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

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

m.pghcitypaper.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 448 posts

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

#171

Post by wdb »

tyri_kai_psomi wrote: post #128
moocowtruck wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

well, USPS has an IT union and I can tell you first hand it is no good for employees, the things you mentioned happening absolutely happen and the place is just a disaster

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…

Pension, more then two weeks holiday, and 9am-5pm workdays sounds like a normal working conditions for an employee?

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

#172

Post by burntoutfire »

wind0w wrote: post #78
corebit wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Whoa! Talk about an overtly racist post! How is this not flagged?!

Criticizing how white men use their whiteness to preserve their exclusive access to money and power isn't racist

Isn't any blanket (and negative) statement about any race racist?

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

#173

Post by scarejunba »

erikpukinskis wrote: post #23
asdfasgasdgasdg wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's actually not Google's responsibility. It's the government's. I mean, it would be a nice thing for Google to do, but Google is not law enforcement. It's important not to assign the responsibilities of the state to a private company, as that inevitably leads to disappointment. I'll also just point out that Google probably lacks a sufficient, just apparatus to evaluate the claims being made. I mean, USW claims th…

I do think it’s Google’s responsibility to ensure their suppliers are adhering to basic standards of decency, whatever Google thinks decency is. The government has nothing to do with that. I don’t think the government should be adjudicating virtue, nor do I think companies can say “I outsourced that part of my product, so it’s not my concern how it gets made!”

No, this is an anti-pattern that appears like a smart idea. The government is where the enforcement of workers' rights needs to happen. The problem with the "pay with your wallet" thing is that there are lots of unscrupulous companies without the public visibility that Google has and all you'll do is push this into the shadows.

Maintaining minimum worker rights is government responsibility because there is no incentive in any direction. It's just the job of government to maintain law.

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

#174

Post by anigbrowl »

ben_jones wrote: post #120
jahaja wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If we want positive change in our world we need respectful and rational discourse. Posts likes yours actively tear down discourse and makes worse the very problems you mention. This is a very ahistorical take. Tone policing and "moderation in discourse" has a strong connection to the will to maintain status quo. Radical discourse, direct action and even an unpleasant tone have however a rich history of change, both…

I agree and would point out that my comment does not contradict yours. Respectful and rational discourse doesn’t mean to sit idle while your talked over, rather it means you respect your enemies strengths and rationalize their weaknesses in order to take a position which best supports your cause.

What do you mean 'rationalize their weaknesses'? I ask because it sounds like you're propounding a 'lose-lose' strategy.

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

#175

Post by pgrote »

CydeWeys wrote: post #157
pgrote wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>One can be pro-organizing but not pro-union. Agree 100%. Im the United States most local and state ballots have measures on them generated by petition drives. Get X number of registered voters to sign a petition and it is on the ballot. I always signs these when the someone approaches me. I may not agree with the cause or be a proponent of the goal, but the group organizing should have the right to appear on the bal…

Few if any are trying to eliminate the ability to have ballot initiatives, whereas plenty of moneyed individuals are trying to eliminate unions. I don't think it's a fair comparison.

I think you may have taken my comment out of context. I was replying to the OP when they said:

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

My understanding is the OP Was looking at it through the lens of a worker.

My comparison was meant to say I support someone's initiative to have something put up for a vote, but that doesn't mean I will vote for it. I could have been plainer in the explanation.

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

#176

Post by stjohnswarts »

wind0w wrote: post #78
corebit wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Whoa! Talk about an overtly racist post! How is this not flagged?!

Criticizing how white men use their whiteness to preserve their exclusive access to money and power isn't racist

Your statement right there is racist as it assumes a general trait across all white men, not just the ones guilty of it. It's the same as saying all black men are bad fathers (because stereotype). Both are hideously racist statements.

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

#177

Post by stjohnswarts »

oh_sigh wrote: post #95
viburnum wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nordic social democracy isn’t magic, it’s just what you get when most workers are in a union.

Congo has about the same population as Norway. I wonder if you'd get the same results if most people were unionized there.

No but it would get somewhat better. You also need great education, a respect for science (rather than superstition), political stability, and good infrastructure. Right now that doesn't exist, but unionization could help it along. Fewer warlords would also help.

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

#178

Post by elihu »

telaelit wrote: post #37

We should all unionize IMHO

I agree with you. For what it's worth, I work at Intel in Oregon. I would be interested in joining a union if that were an option.

I suspect that tech industry work is sufficiently different from most other kinds of work that the optimal union might be somewhat different than unions that currently exist.

Some questions we would need to work out:

What do we want the union to advocate for? Pay and benefits are the usual ones, but what about cube/office size, cube wall height, noise levels, access to dual monitors, freedom to use any editor, 20% time to work on projects outside your usual scope of work, public credit for work, ability to open-source work, a ban on draconian intellectual property agreements, and so on...

How do we prevent the union from being co-opted by leadership that isn't representing the workers well, or is neglecting the needs/desires of some minority of members?

How do layoffs work? Job security through seniority doesn't seem good for productivity or morale, but if management can lay people off for arbitrary reasons then it can create excuses to lay people off for union organizing.

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

#179

Post by stjohnswarts »

robbyt wrote: post #58
ISL wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We have -- we are all citizens. If you're a citizen of the United States, here is the first sentence of the document that instantiates that union: We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establi…

Are H1B workers included in this union?

I have no problem with H1B visas in the union as long as everyone is working for the same entity, why wouldn't they be welcome. Unions are to be inclusive, not exclusive, there are strength in numbers. Sometimes it's the only way to face down the money grubbing people running a company.

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

#180

Post by stjohnswarts »

statusquoantefa wrote: post #26
adamnemecek wrote: post #2

It's funny how progressive everyone is until it impacts their bottom line.

It's funny how everybody covets more power and more money, employers and employees alike, and always want to wrap it all up in a facade of being the moral choice.

Unions are as much about fairness as "more money". People genuinely want better work conditions, better hours, and better benefits just as much as "more money".
Post reply on HN