EDIT: Apparently Yogthos posted this in a couple places but Sino only has 8k subs whereas this has 23k so I'll leave it here.
https://www.taylorwessing.com/en/insights-and-events/insights/2024/01/employees-participation-in-corporate-governance-under-the-revised-chinese-company-law
I posted this in the news mega the other day but it deserves its own post. This law was signed in December but was apparently missed by most socialists. It goes into effect on July 1st.
Some snippets and explanations:
Article 17(2) of the Revised Company Law now stipulates that the assembly of employee representatives shall be the basic form of the democratic corporate governance system and that this shall apply to all companies. That means, regardless of whether a company is private or state-owned, whether it is a limited liability or a stock corporation. This is a notable development, as democratic corporate governance as a requirement for all companies is set out in national law for the first time.
A new organ is required in all companies called the Employee Assembly. It is democratic in nature.
An enterprise shall decide whether to convene an assembly of employee representatives or an assembly of all employees according to the Provisions on Democratic Governance of Enterprises, relevant local regulations, and subject to the number of its employees. In general, an enterprise with 100 or more employees shall convene an assembly of employee representatives; an enterprise with fewer than 100 employees should convene an assembly of all employees. An assembly of employee representatives (or an assembly of all employees, the “Employee Assembly”) is an organ for employees to exercise their power of democratic governance of the enterprise.
It is made up of all employees in companies below 100 members, or representatives are elected in companies above 100 members.
The trade union of an enterprise is the executive organ of its Employee Assembly and is responsible for the daily work of the Employee Assembly.
Cool
An Employee Assembly shall be convened at least once a year, and more than two-thirds of the employee representatives must be present at the plenary session of an Employee Assembly. Elections and votes on relevant matters at an Employee Assembly require a majority of all employee representatives.
Very cool
an Employee Assembly shall usually exercise the following powers and functions:
(I) Listening to the reports from the main persons responsible for the enterprise on the enterprise’s development planning, annual production and operation management, enterprise reform and formulation of major rules and regulations, employment issues, conclusion and implementation of labor contracts and collective contracts, production safety, and payment of social insurance premiums and housing provident funds; and making comments and suggestions thereon;
(II) Deliberating the rules and regulations or major proposals formulated, amended or adopted by the enterprise which may directly affect the immediate interests of its employees, such as remuneration, working hours, rest and vacation, occupational safety and health, insurance and welfare, employee training, labor discipline, and the management of labor quotas; and making comments and suggestions thereon;
(III) Deliberating and adopting the draft collective contracts, the plan for the use of the employees’ welfare fund drawn down in accordance with the relevant national regulations, the plan for adjusting the rate and timing of the payment of housing provident funds and social insurance premiums, the recommendation of candidates for model employees and other important matters;
(IV) Electing or dismissing employee directors and employee supervisors, electing employee representatives to meetings of creditors and creditors’ committees of the enterprise subject to bankruptcy proceedings in accordance with the law, and recommending or electing management personnel of the enterprise as authorized;
(V) Reviewing and monitoring the implementation of labor laws and regulations and labor rules by the enterprise, democratically evaluating the leaders of the enterprise, and making recommendations on rewards and punishments; and
(VI) Such other powers and functions as may be provided by laws or regulations.
Powers = Having access to all information of the company at every level, which is very important to worker benefits and ensuring labour law is being followed. Also the dismissing of directors, supervisors, managers, and electing representatives to meetings of creditors. In companies over 300 employees elected-members of the employee assembly must be elected to the board of directors.
China has made all companies worker-controlled. I would show this article to anyone that claims otherwise. This is worker democracy.
China is still a dictatorship of the proletariat.
This is fucking awesome! I feel about China the same way Americans used to think everyone thought about them. They're the beacon of hope and progress for the world. I'm the wide eyed Italian guy who wants to go sail on a barge to a better place.
I am how America advertised an Iraqi in 2003 but for China. Please liberate our people.
(IV) is huge! Holy shit! Democratic accountability for directors and supers, that's how we get the power tripping micromanaging psychopaths out of the workplace. I'm extremely jealous. 😅
Yeah that's the one that makes me say this is worker democracy. This would never ever be implemented in a capitalist country, not in a million years.
I am for what you describe, but that isn't what is written:
"Electing or dismissing employee directors and employee supervisors, electing employee representatives to meetings of creditors and creditors’ committees of the enterprise subject to bankruptcy proceedings in accordance with the law, and recommending or electing management personnel of the enterprise as authorized;"
Could mean those that employees vote in (which are not all), could also mean all that have power over employees but I doubt it. Reads like the German and swedish phrasing of the two categories: employee directors (those that are elected by the employees) and "owner" directors (which are elected by shares).
