 million in 2013).

* There are no suggestions for making other sensible savings, such as suspending the Mystery Shopper Program, or suspending charitable donations. Indeed, it is hard not to draw the conclusion that this Document is less about saving our co-op or our payroll, and more about saving someone's face. And we are not all in this together. I see no mention in the Blue Document of senior managers or administration taking a 10% cut in their wages over 2008 - as I and my work colleagues have done in this past month.

In light of all of this, I respectfully decline the invitation.

When this co-op is prepared to hold a full employees' co-op meeting, where full and accurate figures are presented, senior managers may be quizzed, some sort of incentive is offered for us working harder for less, and some sort of process is allowed where the body of workers approve or disapprove of this alleged Turnaround Plan, then I will reconsider.

In the meantime, I will continue to work today and tomorrow just exactly as I did yesterday, no more, no less - provided I get paid the same.

This is a legitimate protest, which should be respectfully observed in this co-op. It pains me to do this. But I am not the one being destructive. I am merely protecting myself from the destructive behavior of others. I am forced to take this action because, frankly, we are no longer behaving as any kind of workers' co-operative.

In the event that any action is taken against me for this legitimate protest, I will consider that retaliation. After all, I can hardly be disciplined for saying I won't do more for less, without something in return.

Respectfully,
Geoff

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

"All financial innovation involves … the creation of debt secured in greater or lesser adequacy by real assets,” wrote the economist John Kenneth Galbraith in 1993. And “all crises have involved debt that, in one fashion or another, has become dangerously out of scale in relation to the underlying means of payment.”

Yes We Can @ The Weave

Calling all workers @ The Weave!

Yes, we can make things different in our co-op. We can make The Weave a better co-op and a stronger business.

And yes, we can make a difference with this year’s Election for a Worker-Owner Director. The numbers are there.

A number of workers, who’ve spoken to me as I’ve traveled around the WSM locations, have said to me, what’s the point? We can’t make things different. No-one listens to us.

Wrong. We can make things different. We can make them better in our co-op.

It just needs the right Worker-Owner Director, who represents your views, and knows how to get the Board to pay attention.

Others of you have said, what’s the point? There aren’t enough of us to make any difference with this Election.

Wrong again. We have the numbers to make a difference.

We have a total of 92 workers registered to vote as Worker-Owners. Of those, some 40 Worker-Owners did not vote in the Election last year. If they vote this year, we can make a difference.

We have some 200 workers overall in WSM. That means 108 of you have not registered to become Worker-Owners, so that you can vote.

You can still register before October 25 (this coming Saturday), and you’ll be eligible to vote in this Election.

Speak to your Manager, or to Jason or Linda in Marketing, about registering as a Worker-Owner, and getting your secret ballot.

And here’s the thing. A whole bunch of you joined the co-op in April and May of this year, in the two new Hillsborough locations.

That means you just became eligible to become Worker-Owners. Once you have worked with WSM for 6 months, you are eligible.

So, check with your Manager. And register as a Worker-Owner before October 25.

If there were 108 more workers voting in this Election, we could all make a difference.

So, do what you have to do to vote in the Presidential Election. And then, pay the same amount of attention to helping to shape the immediate environment in which you work.

You have the power to make our co-op whatever it is you want it to be. Don’t give that power to someone else.

*******

If you’re still in doubt, come along to one of the Candidate Forums Jacob and I will be attending around Weaver Street this week:

A separate Forum will be held in each of the Weaver units. Managers have agreed to make it possible for Workers (not just Worker-Owners) to attend. The dates and times are as follows:

The Food House Break Room (also for everyone in the Administration Offices)
Tuesday, October 21, 10:30am-11:30am

Hillsborough Store Break Room
Tuesday, October 21, 12:00pm (noon)-1:00pm

Carrboro Store Break Room (also for our fellow work-mates at Panzanella)
Thursday, October 23, 11:00am-12:00pm (noon)

Southern Village Store Break Room
Thursday, October 23, 12:30pm-1:30pm

Don't fret if you're not free to attend the Forum in your unit. You can attend any Forum you choose. And maybe you'd like to hold off voting until you've had a chance to chat with your Candidates?

Finding The Time @ The Weave

[I wrote the first draft of this next post for myself back in July, before the Weaver Street kitchen staff moved to the new Food House. But it seems appropriate now, too...

Um. As to the photo. That would be Will Aumiller, brother of Lee Aumiller, who seems to be taking too literally my desire to want to give something back to The Weave...best that no more be said about that... ]

I just had me a moment. It's ones like this that take me away from my usual self as the fun-loving jokester, whom everyone knows in Southern Village; the guy with the silly grin, and a wit that makes the gang from Monty Python look like intellectuals.

And transforms me into the passionate advocate, that the rest of WSM recognize as being the 'overwhelming' dude, who just will not shut up! Ok, maybe I over-state...maybe...I mean, I am passionate...!

I couldn't find the light switches for the cafe in Carrboro. I stuck my head in the kitchen and a nice Mexican and a really happy Asian guy tried to show me where they were.

Well. I say tried. None of us understood each other. But we got there. And all the while, we were in fits of laughter.

And, in that moment, I got it. I got The Weave. At least, as it is for we workers. As we should be - as a co-op.

We are a microcosm of America's welcoming melting pot. Except we don't melt any more. We're too 'busy.' And we don't welcome any more. We issue guidelines.

Forget 70 page strategy documents. And Task Forces. And John Carver. And philosophy. And Rochdale. Forget me. My Blog. And my Facebook page. Forget the Board. My Candidacy. And any Elections at all.

What being a co-op about is finding the time.

Finding the time to know our fellow workers. Finding the time to get to know our customers. Finding the time to buy the produce that is truly authentic. Finding the time to determine a way to transport food from the Food House other than in plastic bags which do not biodegrade.

And finding the time to work out properly what the Mexican and the Asian's names were: believe me I tried; but the machinery was too loud - and I'm pretty sure they will always know me as Geeerrrougghhh!!

Somewhere along the line, those in charge at The Weave have allowed themselves to become too 'busy' to find the time.

They ought to have found the time properly to ask workers and consumers if they really wanted change, and if so, in exactly what form.

They can still find the time to ask us how best we can implement and communicate the changes already underway.

And they should make sure they find the time to ask us how we would like them now to refurbish our Carrboro store - the foundation store of The Weave.

And I don't just mean the physical changes. They can and should find the time to make sure that our customers and our workers are happy with the changes that are made to process, systems and personnel.

In particular, they should find the time to choose managers who honor co-operative values and customer service above impersonal, 'conventional' management styles.

I think I've made a little progress with my advocacy inside WSM. And my happiest moments, in that regard, have been where I have been able to create time for fellow workers and consumers to ask the powers-that-be to pay a little more attention to them.

I helped to open up the 2007 Annual Co-op Employees' Meeting last year to a half-hour question-and-answer session.

I badgered the Board to set up the Elections Task Force at the beginning of 2008, so that a wonderful group of dedicated workers and consumers could then help to reform our Board Election System.

As a consequence of that Task Force, we have an Election this year that is totally anonymous. And one that is in Spanish, too!

Management wanted to leave it on the basis that those of our fellow workers who have Spanish as their first or only language could ask for a Spanish version of all of the Election literature.

Bless their hearts. I know they're busy. We're all busy. But, if they had chosen to be less busy for a moment, if they had found the time, they would have realized (because we are all well-meaning people) that, in the countries from which many of these workers emigrated, it is sometimes dangerous to put your hand up and ask questions in an Election. We should be making it easy for them.

Well. Fate has a way of coming back and stinging well-wishers in the ass! As part of my effort to persuade management that it really wouldn't take that much time to translate all of the Election literature into Spanish, I sent them a preliminary copy of my Candidate Profile - in Google Spanish!

And yes, there was a hiccup. No-one's fault. These thing happen. The Google Spanish translation (which was, of course, jibberish) ended up in the first version of my Profile, splattered all over Weaver Street - rather than the 'proper' translation!

Ruffin and Linda kindly spent the best part of a day getting all of the Election literature and displays completely reprinted, repasted and redelivered to all of your mailboxes. And you'll be seeing an explanatory Erratum in this week's Market Messenger. You gotta laugh...!

So, 'finding the time' can have its own pitfalls. But that does not mean that the concept is not right. Like when I persuaded our Board of Directors to find the time to have a 10 minute question-and-answer session at the beginning of each Board Meeting.

One of my mates said: well, 10 minutes isn't long enough to take them to task for...and I stopped that person.

The point wasn't to allow someone (er...like me!) to make a 20 minute strategic statement. The point was to encourage one part of the power structure just to find the time. To pause. To take a deep breath. And to look back at the workers and consumers and say, hey, we acknowledge you.

Even if my new Mexican and Asian friends want to say no more than, 'thank you, it's really great to be here.' The Board, we, The Weave, found the time to say 'thank you' in return. That's it. It's no more complicated than that.

And I don’t mention all of this to bang my own drum. I do it to make a point – that should benefit all of us.

Namely, when all the steam, the fire, the complaints, the laughter, the joy, the sadness, the 'overwhelming' that is our co-op is said and done. When all that is put to one side, what we are as a co-op - or what we should be - is about finding the time.

Who Moved My Spanish...?

Yikes. Ouch. And blimey, even. Who moved the Spanish translation of my Election Candidate Information?

The one appearing in all of the official Weaver blurb is not the one I submitted. Which you can find two posts along, in this blog.

The irony is that I was the person who requested that a Spanish version of all Election Information be provided for all of our work colleagues, for whom Spanish is their first or only language.

Is this the reward for my suggestion? Maybe I should have kept my mouth shut? Hang on. Isn’t that becoming kind of the norm around here? Oops. Hush my mouth…

I mean, Jacob’s Candidate Information reads just fine. In Spanish. Maybe a little bland – bless his heart. I mean, he doesn’t say anything about how and why, as Board Chair, he allowed us to get where we are at the moment. Like, $10 million in debt. Oops. Hush my mouth, again…

And the English version of mine is ok. But the official Weaver Spanish translation?

Look, once you manage to wipe away the tears of mirth, it sounds like I scramble language like I scramble eggs. Less like I come from Southern Village. And more like I’ve become the village idiot.

It makes it look like I can’t be trusted to chew gum and walk at the same time, let alone represent you on the Board of a $21 million turnover co-op. Maybe, that was…? No. Never. Hush my mouth, all over again…

Well. My sincere apologies to all of you. You shouldn’t have to read something like this. Unless it comes from the mouth of Tina Fey or Stephen Colbert. Boom, boom. Maybe it escaped from a Monty Python skit?

I’ve asked the powers that be to do…something?

In the meantime, this was not the post I wanted you to see first when you came onto this blog. That’s the next one: “Something Completely Different?” Can I prevail on you to take a moment to read that one also? I think it’s important.

If you only read Spanish, there’s a translation icon at the top of this blog. It might not be perfect. But heck. Can it do a worse job than Weaver? Oops. There I go again. Grab the soap. Open mouth…

All of which said, this is still an important Board Election. It goes to the very heart of what we want our co-op to be. So, please cast a vote. Remember though, you have to register as a Worker-Owner first. And you have to do that before October 25.

Other than that. Hmm. Yes. Gosh. Well. What a strange year it’s been at The Weave. Yes. Hmm. Hello. Maybe, it really is time for something completely different…?