Anti-union activity is heating up ahead of Google contractor's vote to unionize • Hacker News Board

Re: Anti-union activity is heating up ahead of Google contractor's vote to unionize

#141

Post by OldFatCactus » Sat, Sep 21, 2019, 6:02 PM UTC

mszcz wrote: post #138

tyri_kai_psomi wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We have a contract with the USPS IT department and let me tell you, it is absolutely awesome for their employees. They do about half the work we do in twice the amount of time, get paid more, have more holidays (2 weeks + every single federal holiday) and have pensions. Every worker there clocks in at 9, and clocks out at exactly 5, not a single minute past. If you want a meeting or them to get you something, it need…

I don't know if I'd like to work in a place like that. Wouldn't you get lazy after a couple of years? Doesn't this create incentives to deliberately work more slowly? After a couple of more years like that wouldn't you get used to not doing much and then get slaughtered when inevitable change came around? My friend referred to this kind of situation as "being in an ass" ;) Yeah, from time to time there's a smell but…

You would get lazy having a 40 hour work week and 2 weeks paid vacation?

Re: Anti-union activity is heating up ahead of Google contractor's vote to unionize

#142

Post by CydeWeys » Sat, Sep 21, 2019, 6:04 PM UTC

AlexTWithBeard wrote: post #124

geofft wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I heard anti-union rhetoric in college when people were wondering why it cost so much to set up A/V in a lecture hall. If you haven't heard any, I'm not sure whether to tell you that you've lived a sheltered life or you've so internalized the anti-union rhetoric (like your comment, right here! ) that it doesn't register when you hear it. Also, I'm very confused about your "liberal areas" comment. My impression as a r…

subway doesn't have massive funding If I remember correctly, NYC Subway budget is about 10bn. London tube is about 2bn. It's not a money problem.

Can you cite your sources? I don't think you're comparing like to like.

These costs also need to be normalized for ridership figures (NYC has higher ridership). And don't forget that most of the figures you're going to see for NYC are for the entire MTA, which runs a lot more than just the subway.

And it's important to distinguish the cost per ride vs the subsidy per ride. Fare revenue shouldn't count "against" a transit system.

For some figures, the total budget of the London Underground is £10.3B (inclusive of fares): http://content.tfl.gov.uk/tfl-budget-2019-20.pdf [pg 10]

The total budget of the MTA (inclusive of fares) is $16.3B: http://web.mta.info/news/pdf/MTA-2019-Prelim-Budget-July-Fin... [pg 14]

Normalize those figures to dollar amounts and account for ridership, and it appears that the MTA is cheaper per ride than TfL.

Re: Anti-union activity is heating up ahead of Google contractor's vote to unionize

#143

Post by SomeOldThrow » Sat, Sep 21, 2019, 6:04 PM UTC

LeoPanthera wrote: post #131

darawk wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It confirms that yes, this union will have an effect, and not in management's favor. Like "Clearly we're onto something here if they oppose it this much." I think it's important to note here that "bad for management" doesn't necessarily mean "good for employees". It is possible that unions are bad for both, by gumming up the negotiating process, and insulating low performing employees at the expense of high perform…

> I think it's important to note here that "bad for management" doesn't necessarily mean "good for employees". It is possible that unions are bad for both It's become clear in the past few years that a lot of people care less about winning than they do about their "enemies" losing. To them, it doesn't matter if you hurt yourself, as long as you hurt the people who disagree with you as well.

What are you referring to?

Re: Anti-union activity is heating up ahead of Google contractor's vote to unionize

#144

Post by staticautomatic » Sat, Sep 21, 2019, 6:05 PM UTC

claudeganon wrote: post #52

staticautomatic wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One can be pro-organizing but not pro-union.

Not sure how you square those two. Could you elaborate? Any less durable form of organizing seems likely to have its work undone by the very well-organized and durable cadre of owners/management

To characterize unions-- especially contemporary unions in the United States-- as limited strictly to collective action functions, is factually incomplete and wrong. That unions perform other functions and aim to protect workers in other ways beyond collective action should be a totally uncontroversial statement.

