The main difference between a standard business and a cooperative would be the sharing of profits - there's still the need for management/marketing/etc, which can either be done by one of the cooperatives or subcontracted, it doesn't disappear. That the maids don't have the skill set or the means to acquire it is exactly what I commented on originally. That is the gap. The extraction of surplus-value comes from having an economical/power/knowledge advantage.
If I had the means to build a vacuum cleaner (not that hard, you know software can be way more complex than that), but instead sold my project to Dyson, because they have the means to produce and market it, yes, I'm setting myself up to be exploited. It's an option. (drifting off-topic, but crowdfunding is changing that too)
Yes, I understand the principle. But deciding to form a coop, hiring a manager/marketer and being a partner in a company are all skills, and while valuable, they're just just as arbitrary to decide to teach in schools as knowing how to build a vacuum cleaner.
Also, where is the evidence of exploitation? Does this guy make more money than he would if there was profit-sharing? Paying a salary is profit sharing.
Building, marketing and running a company is a different specific skill set.
How is that not division of labour?
> so no, that doesn't sound easy to me ;)
Presumably a lot easier than building a vacuum cleaner.