GitHub tries to quell employee anger over its ICE contract • Hacker News Board

Re: GitHub tries to quell employee anger over its ICE contract

#201

Post by awinder » Thu, Oct 31, 2019, 9:52 PM UTC

BurningFrog wrote: post #168

If anyone thinks Github boycotting ICE will change anything of ICE's conduct, that to me is some kind of Delusions of Grandeur. The money involved are a tiny part of a forgotten section of their budget. If they don't think it will change anything, we can agree that this boycott is purely symbolic and will accomplish nothing.

Nowhere in the article is the viewpoint that they’re going to change ICEs conduct mentioned. Inventing opposing viewpoints is one of the lowest rhetorical devices, and I really wish people would post with more care around here.

As for “only being symbolic”, no, it wouldn’t. It would allow workers to be in an environment where their work supports their values. A lot of these workers are going to leave the org to go work for a company that doesn’t so conflict with their values, as is absolutely their prerogative in a free labor market. This is actually a mature way to let GitHub understand the full costs of their actions, so that they can make an informed decision. There’s literally no problem here, this is a functioning labor dynamic.

Re: GitHub tries to quell employee anger over its ICE contract

#202

Post by killface » Thu, Oct 31, 2019, 9:53 PM UTC

CydeWeys wrote: post #55

godzillabrennus wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unions have historically tended to reward seniority over merit. Tech workers should work to solve that if they organize. I think a lot of problems caused by unions trace back to that. Unions should come back to help recreate the middle class.

It's not clear to me why tech unions would do this. People keep bringing this up, but there's no reason tech unions would ever have to be structured in this particular manner. Given that, I don't find it a compelling argument against unionization in our sector. Most importantly, of all the people who are working on organizing the tech sector, to my knowledge none of them are trying to implement tenure-based seniority…

[flagged]

Re: GitHub tries to quell employee anger over its ICE contract

#203

Post by undersuit » Thu, Oct 31, 2019, 9:54 PM UTC

mehrdadn wrote: post #175

kick wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

ICE didn't exist until 2003, and isn't necessarily needed.

Huh? The Programs division [of INS] was responsible for handling all the functions involved with enforcement and examinations, including the arrest, detaining, and deportation of illegal immigrants as well as controlling illegal and legal entry. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_and_Naturalization...

Exactly. ICE isn't needed.

Re: GitHub tries to quell employee anger over its ICE contract

#204

Post by 55555 » Thu, Oct 31, 2019, 9:54 PM UTC

olliej wrote: post #160

hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Every programming job I’ve ever had in the U.S. was for a company that was staffed by at least 90% foreigners. Where the hell are you working? I'm going to call bullshit, because it's really not that easy to get a work visa in the US. You're saying 90% of your colleagues weren't US citizens?

I suspect they’re saying anyone who looks/sounds different must be foreign.

There is a rule about inferring the most charitable interpretation IIRC.

Re: GitHub tries to quell employee anger over its ICE contract

#205

Post by dragonwriter » Thu, Oct 31, 2019, 9:54 PM UTC

pjc50 wrote: post #196

ratsmack wrote: post #2

It seems that these kinds of demands are becoming more common. Is it because conflict resolution is becoming a dying art, is it because people don't rise to the level of maturity of past times? I just find it to be confusing. Non PW link: https://archive.ph/IkYQ3

> conflict resolution is becoming a dying art Conflict escalation is a deliberate choice by those in charge. Such as ICE.

> Conflict escalation is a deliberate choice by those in charge. Such as ICE.

To be fair, the decision on a policy of conflict escalation in ICE’s domain was, quite overtly, made several steps above the head of ICE in the chain of command.

Re: GitHub tries to quell employee anger over its ICE contract

#206

Post by madhadron » Thu, Oct 31, 2019, 9:55 PM UTC

zozbot234 wrote: post #81

CydeWeys wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What exactly does Hong Kong nationalism (which is pro-democracy) have to do with White nationalism in the US (which is pro-racism)?

Hong Kong nationalism is not pro-democracy. The Chinese Government supports holding elections for local government officials, including in Hong Kong. Given that, the anti-Chinese attitudes we're seeing there are quite unproductive.

Elections? There hasn't been a democratic election in China since 1912.

Re: GitHub tries to quell employee anger over its ICE contract

#207

Post by malvosenior » Thu, Oct 31, 2019, 9:55 PM UTC

noelsusman wrote: post #183

ratsmack wrote: post #2

It seems that these kinds of demands are becoming more common. Is it because conflict resolution is becoming a dying art, is it because people don't rise to the level of maturity of past times? I just find it to be confusing. Non PW link: https://archive.ph/IkYQ3

One man's maturity of past times is another man's unwillingness to confront injustice in society. But on a broader note, I think a lot of it can be traced to the current president. He seems to go out of his way to do things that stir up deep anger in his opponents. There's a reason why millions of people hit the streets the day after his inauguration to register their dissatisfaction with the fact that he's president…

The way a lot of non tech employees vented their anger was by electing Trump. Just as ICE is an injustice to you, Trump's targets (corrupt media, lax immigration enforcement...) are seen as injustices by his supporters.

He is not the cause but the proposed solution to existing injustices. You may not agree he's a good one but that's how his supporters see him.

Re: GitHub tries to quell employee anger over its ICE contract

#208

Post by V-eHGsd_ » Thu, Oct 31, 2019, 9:56 PM UTC

rhacker wrote: post #190

sneak wrote: post #171

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No person is illegal.

Colloquialism

it's a dog-whistle

Re: GitHub tries to quell employee anger over its ICE contract

#209

Post by ryanbrunner » Thu, Oct 31, 2019, 9:56 PM UTC

CydeWeys wrote: post #156

ratsmack wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just sitting here thinking about it, I can't remember anything specific like this outside of the tech industry... I may be wrong though.

You're not considering the entire history of the labor movement in the United States, then. There were massive protests, literal battles, and many died, all to bring about better working conditions, shorter workweeks, higher pay, etc., not just for those inside those companies but across the entire economy. Workers fighting for the rights of themselves and others isn't a new thing. Hell, it even happened in the era o…

Genuine question, but are there many examples from the labour movement where there were labour actions directed at the company's general business practices rather than the rights of the workers working in those companies? It feels like the obvious difference here is that GitHub employees aren't arguing for their own rights so much as the rights of people outside of GitHub.

Re: GitHub tries to quell employee anger over its ICE contract

#210

Post by SolarNet » Thu, Oct 31, 2019, 9:56 PM UTC

fiter wrote: post #131

CydeWeys wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's very weird to conflate employees of tech companies caring more about other people's rights with a loss of "the maturity of past times". It wasn't the maturity of past times, it was the status quo of not really caring about anyone else's rights at all. The civil rights movement was only half a century ago!

The maturity could be the ability to compartmentalize. Whether that's a good thing is up for debate. Should we keep religion out of politics? Should we keep politics out of work? I doubt there are any clear answers.

> Should we keep religion out of politics? Should we keep politics out of work? I doubt there are any clear answers.

Sure we should probably keep politics out of work.

Human rights abuses are not politics though.

We can disagree on corporate regulation, taxes, transportation policy, zoning laws, bike lanes whatever. Hell we can disagree on gun control, abortion, climate change, whether the earth is flat or round.

But if there is a government organization within our control (e.g. we vote for the people who vote on controlling it) that is killing people, is torturing people (raping thousands of kids), is oppressing reporting on it, that's not politics any more.