Although unions proximately came into existence for the purpose of taking collective action against oppressive employers, it's equally true, and at least as important, to understand that they came into existence in order to fill a regulatory vacuum in labor law.

This should prompt some important questions:

1. Should the job of protecting workers from employers properly belong to any entity other than the government?

2. Is filling the regulatory vacuum with regulation theoretically or empirically insufficient to protect workers?

3. Are unions the only means of collective action?

4. Are the functions that unions serve beyond coordinating collective action actually necessary in order to protect workers? Would they still be necessary even if labor law was sufficiently well regulated?

My position is this: We should dramatically expand and increase labor regulation and enforcement actions, and we should allow employees to take collective action. Then we should ask ourselves whether unions are still necessary.

Re: Anti-union activity is heating up ahead of Google contractor's vote to unionize

#145

Post by rtempaccount1 » Sat, Sep 21, 2019, 6:06 PM UTC

pcnix wrote: post #29

tyingq wrote: post #4

"HCL employee and union organizer Ben Gwin says HCL workers make between $30,000-60,000 a year, and it varies widely." That's really low. I wonder what kind of work they do for Google.

For Indian developers that's above average pay, and HCL has a heavy Indian presence. Prices for developers outside of the US and Europe are actually quite low, and part of the reason is the low costs in other countries that let companies get away with paying less, and another part is that there's a lot of engineers available. Even if the average engineer is not as good, there's so many engineers in India that compani…

I'd say it's mainly just the US, from my experience (UK outside of london) developer salaries in Europe are much lower than the US.

For one example https://www.payscale.com/research/UK/Job=Software_Developer/...

Re: Anti-union activity is heating up ahead of Google contractor's vote to unionize

#146

Post by ThrowawayR2 » Sat, Sep 21, 2019, 6:07 PM UTC

claudeganon wrote: post #34

rdiddly wrote: post #28

I always wonder about these ham-handed anti-union efforts. I assume they must work to some degree, or they wouldn't do it. But it seems like the sudden escalation of anti-union arguments would only end up working in favor of the union. Because it betrays how against it they are. It confirms that yes, this union will have an effect, and not in management's favor. Like "Clearly we're onto something here if they oppose…

I think it has to be framed against the baseline of pervasive anti-union ideology in the US. When people have been inculcated all their lives with the idea that labor organizing is bad, they’re all just temporarily embarrassed corporate execs, it doesn’t take too much to push them back towards this baseline. Or at least enough to quash the union.

> When people have been inculcated all their lives with the idea that labor organizing is bad, they’re all just temporarily embarrassed corporate execs, it doesn’t take too much to push them back towards this baseline.

Okay, everyone, think carefully about what the trite "temporarily embarrassed millionaires" quote implies. The underlying meaning is "These people are too ignorant/foolish/some other pejorative to recognize that they are not, in fact, 'temporarily embarrassed millionaires', LOL." It also has a implication of "I, however, do recognize this because I am wiser/smarter/etc. than them and I know what's good for them better than they do themselves."

If the people who repeat these kinds of things think that ordinary folk are not bright enough to pick up on these subtexts and resent the hell out of them for it, maybe they are not a tenth as smart as they think they are. Maybe it's time to stop parroting Wright's stupid quote and stop looking down on these people if you all actually want to, like, win elections or something.

Re: Anti-union activity is heating up ahead of Google contractor's vote to unionize

#147

Post by geofft » Sat, Sep 21, 2019, 6:07 PM UTC

AlexTWithBeard wrote: post #124

geofft wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I heard anti-union rhetoric in college when people were wondering why it cost so much to set up A/V in a lecture hall. If you haven't heard any, I'm not sure whether to tell you that you've lived a sheltered life or you've so internalized the anti-union rhetoric (like your comment, right here! ) that it doesn't register when you hear it. Also, I'm very confused about your "liberal areas" comment. My impression as a r…

subway doesn't have massive funding If I remember correctly, NYC Subway budget is about 10bn. London tube is about 2bn. It's not a money problem.

