Anything that removes the power of CEOs and gives it to the worker should be highly encouraged. Economic democracy is the final frontier of human empowerment and giving workers then means to have democratic control over the economy can only unlock more human potential, not less.
High performance sports teams have a captain that is often elected in some form from the team.
Likewise the crew of a pirate ship used to elect their captain.
Both examples serve contrary to your point, and there's no reason you couldn't have something similar in business: a cooperative that elects a CEO, rather than it being done by a board of other CEO's.
To make the actual analogy you wanted, maybe you should discuss fragging:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fragging
And what it means when your underlings hate your leadership so much they would rather kill you than follow their "superior's" orders.
Pretty sure the moment you do this, the workers liquidate the company and distribute the assets among themselves, as evidenced by the acceptance rate of voluntary severance offers in many past downsizings, such as the Twitter one.
The only thing that will do this is if workers are the resource bottleneck.
> Economic democracy is the final frontier of human empowerment and giving workers then means to have democratic control over the economy can only unlock more human potential, not less.
This already exists. It's called free enterprise and freedom of association.
Unless of course you mean that nobody can own or expend resources without (nominally) everybody agreeing... which has also been tried, and failed horribly.
The rest of China’s potential will never be unlocked as long as it is kept artificially constrained by the political control of authoritarianism.
This is literally historically wrong, there are many examples to the contrary. If you think any form of government is "always" wrong, I can point you to failed democracies that then prospered in a dictatorial rule too, such as Singapore or South Korea or even China if you want to count that, which have all been basically one party rule to great effect.
Except replacing CEOs with AIs will not do this.
It won't make the companies worse run, why would workers want to destroy their means to live? CEOs do this with no skin in the game, the workers should take that skin as they will always be better stewards than the single tyrant.
Where is your evidence that companies won't be worse run? Workers could just vote to give themselves massive raises and hemorrhage the company, ironically like how some private equity firms operate but en masse. No one would start companies in this sort of scenario thereby causing the economy to fall, especially in comparison to companies that don't have this sort of voting system for companies.
The ability to deny someone healthcare, the ability to eat, how you dress yourself, who you can speak to, and even if you can subsist in our society (notice I didn't say thrive); these are things no human should have over another.
Companies have the ability to destroy lives and workers have ZERO recourse.
My solution is simple, workers should be able to vote for their bosses. If these executives are as good as you say then they should win the election easily. I mean after all boards vote on who becomes an executive, why shouldn't workers be allowed this right as well? Boards + executives decide company strategy, why can't workers be allowed to do this too? Why can't their be consensus building where we actually give workers the freedom to dictate their own success? Boards + executives vote on their salaries too (hint, they never go down), workers should have this right too.
I'm sorry but the more I think about it, the more farcical it all seems. Workplace democracy should the next pursuit of human rights as democratizing the economy can only lead to more human flourishing as democratic governments have provided thus far.
If it's good enough for the state, it's good enough for the F500.
And also, the way you dress yourself or have healthcare? Do you not think co-ops like REI don't have a work uniform or give their workers healthcare? Sorry but your takes sound extremely naive, where have you worked before? As I said I have literally worked in a software co-op and it's not all it's cracked up to be based on how you're describing them.