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

Organizers have unionized 5,000 contract workers at Apple, Facebook, Yahoo

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 450 posts

Re: Organizers have unionized 5,000 contract workers at Apple, Facebook, Yahoo

#131

Post by jules »

thephyber wrote: post #125
jules wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

An unregulated market doesn't mean that you can shoot people. Each transaction must be voluntary. Capitalism is not the same as anarchy.

> An unregulated market has never existed in the history of modern civilization for more than 5 minutes. Ironically for your statement, the most unregulated markets are the most violent as they only occur after one government falls before institutions create themselves to deal with the chaotic state of unorganized and fearful humans. It will be interesting to see if the digital economy brings with it any self-created…

You are mixing up capitalism with anarchy and chaos. Capitalism requires the rule of law and property rights. An unregulated market is one where any voluntary transaction can take place and no involuntary transaction takes place. It is not a voluntary transaction if I put a gun to your head and tell you to hand over your wallet, and a "market" in which that is allowed is not even a market. It is illegal for me to pay you to deliver a letter to another house. That's not a free market either, because the transaction was mutually voluntary but it is disallowed.

Re: Organizers have unionized 5,000 contract workers at Apple, Facebook, Yahoo

#132

Post by tptacek »

mseebach wrote: post #129
tptacek wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have effectively no college, and went to work right after high school. Whatever labor organization tech workers come up with doesn't have to be the AFL-CIO and it doesn't have to be the AMA. It can just take the best attributes from all those organizations. Or it can start more modestly! Maybe tech workers will just come up with two or three things --- say, late exercise on options and better IP clauses --- and jus…

So that's a nice optimistic vision, and if I had any faith we could keep it to that, I'd be for it. My vision includes scope creep and lots of greedy ambitious good-at-politics less-good-at-actually-doing-work types grabbing the show once it's successful. Most organisations meaningfully described as unions has a non-trivial element of excluding people from the trade in one way or another. I will never be a part of an…

I wouldn't either. Luckily, since organization hasn't really happened yet, if we get involved now we can make that a principle for the field. Tech is unique among professions in how open it is to people that aren't the product of an academic feeder assembly. That's something I think is worth preserving about the industry, and something a labor organization should help preserve.

Don't assume that a disorganized workforce will keep that from happening. Look at pretty much all cybersecurity regulation from the last 10 years to see what could happen if labor rolls over and lets it: professional certification, run by commercial firms that specialize in selling themselves as efficient authorities.

Re: Organizers have unionized 5,000 contract workers at Apple, Facebook, Yahoo

#133

Post by chimeracoder »

tptacek wrote: post #120
chimeracoder wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It's deeply misleading to suggest that a group of employees availing themselves of the protections of the NLRA are putting themselves on a slippery slope to becoming the Teamsters. That's not what I said. What I said: It's misleading to suggest that professional associations require the NLRA to operate.

What you appear to be arguing is that it would be better for tech workers if they could be fired for organizing.

> What you appear to be arguing is that it would be better for tech workers if they could be fired for organizing.

I've done my best to explain why the NLRA and "labor unions" (as asked in the original question) are completely orthogonal to professional associations (which you mentioned in your reply). I've explained why the rights that the NLRA grants are relevant to labor unions, but are different from the ones that professional associations require and use in their operations. I've explained why bringing up professional associations in a thread specifically about labor unions is a red herring. I've mentioned some of the history, and I've proposed a thought experiment to try and illustrate this difference better.

If after all of that, you really, genuinely think the best summary of what I've said is "it would be better for tech workers if they could be fired for organizing," then I don't know what to say. That's an unbelievably uncharitable way to twist the things I've said in good faith.

Re: Organizers have unionized 5,000 contract workers at Apple, Facebook, Yahoo

#134

Post by tptacek »

chimeracoder wrote: post #133
tptacek wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What you appear to be arguing is that it would be better for tech workers if they could be fired for organizing.

> What you appear to be arguing is that it would be better for tech workers if they could be fired for organizing. I've done my best to explain why the NLRA and "labor unions" (as asked in the original question) are completely orthogonal to professional associations (which you mentioned in your reply). I've explained why the rights that the NLRA grants are relevant to labor unions, but are different from the ones tha…

If you would stop citing the NLRA and constrain your comments to just unions, we wouldn't have an argument. But you keep implying that the NLRA means unions, and in fact the NLRA is the law that prevents companies from firing their employees for any kind of organizing. It does other things, but you don't have to engage with those other things to get the protection I'm talking about.

So when you cite the NLRA as a bad thing, you are literally making the argument I just suggested you were.

Re: Organizers have unionized 5,000 contract workers at Apple, Facebook, Yahoo

#135

Post by pktgen »

tptacek wrote: post #60

If the drivers and cafeteria workers at tech companies can organize, so can the developers. Unlike the developers, the drivers tend to be financially insecure. In this economy, they're eminently replaceable. What they do is outside the core competency of their employers. You'd think they'd have almost no leverage. And yet, in the space of just a few years, they've managed to secure higher wages and health benefits --…

> You can, if you do it right, walk off your job and refuse to come back, and if you're disciplined for doing so, sue your employer.

An employee's recourse for illegal retaliation is even easier than you say. You file a charge with the NLRB (which you don't need a lawyer for) and let the federal government investigate and litigate.

> Here's a thing that a lot of people on Hacker News don't know --- and I think this is a genuine case of something that the ownership class in the American economy doesn't want you to know: [snipped remaining]

I couldn't agree more. Thank you for this post and your constant efforts to inform workers of their federally-protected rights under the NLRA.

