Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Housing Plans in California & New York face resistance from construction unions

wsj.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 68 posts

Re: Housing Plans in California & New York face resistance from construction unions

#21

Post by jacquesgt »

sologoub wrote: post #17
twblalock wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's a mischaracterization. The law Jerry Brown proposed dealt with "as-of-right" zoning, i.e. if a parcel of land has been zoned for housing, and someone wants to build housing on it, they can do so without the NIMBY neighbors holding up the project indefinitely with frivolous lawsuits and "environmental" reviews. Unfortunately, Brown attached a low-income housing restriction onto it, but it was definitely a step…

That's not how it works, especially in hot markets. Zoning is not absolute and the current process allows for all kinds of variances and exceptions. The Pen Factory project is an excellent example. Local NIMBYs defeated a really neat project that even included low income housing. The original developer said "screw it" and sold the property to a developer that is now doing a by the books and within exact letter of zon…

The proposal was to allow for as-of-right development if the development adhered to local zoning ordinances. That means no variances. As soon as a developer wanted a variance, they'd be back under the current system.

Re: Housing Plans in California & New York face resistance from construction unions

#22

Post by bjt »

jseliger wrote: post #12
themartorana wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Also, support for unions is waning. Here in Philadelphia, union support is at an all time low. They were rendered toothless in recent elections for the first time ever, and a series of bad press (arson, assault, and destruction of property by union members) and continued ties to organized crime have worn thin sympathies. I also imagine that in difficult economies like ours, the "right" to a job or work over someone e…

Also, support for unions is waning. Here in Philadelphia, union support is at an all time low. They were rendered toothless in recent elections for the first time ever, and a series of bad press (arson, assault, and destruction of property by union members) and continued ties to organized crime have worn thin sympathies. For good reason. They prevent accountability among police: http://reason.com/blog/2014/08/14/poli…

I think any discussion of the good and bad side of unions needs to distinguish between public and private sector ones.

In the private sector, union negotiations are naturally constrained by the knowledge that if the company isn't profitable, everybody loses. I think there are cases in the private sector where unions make a lot of sense (e.g. mining towns where there's one dominant employer).

In the public sector that doesn't apply. The union's incentive is to demand all that it can. You're not going to put the government out of business.

Re: Housing Plans in California & New York face resistance from construction unions

#23

Post by praptak »

twblalock wrote: post #2

Unions shot themselves in the foot here. Some of the new construction projects would have been run by union shops. Now, they won't happen at all. Net result: fewer union jobs than there could have been. At some point, the unions will need to realize that stuff is going to get done with or without them. They can be part of the process, or not. If they are part of the process, they get some jobs out of it. This should…

They obviously are a part of the process. And, assuming this stuff will get done with or without them, their strategy is the right one - get as much as possible out of it. In this case it's wage guarantees.

Re: Housing Plans in California & New York face resistance from construction unions

#24

Post by cpncrunch »

desdiv wrote: post #7
wmil wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Clicking the Google search link is working for me. Did you install some privacy proxy that may be screwing with referrer headers? Or is there some new requirement they're checking?

The Google search link fails around 20% of the time for me, without any browser/plugin/config changes on my side. So it could be just that WSJ is randomizing things.

Yes. The exact same search that went to the paywall earlier now displays the full article.

Re: Housing Plans in California & New York face resistance from construction unions

#25

Post by hudibras »

twblalock wrote: post #6
themartorana wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Also, support for unions is waning. Here in Philadelphia, union support is at an all time low. They were rendered toothless in recent elections for the first time ever, and a series of bad press (arson, assault, and destruction of property by union members) and continued ties to organized crime have worn thin sympathies. I also imagine that in difficult economies like ours, the "right" to a job or work over someone e…

50 years ago, they could have gotten away with this. Now, the demand for housing is so high that the unions can only delay the inevitable. Ironically, the NIMBYs and the unions have ended up on the same side of the housing issue. Most union members I know would be unhappy about being on the side of the privileged and established, and against the working-class people, for whom home affordability is of primary importan…

>Now, the demand for housing is so high that the unions can only delay the inevitable.

The unions agree with you here, that's the whole point. The demand is so high that the developers will soon agree with the unions' requests in exchange for a slightly smaller profit.

Re: Housing Plans in California & New York face resistance from construction unions

#26

Post by twblalock »

praptak wrote: post #23
twblalock wrote: post #2

Unions shot themselves in the foot here. Some of the new construction projects would have been run by union shops. Now, they won't happen at all. Net result: fewer union jobs than there could have been. At some point, the unions will need to realize that stuff is going to get done with or without them. They can be part of the process, or not. If they are part of the process, they get some jobs out of it. This should…

They obviously are a part of the process. And, assuming this stuff will get done with or without them, their strategy is the right one - get as much as possible out of it. In this case it's wage guarantees.

People who kill the process entirely cannot be considered a part of it. The next laws that pass regarding this issue will circumvent the unions. If they wanted a seat at the table, they would not have taken such extreme measures.

There is a difference between hardball negotiating, and destroying the very thing the negotiation pertains to.

Re: Housing Plans in California & New York face resistance from construction unions

#27

Post by twblalock »

hudibras wrote: post #25
twblalock wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

50 years ago, they could have gotten away with this. Now, the demand for housing is so high that the unions can only delay the inevitable. Ironically, the NIMBYs and the unions have ended up on the same side of the housing issue. Most union members I know would be unhappy about being on the side of the privileged and established, and against the working-class people, for whom home affordability is of primary importan…

>Now, the demand for housing is so high that the unions can only delay the inevitable. The unions agree with you here, that's the whole point. The demand is so high that the developers will soon agree with the unions' requests in exchange for a slightly smaller profit.

No, the developers will agree with everyone else except the NIMBYs and the unions, because union workers are a minority of workers, and they don't do a better job than non-unionized workers. In fact, they often do a worse job, because unions protect bad workers who could not survive outside of a union.

The days when unions could get their way in these kinds of matters through outright bullying are long gone, and good riddance to them!

Re: Housing Plans in California & New York face resistance from construction unions

#28

Post by hueving »

gameofdrones wrote: post #8

This one instance might be so (unions are imperfect human endeavors), but this article comes across as thinly-veiled MSM/establishment strawman/false equivocation via the pernicious, irrational, data-free worldview which completely ignores the net positive force unions had in the bloody struggle for worker pay and working conditions in the 19th and 20th centuries. See also: "Inequality for All" and "Where to Invade N…

"helped in the past" != "helpful now"

Burning coal has been a tremendous help to society, but that doesn't mean we should continue to do it when we find better alternatives for each of its use cases.

Can you name some of the advancements unions have brought to employees in the US over the last 10-20 years? Does that outweigh their anti competitive nature that has led to companies moving manufacturing out of unionized areas entirely?

Re: Housing Plans in California & New York face resistance from construction unions

#29

Post by vacri »

themartorana wrote: post #5
twblalock wrote: post #2

Unions shot themselves in the foot here. Some of the new construction projects would have been run by union shops. Now, they won't happen at all. Net result: fewer union jobs than there could have been. At some point, the unions will need to realize that stuff is going to get done with or without them. They can be part of the process, or not. If they are part of the process, they get some jobs out of it. This should…

Also, support for unions is waning. Here in Philadelphia, union support is at an all time low. They were rendered toothless in recent elections for the first time ever, and a series of bad press (arson, assault, and destruction of property by union members) and continued ties to organized crime have worn thin sympathies. I also imagine that in difficult economies like ours, the "right" to a job or work over someone e…

There is also the point that most of the big battles have been won, now. The workplace is incredibly safer than it was 100 years ago. Workplace and wage laws are much more mature. There is welfare for the sick and the aged (to varying degrees depending on country). Apart from squabbling over the exact dollar rate for work, there isn't much in the way of big ticket items for unions to get solidarity over.

My own personal experience with unions:

    'I have a wage problem I need your help with'
    "You're only a part-time employee. We have to rate the full-time employees more, and we don't have the resources to help you, so no"
    'But I pay the same as anyone else. There is no discount for being a part-timer'
    "(crickets)"
So much for solidarity.

Re: Housing Plans in California & New York face resistance from construction unions

#30

Post by drifting »

cpncrunch wrote: post #3

Impossible to read without subscribing. Incognito doesnt work. Clicking on google search link doesnt work.

Here is a link to the full article: http://www.wsj.com/articles/construction-unions-stymie-low-i...

In the future, copy the URL and paste into new.google.com and click on that link to get the full article

Post reply on HN