Housing Plans in California & New York face resistance from construction unions • Hacker News Board

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

#31

Post by johnm1019 » Mon, Aug 29, 2016, 6:53 AM UTC

bjt wrote: post #22

jseliger wrote: post #12

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. 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…

Unless it's Detroit. Or Puerto Rico.... or....?

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

#32

Post by icantdrive55 » Mon, Aug 29, 2016, 7:11 AM UTC

hueving wrote: post #28

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…

Off the top of my head, try being a non-union Electrician, Plumber, etc. in San Francisco for a day.

At the end of that day, you will drop to your knees, and thank god for those lefty unions. At the end of a few years, you just might be able to afford a house.

Actually San Francisco has a lot of union jobs, and they arn't moving to China.

Personally, I think people in tech will look back, and wish they had some Union protection. It's the one profession I'm shocked hasen't completely moved overseas.

What's the better alternative? America is better now because got rid of a lot of unions? Yes--a lot of products are made where your boss can get maximum ROI. They are made overseas for a lot of reasons, including lax laws concerning every aspect of that widget. Employee health/happiness/economic viability--who cares. Enviornment--who cares. Ability to pay taxes--who cares. Who cares as long as it's cheaper. Sometimes the cheapest is not the best for society as a whole?

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

#33

Post by emp_zealoth » Mon, Aug 29, 2016, 7:14 AM UTC

johnm1019 wrote: post #31

bjt wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

Unless it's Detroit. Or Puerto Rico.... or....?

I suggest you watch John Oliver piece on Puerto Rico.

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

#34

Post by briandear » Mon, Aug 29, 2016, 7:25 AM UTC

bjt wrote: post #22

jseliger wrote: post #12

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. 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…

That's exactly correct. Public unions aren't as easily accountable to the market. The incentives are disaligned. While private union incentives are generally aligned with business except in more extreme cases such as subsidized industries.

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

#35

Post by pastProlog » Mon, Aug 29, 2016, 7:56 AM UTC

hueving wrote: post #28

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…

Can you name some of the advancements that heirs who have never worked a day in their lives have brought in the US over the last 10-20 years? Who live off the labor of those of us who do work, the labor time of which they expropriate with their dividends and profits?

The heirs, the parasites who live off the labor of those of us who do work are the ones who have to explain what good their parasitism is doing in this day and age. We who work and create wealth and who organize ourselves don't have to justify our existence to these parasites and their myrmidons. They need us, we don't need them.

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

#36

Post by atemerev » Mon, Aug 29, 2016, 7:59 AM UTC

If they continue to be uncooperative, just show them this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZnTQMzDvTgc

I'd suggest this will improve our (i.e. demand-side) negotiation chances.

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

#37

Post by ptaipale » Mon, Aug 29, 2016, 9:19 AM UTC

techdragon wrote: post #19

toomuchtodo wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe its because the public looks down upon unions that the middle class is slowly sliding into destitution? [1] [2] I'm definitely not a fan of unions, but besides the movement to push minimum wage up to $15/hr across the country, I don't see any organized groups continuing to push the salary threshold at which overtime pay is required, reducing the number of hours in a work week (which is f___ing insane we're stil…

The 40 hour work week isn't a productivity related number... It's a cultural construction born from early 20th century union political efforts. For instance in Denmark, the work week is typically 32 hours and has been this way for decades... Works fine for them... Not sure how well it would work in a culture like America where working as hard as possible is considered a good thing... Regardless of how stupidly obviou…

37, not 32.

http://www.eurofound.europa.eu/observatories/eurwork/compara...

There are particularly many part-time workers in Denmark, and flexibility of labour market is high (including close to zero protection from layoffs), and this has resulted in Danes working fewer hours per worker than other Western nations (1490 hours per year per employee on the average) but on the other hand the labour marker participation rate is very high, so Danes work more hours per capita than any Western nation.

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

#38

Post by bogomipz » Mon, Aug 29, 2016, 10:26 AM UTC

icantdrive55 wrote: post #32

hueving wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"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…

Off the top of my head, try being a non-union Electrician, Plumber, etc. in San Francisco for a day. At the end of that day, you will drop to your knees, and thank god for those lefty unions. At the end of a few years, you just might be able to afford a house. Actually San Francisco has a lot of union jobs, and they arn't moving to China. Personally, I think people in tech will look back, and wish they had some Union…

As far as the union jobs you described, its not actually possible to outsource manual on-site performed labor to overseas. Is that really an accomplishment of unions?

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

#39

Post by fennecfoxen » Mon, Aug 29, 2016, 10:32 AM UTC

techdragon wrote: post #19

toomuchtodo wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe its because the public looks down upon unions that the middle class is slowly sliding into destitution? [1] [2] I'm definitely not a fan of unions, but besides the movement to push minimum wage up to $15/hr across the country, I don't see any organized groups continuing to push the salary threshold at which overtime pay is required, reducing the number of hours in a work week (which is f___ing insane we're stil…

The 40 hour work week isn't a productivity related number... It's a cultural construction born from early 20th century union political efforts. For instance in Denmark, the work week is typically 32 hours and has been this way for decades... Works fine for them... Not sure how well it would work in a culture like America where working as hard as possible is considered a good thing... Regardless of how stupidly obviou…

> The 40 hour work week ... [is] a cultural construction born from early 20th century union political efforts.

This is unabashed union propaganda.

Which isn't to say that unions weren't involved, but there were plenty of other factors involved. I refer you to work such as The Shortening of the American Work Week: An economic and historical analysis of its context, causes, and consequences (Whaples, 1990) which place the shift in a broader context of "wages, gender, ethnicity, religion, age, urbanization, unionization, and legislation" issues, to say nothing of "industrial structure and technology".

One should treat it like the pronouncement that Al Gore created the internet: definitely give the unions some credit, while taking their self-serving praise with a few grains of salt.

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

#40

Post by bradleyjg » Mon, Aug 29, 2016, 10:54 AM UTC

I don't know anything about the California controversy and I certainly don't think union workers should mandated on new construction in NYC, but I was glad that tax deal died in Albany. It was a terrible program.

Under it billions of dollars of tax revenue over decades which otherwise would have been owed by extremely wealthy people often on their third or fourth home was forgiven and in exchange a few hundred affordable apartments in some of the most expensive neighborhood were handed out to lucky lottery winners. It was about the least efficient affordable housing program imaginable.

A much much better idea would have been to collect the full owed property taxes on the new buildings for billionaires going up in Manhattan and use the money to do more good for many more people. Mostly in the outer boros where the dollar goes further.