Re: Organizers have unionized 5,000 contract workers at Apple, Facebook, Yahoo

#136

Post by Animats »

wyldfire wrote: post #69
tptacek wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Since the capital and ownership sectors of our economy are all trained to operate businesses rationally and to not leave value on the table, it seems pretty clear that anything that labor doesn't take will be traded away. To me, in that light, neither the "depredations" of owners and investors nor the "coercion" of labor unions is really a problem; it's just the natural give and take of the market at work. The real p…

> The real problem is the late 20th century stigma labor organization has acquired. I think the stigma is well-deserved. Indeed they are rife with corruption and often create very odd incentives. Unfortunately unions suffer the same fate as other "invisible" benefits: everyone takes them for granted and doesn't recognize their value. People focus on the drawbacks and it's much easier to convince them that we're all b…

Unfortunately unions suffer the same fate as other "invisible" benefits: everyone takes them for granted and doesn't recognize their value.

Unions - the folks who brought you the weekend. (That's a button and bumper sticker.) Also the 8-hour day and the 40-hour week, which the US somehow lost.

Re: Organizers have unionized 5,000 contract workers at Apple, Facebook, Yahoo

#137

Post by chimeracoder »

_bfhp wrote: post #128
apsec112 wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Being a constituent doesn't necessarily mean anything. Eg., Eric Garner was a constituent of New York City. NYC is democratically governed, and he had an equal right to vote. It didn't help him very much.

Being a constituent of X (in this context) means means X is expected to advocate for you. Thus Eric Garner wasn't a constituent of NYC, he was a constituent of his representatives, who may or may not have done a good job advocating for the safety of those interviewed or detained by the police. I don't see how constituency doesn't help here, because now we can hold reps responsible for advocating for better protection…

> I don't see how constituency doesn't help here, because now we can hold reps responsible for advocating for better protection,

New York politics (both city and state) are structured in a way that is unbelievably stable (to the status quo) and therefore all-but-impossible to use as a vehicle to effect meaningful change, even to a degree that's possible in other cities and states.

In the case of Eric Garner, yes, it's true that (for example) the judge that ruled against releasing the records surrounding his death (effectively killing any chance at a lawsuit to force change) was up for re-election last year. However, because he has the support of the party machine in his district, the party chose not to run any other candidates against him[0][1]. Party affiliation laws make it all-but-impossible for more than one party to compete in any given district[2], and actually impossible for a third party to compete[3]. As a result, there was no reasonable way he could be unseated, even if literally every other person in the county (had refused to support him.

Changing any of these laws to allow more influence from constituents requires the unanimous approval of the three ranking members of the government, who are also the leaders of the party, which means that they'd essentially have to actively give up their own power. Unsurprisingly, that hasn't happened.

If you want to demonstrate that a democracy causes those in power to listen to their constituents, there is hardly a worse example than New York.

[0] In New York, this is actually a prerogative of the party, believe it or not.

[1] Technically, they ran eight candidates against him, but there were nine positions available, so all were guaranteed victory.

[2] Think of it like Comcast and Time Warner - they "compete" with each other by divvying up territory that they each have a monopoly over. That's how New York state operates - the Republican and Democratic parties each "own" territory and have a gentleman's agreement not to compete too seriously in the others' turf.

[3] The only way third parties can gain influence in New York is to cross-endorse a candidate from one of the major party lines. For example, the Working Families Party usually cross-endorses the Democratic candidate.

Re: Organizers have unionized 5,000 contract workers at Apple, Facebook, Yahoo

#138

Post by tedunangst »

ZeroGravitas wrote: post #130
tedunangst wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, the local bus drivers union isn't held in such high regard either, so maybe not the best example. And I seem to recall Verizon experiencing a sudden spike in equipment failure right around the time their telecom union went on strike. (Happy to concede there are unions people like, but if that's your best effort at naming two good ones, I think the problem is worse than you're acknowledging.)

How would you rank sabotage of Verizon equipment by their employees against, say, a coal company transferring all their pension and health liabilities into new company and then letting it go bust, while they retain all the profit making parts? "Some will rob you with a six-gun, And some with a fountain pen. " -- Woody Guthrie "Pretty Boy Floyd"

Did the coal union know the pension was underfunded?

Re: Organizers have unionized 5,000 contract workers at Apple, Facebook, Yahoo

#139

Post by ZeroGravitas »

tedunangst wrote: post #138
ZeroGravitas wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How would you rank sabotage of Verizon equipment by their employees against, say, a coal company transferring all their pension and health liabilities into new company and then letting it go bust, while they retain all the profit making parts? "Some will rob you with a six-gun, And some with a fountain pen. " -- Woody Guthrie "Pretty Boy Floyd"

Did the coal union know the pension was underfunded?

Was it underfunded before the split?

Re: Organizers have unionized 5,000 contract workers at Apple, Facebook, Yahoo

#140

Post by chimeracoder »

tptacek wrote: post #134
chimeracoder wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What you appear to be arguing is that it would be better for tech workers if they could be fired for organizing. I've done my best to explain why the NLRA and "labor unions" (as asked in the original question) are completely orthogonal to professional associations (which you mentioned in your reply). I've explained why the rights that the NLRA grants are relevant to labor unions, but are different from the ones tha…

If you would stop citing the NLRA and constrain your comments to just unions, we wouldn't have an argument. But you keep implying that the NLRA means unions, and in fact the NLRA is the law that prevents companies from firing their employees for any kind of organizing. It does other things, but you don't have to engage with those other things to get the protection I'm talking about. So when you cite the NLRA as a bad…

> So when you cite the NLRA as a bad thing, you are literally making the argument I just suggested you were.

I never once cited the NLRA as "a bad thing".

Post reply on HN