1. That doesn't seem right to me? http://web.mta.info/news/pdf/MTA-2019-Prelim-Budget-July-Fin... says the MTA budget is $16.6B, of which $8.7B is to NYCT (subway + bus + Staten Island Railroad). http://content.tfl.gov.uk/transport-for-london-budget-2018-1... says the TfL budget is £9.8B (about $12.2B), of which the Underground alone has a budget of £2.5B (about $3.1B), buses are almost as much, and then there's the Overground and a few others. I don't think the distinction in budget is anywhere near 5 to 1.

2. My argument is not so much whether it has massive funding or not, my argument is that riders have the impression that it has insufficient funding - i.e., riders do not have the impression that the problem with the subway is union salaries and benefits. I'm (obviously) happy to get into transit geekery, but this discussion is about whether people have a positive or negative view of unions.

Re: Anti-union activity is heating up ahead of Google contractor's vote to unionize

#148

Post by SomeOldThrow » Sat, Sep 21, 2019, 6:08 PM UTC

mszcz wrote: post #138

tyri_kai_psomi wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We have a contract with the USPS IT department and let me tell you, it is absolutely awesome for their employees. They do about half the work we do in twice the amount of time, get paid more, have more holidays (2 weeks + every single federal holiday) and have pensions. Every worker there clocks in at 9, and clocks out at exactly 5, not a single minute past. If you want a meeting or them to get you something, it need…

I don't know if I'd like to work in a place like that. Wouldn't you get lazy after a couple of years? Doesn't this create incentives to deliberately work more slowly? After a couple of more years like that wouldn't you get used to not doing much and then get slaughtered when inevitable change came around? My friend referred to this kind of situation as "being in an ass" ;) Yeah, from time to time there's a smell but…

Idk about you, but I don’t work hard out of fear of losing my job. I do it for the respect of my coworkers more than anything. It’s totally viable to be lazy in a non-union job too.

Re: Anti-union activity is heating up ahead of Google contractor's vote to unionize

#149

Post by stjohnswarts » Sat, Sep 21, 2019, 6:09 PM UTC

darawk wrote: post #112

rdiddly wrote: post #28

I always wonder about these ham-handed anti-union efforts. I assume they must work to some degree, or they wouldn't do it. But it seems like the sudden escalation of anti-union arguments would only end up working in favor of the union. Because it betrays how against it they are. It confirms that yes, this union will have an effect, and not in management's favor. Like "Clearly we're onto something here if they oppose…

> It confirms that yes, this union will have an effect, and not in management's favor. Like "Clearly we're onto something here if they oppose it this much." I think it's important to note here that "bad for management" doesn't necessarily mean "good for employees". It is possible that unions are bad for both, by gumming up the negotiating process, and insulating low performing employees at the expense of high perform…

On average unions work better for the most people. People on the upper end will not stop contributing or trying, people on the lower end don't matter much anyway. It's the middle that provides most of the advancement.

Re: Anti-union activity is heating up ahead of Google contractor's vote to unionize

#150

Post by anigbrowl » Sat, Sep 21, 2019, 6:10 PM UTC

ben_jones wrote: post #119

revscat wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

The very country we (I’m assuming you’re American apologies if not) are sitting in was founded by a group of, admittedly rich old white men, coming together and convincing their oppositions to not just go to war against the greatest power of their time, but afterwards to come together as a single unified country through a large number of compromises. You were quick to list the handful of dictators and “strongmen” you…

This seems like a self-defeating argument - why didn't the American revolutionaries just hug it out with King George? You take the fact of their going to war as a given, like the weather, then turn around and pour scorn on grandparent posters' firm opposition to autocracy and level of knowledge ('the handful of dictators and “strongmen” you know off hand').

You seem to be characterizing ideologies as fight everything out vs talk everything out, and then saying that centrism is the 'muck in the middle' where compromises are brokered. Why, then would you invalidate the whole concept of opposition and dismiss them as ignorant?