can the workers of a communist company vote to have a leader to organize the workers in some meaningful way while each contributing some of the fruits of their labor to the leader?
The workers of a communist company vote on every aspect of how the business is run. They don't need one leader because everyone agrees on what, how, and how much each person gets payed
what if the majority of workers thought a leader could make some decisions more efficiently and vote for one to make such decisions in exchange for some of their labor?
As long as the workers have a say in what that leader does and how much he gets paid, then this is not an issue. But the leader must be doing his share of the work as well.
Though perhaps cumbersome, the will of the workers could be more accurately understood by all if they voted every day to keep the leader. So one day of failure could depose the leader.
fair enough. so they vote once a month on to keep the leader/decision maker. if the vote fails the system defaults to what it was before.
Yeah, basically it's all according to the will of the voters. A Co-op might elect to have multiple leaders or have a completely different structure. Everyone who works gets to vote.
could you say that by continuing to work at the business (or Co-op) every day a worker is voting for the leader and leaving the business/co-op is a vote of no confidence?
So basically your saying everyone votes for the same thing and no worker is left unhappy with the outcome of the vote. Even though a worker may have strongly opposed the majority vote.
1/2 Maybe that might be true if you're using a First Past The Post voting system which is a terrible idea btw. You could do an Approval voting system where instead of voting for...
2/2 ...only one option, people vote multiple times to indicate every option they are OK with. That way everyone is happy. Video explainer:
Here's another possible voting system for larger co-op companies:
