Criticism On The Codetermination

The system of firms, incarnate the differentiation and co-operation of investors and labors, which is an important problem that we must take it seriously. Seeing from the function of laws, the most important task of corporate laws is to protect the benefit of investors, and cognize the weak of labor and protecting the benefit of labors is the task of labor laws. It seems totally different for the corporate laws and labor laws, but the all care about the boom of society and the development of people. What kind of systems can not only differentiate the benefit of labors and investors so they can accelerate the development of society, but also unite them to create a harmonious society. We must take it seriously.Codetermination is a system for the labors of our country to take part in the corporate governance, which is emanate from the democracy management of our planned economy era. The system of democracy management of our planned economy era is actually the codetermination. The system of democracy management is in reason in our planned economy era, which is determined by the condition of that era. But, along with the change of society conditions, whether the codetermination is still in reason, which is doubtful. But, not only impacting by the idea of historical system and the Germany codetermination system, but also in order to protecting the labors right, almost all of the jurisconsult of our country support the system of codetermination. Most of codetermination supporters claim that the theories of corporate social responsibility and human capital support the codetermination. After work on the theories of corporate social responsibility and human capital, I find discover that it is not true. Studying the theory of human capital will not reach a conclusion of supporting the codetermination, but an opposition conclusion. Most of the views of the theory of corporate responsibility are not in reason at all.The paper analyses the historical rationality on the presentation of the democracy management firstly, then define and introduce the codetermination, and criticize the codetermination on the basic of corporate social responsibility theory and human capital theory. The first part of the paper analyses the historical rationality on the presentation of the democracy management. The system of democracy management, including the system of labor conference, the right of labors to advising, and so on, is a system of our planned economy era. The system of labor conference is the most important content of democracy management. Because of the confusion of government and firms'purview, the confusion of property right, and the dissimilation of the connection of the labors and the firms, the connection of the labors and the firms is actually the connection of a person and the state. Studying from the political sociology, the firms were the implements of control the society. The system of democracy management was in reason because it was a cushion to the rigidified and concentrated society controlling. The system of democracy management was actually the codetermination.The second part of the paper introduces the point of views of our scholars on the codetermination. Their views have three kind of mistake: one is that they miss to realize the differences between the codetermination and the system of labor contract or the labor union; the other one is that they didn't distinguish the codetermination and the ESOPs and so on. After clear such mistakes, the paper defines the codetermination. The codetermination is actually a system that the labors share the firms'property right, share the residual claim and the residual control with the investors. Then the paper introduced the status quo in our corporate laws and labors laws.Criticizing the codetermination from the corporate responsibility theory is the third part's content. The theory of corporate responsibility is come out on the worry of the boom of corporation strength, the pollution of circumstance, the gap between the reach and the poor, and so on. The discussion of corporate responsibility seems to bring on the amending of U.S corporate laws, but the conclusions of the theory is in doubt. So, the codetermination base on the corporate theory is also without reason.The last part is to criticize the codetermination from the human capital theory. Studying the human capital theory's process of coming into being, and it's primary views, we will find that the economist who develop human capital theory never said that the labors should share the firms'property right, share the residual claim and the residual control with the investors. If studying the investment difference between the material resources owners and human capital owners, we will definitely find that codetermination will not benefit the efficiency of firms, but make against it, which will not only violate the corporate governance, but also break the labor laws with the absence of equality and justice.