The Mondragon Experiment

[The Old Man from Scene 24]

A long time ago, a friend of mine showed me this documentary about a co-op in Spain.

I am a communist, but I must admit that these people seem to have dealt with their capitalism pretty well. They are a corporation that is ran like a democratic socialist country. The regular workers vote on how much their managers can make. It is a collection of businesses, and on average, a manager is only allowed to make at the most 3 times the salary of the lowest paid workers. Every worker is paid enough to afford more than what they need for themselves and their children. It is basically a commune.

It is about 1 or 2 hours long, but you might get attached after watching the first 10 minutes.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7efaDeFmurQ

[Rafiq]

Right, however, worker's cooperatives are still just as Petite Bourgeois as your local small business.

[HEAD ICE]

i think on libcom there are a few good articles about how mondragon was actually a hell hole and in many ways worse than a "capitalist run" business (such as inability to form unions, go on strike for better wages, and constant pressure for 'sacrifice' for the 'good of all').

[The Intransigent Faction]

i think on libcom there are a few good articles about how mondragon was actually a hell hole and in many ways worse than a "capitalist run" business (such as inability to form unions, go on strike for better wages, and constant pressure for 'sacrifice' for the 'good of all').

Wow, really? I watched this documentary in a sociology class last year. From what I recall it wasn't (obviously) perfect or the ideal kind of commune like what would exist after a revolution...but aren't there some democratic aspects that are at least a step above the norm for corporations?

That aside, if it's still a for-profit corporation then of course that doesn't get to the root of the problem. It's just that when I think "hell hole" I think of a third-world sweat-shop, not a Mondragon.

[Red Commissar]

The problem with these attempts, like utopian socialist communities a long time ago, is that they think they can exist happily in the middle of a capitalist-dominated economy, or at least insulate themselves from the bad effects of it. There's no way you can completely isolate yourself from that, and no matter how lofty or 'noble' your goals, your co-op or what ever will still be bound by the market unfortunately.

Mondragon has shown that it isn't impervious to this either. More recently we've seen (egged on by the fierce competition with attempts to drive down labor 'costs' and the lifting of trade tariffs) that some of the coops under it have begun to hire waged foreign laborers to carry out menial tasks for them, much like other businesses in Spain and elsewhere. Benefits of the co-op only extend to full-time workers, and even then it is more of a 'workers-managed' rather than 'worker-owned' situation.

And it will only get worse from there, I'm afraid.

[nideaquinidealli]

The Mondragon Coop was created by the Catholic Church as a way of maintaining workers away from unions and left parties.
It's linked with a bank (Caja Laboral) and recently has established factories in China.
From the first time, they have hired workers without any of the rights of coop members. Coop member are a small minority of the workers.
Mondragon Coop democracy is the same type of democracy that rules in the corporation's shareholders meetings.
Nothing to do with socialism.

[Thirsty Crow]

I am a communist, but I must admit that these people seem to have dealt with their capitalism pretty well. They have not dealt with capitalism since they are a capitalist enterprise operating in the capitalist global market. I would hat to think that capitalism is effectively dealt with if you have a bunch of co-operatives (and that does not address the core issue of what makes capitalism what it is).

They are a corporation that is ran like a democratic socialist country.Again, I don't think we should conceptualize socialism in relation (positive) to production for profit via sale of commodities on the market.


It is a collection of businesses, and on average, a manager is only allowed to make at the most 3 times the salary of the lowest paid workers. This is not true, at least not anymore.
There was an interesting article in The Economist dealing with co-operatives and advantages of this form of capitalist enterprise in dealing with not capitalism but class struggle in fact, by means of stiffling it. The article was posted at libcom. Here's the relevant part (emphasis mine):


The most successful co-ops, however, are those least shackled by ideology. Mondragón used to cap managers’ pay at three times that of the lowest-paid co-operativist, for example. But it realised it was losing its best managers, and that some non-member managers were earning more than member managers. The cap was raised to eight times. But this is still 30% below market rates, and some managers are still tempted away. “Frankly, it would be a bad sign if nobody was,” says Adrián Celaya, Mondragón’s general secretary.
Every worker is paid enough to afford more than what they need for themselves and their children. It is basically a commune. Even the ones that were laid off? Even the non-member wage workers employed by the company?
And no, it is not basically a commune, as I've stated, since the basic necessities of operating in capitalist market condition still hold. The purpose of the commune is to get rid of that necessities, that basic social relations, and institute new ones.

I really recommend the article I mentioned. You can find it here: http://libcom.org/library/co-operatives-all-together