• geikei [none/use name]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    3 years ago

    Is it really usual or comparable ? Exxon for example seems to have had similar profits as Hauwai in 2021 and has around 80k employees. The equivalent of what Huawei does would be an annual distribution or “bonus” of around 100k to their employees .From what i see their bonuses were at average 15k but in their bulk bellow 10k. With CEOs racking up dozens and dozens of millions over the years , even just in bonuses. And on top of that it seems that even the employee bonuses have been obliderated in recent years due to “oil crisis”. justifications . Same seems to be the case with the other companies you mention. “average” bonuses of 10k (a lot under that and inflated due to CEO and other high level bonuses,) on companies where the equivalent clear profit/employees would put it at 100k . And also an abandonment of a lot of these bonuses in recent years

    But Huwaei is relatively evenly dividing a majority of pure annual profits among the general employee population . And thats not as a bonus scheme but a direct result and part of Huwaei being majority ESOP structured in a very unique way, which also translate to worker control ,union and voting mechanisms inside the company. You can maybe argue that this counts as “labor aristocracy” only if you argue that fairer profit distributive among employees co-op/esop structures of large profitable tech company like Huawei exising makes their employes much better compensated compared to others. But thats not a problem with the structure , its a reason for more and more of China’s and the worlds tech and other companies to be restructured like that. Also idk about comparing inflated monstrous oil giants that have exerted influence in some of the worst policies and disasters of modern times to Huawei

    Also it seems like if this was anything in line with a western giant like Exxon or even some silcon valey company it would be easy after the economic warfare and sanctions the west and Trump(now biden) unleased against Hauwai, forcing them out of markets to find an excuse just not give “the treats” and instead trickle down the “losses” to their employees as an excuse for the ceos to get richer and for more individual accumulation of wealth. But the highest decision making body in Huawei is the Employee Shareholders’ Representative Commission representing and being voted up in 1 share 1 vote stages from the 130,000 Huawei employees that own collectively 95%+ of the companies shares with no huge discrepencies of share holding between employees.

    Also the more i read the more i see that their system is pretty complicated and interesting, more Based than just “its ESOP” but with also interesting peculiarities due to historical development

    • zifnab25 [he/him, any]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      3 years ago

      Fair enough. Huawei’s bonus pool was exceptional in that it was so large. And that even base salary spread between lay workers and executives is far smaller than in a US counterpart.

      But the idea of an annual bonus tied to company income isn’t a novelty of Huawei. Nor is this a sign of a non-capitalist business model. It is simply an earlier stage of Capitalism.

      You can maybe argue that this counts as “labor aristocracy” only if you argue that fairer profit distributive among employees co-op/esop structures of large profitable tech company like Huawei exising makes their employes much better compensated compared to others. But thats not a problem with the structure , its a reason for more and more of China’s and the worlds tech and other companies to be restructured like that.

      Luxury cell phones occupy an economic niche that affords the firm high profit margins. I don’t think you’d want this model of firm operating your plumbing network or electricity provider or your rail system or your grocery store chain.

      That’s not to say the co-op model isn’t superior to the corporate investor model. But it is still a capitalist form of production, in which the incentives are stacked towards continuous growth and expansion.