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

Google attempted to shut down a unionization meeting in Zurich

vox.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 229 posts

Re: Google attempted to shut down a unionization meeting in Zurich

#51

Post by riffraff »

CydeWeys wrote: post #30
s3nnyy wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unions in Switzerland are not very common compared to France or Germany.

More than half of Swiss workers are covered by collective bargaining agreements. That's much higher than in the US at least; not sure about France/Germany.

Are the mechanics the same in Europe and the US?

For example, in Italy most people have a contract which follows the collective agreement obtained by the unions for that specific sector (i.e. commerce, textile worker, metal worker etc) even if people are not part of any union. If you are a member of the Union you may get some extra legal help or such, but not a different contract.

From what US people say it seems instead that members of a union live in a separate world.

Re: Google attempted to shut down a unionization meeting in Zurich

#52

Post by Porthos9K »

tdb7893 wrote: post #48
Porthos9K wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This should not be grayed, but HN is full of bootlickers.

My experience is that HN often aligns with more Libertarian ideologies in the comment section.

Real libertarians, or the "privatize tyranny" crowd?

Re: Google attempted to shut down a unionization meeting in Zurich

#53

Post by SomeOtherThrow »

Kalium wrote: post #28
SomeOldThrow wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> we already get better benefits than you can get anywhere else in the states. Wait until you hear how well the rich assholes that profit off your work live.

Wait until you find out how far the pay of those rich assholes goes when you spread it around! There are good arguments to be made for unionization. That some people make more - sometimes substantially more - isn't always one of them. Certainly trying to stoke anger might not always be the best of all available ways to win over people trying to be thoughtful.

> Wait until you find out how far the pay of those rich assholes goes when you spread it around!

Like by raising wages? How else would you spread it around?

> That some people make more - sometimes substantially more - isn't always one of them.

Read marx. Or chomsky.

Re: Google attempted to shut down a unionization meeting in Zurich

#54

Post by joshuamorton »

CydeWeys wrote: post #33
vowelless wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It will likely stifle my salary, and the salaries of a lot of high earning swes. Or not. Curious what others think.

Since when did unions stifle salaries? They generally get higher salaries for their employees, no? Isn't the typical complaint about union workers that they're "overpaid"?

The common complaint is that since unions (at least in a lot of classic union jobs) force pay based on tenure, its difficult or impossible for bright people to succeed and change things.

And I'd agree that such a style of union would be antithetical to a company like Google, but its also not the only kind of union.

Re: Google attempted to shut down a unionization meeting in Zurich

#55

Post by s3nnyy »

CydeWeys wrote: post #30
s3nnyy wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unions in Switzerland are not very common compared to France or Germany.

More than half of Swiss workers are covered by collective bargaining agreements. That's much higher than in the US at least; not sure about France/Germany.

That's sector dependent/doesn't exist in all sectors

Re: Google attempted to shut down a unionization meeting in Zurich

#56

Post by kodablah »

moate wrote: post #49
kodablah wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> That layoff was the best thing to happen to me. Shook me out of my cosy job, forced me into building my own consultancy, and taught me the power of solidarity. This last part sounds like an argument against unions. One wonders, had the commenter worked in an environment where layoffs/firings aren't worth it due to externalities (and therefore never really happen), whether they'd rethink.

Just trying to understand: you think that somehow unions make it EASIER to layoff/fire someone? That management would somehow assume it's easier/less costly to fire people when they know those people will have a lawyer review the terms of their termination? That management would be less inclined to attempt including illegal non-competes?

No, sorry, I was too succinct. I am saying externalities like unions make it HARDER. Therefore the commenter might never have been laid off in a heavily unionized employment situation. Not arguing explicitly for or against, just mentioning that in situations where it is difficult to layoff/fire employees, it is not always a good thing (peer complacency, bloat, etc). Those that have worked in those situations often wish the protections were fewer, which is why I wondered if the commenter would rethink.

Re: Google attempted to shut down a unionization meeting in Zurich

#57

Post by duxut_staglatz »

CydeWeys wrote: post #30
s3nnyy wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unions in Switzerland are not very common compared to France or Germany.

More than half of Swiss workers are covered by collective bargaining agreements. That's much higher than in the US at least; not sure about France/Germany.

If we look at union membership (which is different than being covered by collective bargaining agreements), the US (10%) has a lower union density than Switzerland (17%) and about the same than France (8% or 10%).

See https://stats.oecd.org/Index.aspx?DataSetCode=TUD

Re: Google attempted to shut down a unionization meeting in Zurich

#58

Post by vkou »

tdb7893 wrote: post #48
Porthos9K wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This should not be grayed, but HN is full of bootlickers.

My experience is that HN often aligns with more Libertarian ideologies in the comment section.

I can't take that claim too seriously, because a real Libertarian would welcome a free, and non-coercive association between employees as much as they welcome the free, and completely non-coercive association between an employee, and their employer... (I am, of course, not at all coerced to work under the conditions my employer sets upon me!)

But for some reason, many Libertarians have nothing but contempt for the former. It could be that the ideology has been a bit subverted...

Re: Google attempted to shut down a unionization meeting in Zurich

#59

Post by claudeganon »

Porthos9K wrote: post #52
tdb7893 wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My experience is that HN often aligns with more Libertarian ideologies in the comment section.

Real libertarians, or the "privatize tyranny" crowd?

I’ve seen people downvoted for highlighting that “libertarian” was a term invented in the context of anarchist and socialist struggle before being co-opted by the right, so I’m going to go with the latter...

Re: Google attempted to shut down a unionization meeting in Zurich

#60

Post by gfdgsgaagrhstrs »

Porthos9K wrote: post #52
tdb7893 wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My experience is that HN often aligns with more Libertarian ideologies in the comment section.

Real libertarians, or the "privatize tyranny" crowd?

> privatize tyranny

Unquestionably this.

Post reply on HN