The law has less ability to punish and gold accountable individuals and strengthens more the collective worker organs and gives more information, as well as representation and participation.
Ahhhhh this is so cool. Libs will of course say that this is fake for the same reason they believe all unions in China to be fake, because they're part of the CPC, but China continues to implement Full-Process Democracy and continues to be the gold standard for representation in a modern government.
Guess I'll be the Lib.
How is this any different than the German codetermination system? Honestly it seems like they're just copying it, though it does apply to small businesses too. Which is cool but I wouldn't call it workplace democracy.
German codetermination only elects less than half of people to the supervisory board of directors, and then those people hire managers and make major business decisions. The Employee Assembly, on the other hand, is electing their own managers and directors directly. This means that shareholders do not get a say in the hiring and firing of management, it's just worker controlled. Since codetermination still allows for more than half of the supervisory board to be chosen by shareholders it's class collaborationist at its core.
I am not sure what % of the board must be elected actually, worth verifying that.
Compared to codetermination though one important difference is that it applies to all companies over 300, not just companies over 500 employees.
This all comes with the caveat of it being a translation but I really don't think it says what you think it does.
Section I just say the employees are informed of and get a performative say in what the company was already planning on doing, not that they get an actual say in that plan. Section II is only about working conditions and not about the nature of the work itself, if it should be done, how best to do it, etc. Section III also is only about contract points which deal with remuneration and not with the actual business of the company. This part of Section IV;
Electing or dismissing employee directors and employee supervisors
Is suspiciously worded and makes me think that it really only means their direct managers and department heads, which of course is an improvement but they aren't voting on whether major shareholders get a seat on the board of directors or not. Even if it did include the regular C suite, it absolutely does not include members of the company appointed by the party/state.
Some of the better seeming parts have no teeth.
electing employee representatives to meetings of creditors and creditors’ committees of the enterprise subject to bankruptcy proceedings in accordance with the law
Just says they get to show up to the meeting, not that they actually have any say in that meeting. Especially the last part of section IV.
and recommending or electing management personnel of the enterprise as authorized
Is super weasel wordy. This could be satisfied just by acknowledging the recommendation of the assembly, it doesn't actually require the company to follow that recommendation.
Section V also has no teeth. There is no mention whatsoever of the makeup of the board of directors or what say shareholders have. Which leads me to believe that this is whole thing is just designed to appease workers and not actually provide workplace democracy. To be clear, it is a potentially a step in the right direction if it is given teeth but as it stands it is absolutely just as 'class collaborationist' as Germany's.
Of course all of this ignores the corrupting and profit maximizing nature of modern corporations which is not changed one iota just by changing who can vote for who is in charge (as evidenced by large co-ops like Mondragon) especially since they still have to compete against corporations who absolutely will cut every corner and cheat to get ahead.
Edit: I forgot how to format
I'll get a friend to translate it if you want, what specific part is the issue
The bigger problem is what it doesn't say, like about anything about the board of directors or shareholders. I don't think it would help much unless they're also familiar with Chinese labor law.
On paper, the elected member in board meetings wouldn't have much individual power but they would be able to report back to the greater labor audience on potentially negative workplace changes. I interpreted the law as making it easier for workers to organize and be aware of up top decisions, even without direct say. It doesn't give direct rights but the potential to struggle for them.
I thought of that parallel too, my comment was more that this is one aspect of many in the Chinese system which seeks to extend democratic processes beyond just electing your representative. This particular system is cribbed from Germany's notes, but the context it exists in has more democratic structures than the context that the German one exists in.
China is still a dictatorship of the proletariat.
:bloomer:
I hope this policy is the step towards building more democratic institutions that govern the workplace. Workplace democracy always been an important core value for me.
I definitely see more to be done. I also see flaws in it too that will need wrinkles iron out. I see a vector for corruption, corporate espionage and bribery. It will evolve over time.
I agree. There have to be many safeguards added to such an institution for the people to be able to utilize it in a way that is free from corporate intimidation and corruption. I hope they succeed in doing that.
"China has made all companies worker-controlled. I would show this article to anyone that claims otherwise. This is worker democracy."
No. Don't overhype yourself in idealist ways cause you want the CPC settle handedly now to introduce full worker control.
This law is a good step and would be great for counties like the US. However it isn't worker control, far from it. Sadly.
It gives institutionalized organs für the workers, which convene rarely, but have mandates to convene, which is good. It is unclear what punishment is if they don't. It is also unclear what powers they have, as for example the German model for large companies has a minority of board members be worker council elected (more or less). However within the board they are a minority. Here it is written, that the company shareholders don't have a say in election of that portion. This means it isn't worker control.
It is an option though to create instruments that might be formalized to express that companies worker's wishes. This is course will have structural problems i.e. who is allowed to vote, talk, what is with internal conflicts, what is with competition between that company and others or the conflict between members of that company and those not employed in it?
For those questions the presented solution is the trade union of that company, which means a structured entity. It isn't clear how exactly that is meant, as the conception of unions varies a lot. I doubt it is the US conception and think it might be more aligned with the bigger unions in China, but derived from their members of that company.
To further align the workers with a struggle that is not only focused on that company the membership within the communist party for some is quite relevant. This is what real socialist countries often encouraged. China has therefore, with it's high membership count, a different condition than if the concept would've just been copied.
The obligations to coerce relevant people and information though is an important step to establish workers control and participation in the companies.
I welcome the spirit of the law as presented by OP, but urge you to not view laws that are stepping stones as the goal already. Details, implementation and practice matters.
There are reasons the law doesn't go further so that it actually is (full) worker control. Capital is still relevant in China, both domestic (even though managed) and international (with mechanisms to reduce capital flight, but not well controlled). This law therefore does try to not scare International capital in practice too much. Talk of worker control (then making the most important decisions) is sadly still propaganda.
The law, if it really got obligations for all companies to create this assemblies would go further then the German law, as that exempts plenty of small companies that account for a majority of companies, even though not a majority of employees. Germany also has no real mechanism to hinder a medium sized company to make smaller ones to slip through.
according to the Provisions on Democratic Governance of Enterprises, relevant local regulations, and subject to the number of its employees.
This means that it mirrors the German law a bit and could include local exemptions i.e. special economic zones.
But none the less:
is set out in national law for the first time.
Current German laws with by having a worker's council elected (sounds cooler than it is often, cause it dissipates anger a bit and makes wild organizing hard), which has the right to request management to talk and inform, but sadly no access to books. They can convene workers assemblies (paid assemblies of the whole employees) multiple times per year is necessary, but also has minimums occurrences required by law. There is too little punishment for hindering those established laws, as the German state is neoliberal in many aspects.
I encourage you to talk to experts of our side in labor relations and see what you can demand from that new law within your company. Also see what structural differences in terms of unions, membership, party membership, co existing laws and judicial system exist, as well as rights to strike, to healthcare and alike.
Within the US as within Germany democracy end at the gate to the workplace. To quote century old writers.
if the frog jumps half way every time, it will never reach the other side of the road... right?
Maybe I’m just jaded, but this all sounds almost too good to be true. Hope not though, ofc.
Yeah, I'm not going to pretend to know the daily reality of companies in China but we do have something similar in my country for companies with over 50 employees and I wouldn't say it is that significant in terms of workplace democracy. The least charitable reading would be that China is doing something similar but a bit broader.
Still all good things, but to pretend that this is basically China pressing the communism button is silly.
So all workers are now guaranteed representation even if they're not unionized, and larger companies have mandatory co-determination. Combine that with the state controlling the commanding heights of the economy, surely the social democrats are pleased???
surely the social democrats are pleased???
This is not the white socdems personally benefitting from a larger portion of colonial superprofits, so they don't care.
surely the social democrats are pleased???
Of course not, China still bad, USA lesser evil etc. etc.
I cant find another source to this. This is huge if True, wouldnt be surprised if mim silences about it completely
Full Chinese text here: https://mp.weixin.qq.com/s?__biz=MzA4MzU5NTg0Mg==&mid=2649624819&idx=1&sn=de061298e4a4be17580fffaf6ba89620&chksm=87eeb7deb0993ec80934d1239f30136003578e04b8ac5d2eb21f6490a28f7cb00c26a85ffb68&scene=27
Do you read chinese? Is the article op posted faithfull to the original content? Thanks in advance
I do not but Google translate is quite capable with Chinese these days so that's an option and I have Chinese friends that confirm it's accurate.
There are a number of hexbear users that definitely do so someone else will answer your question shortly.
Here it is translated:
http://en.pkulaw.cn/display.aspx?cgid=8ba805acd08846d7bdfb&lib=law
I'm also interested in reporting on this, but like from a news agency. Not sure why someone would fake this but it's such huge news if true, why is there no other reporting?
Lmao where are those "china watcher" dipshits to warn us about the communist menace!?
You can read it for yourself here: http://en.pkulaw.cn/display.aspx?cgid=8ba805acd08846d7bdfb&lib=law
It's not particularly long or difficult to understand. Article 75 is the good stuff though.
the maoist uprising against the landlords was the largest and most comprehensive proletarian revolution in history, and led to almost totally-equal redistribution of land among the peasantry
But at what cost??? /s
These are amazing news, and I hope that everything goes well.
