Thousands of Google’s cafeteria workers have unionized • Hacker News Board

Re: Thousands of Google’s cafeteria workers have unionized

#61

Post by reaperducer » Tue, Dec 31, 2019, 7:29 PM UTC

jedimastert wrote: post #59

reaperducer wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

they need something like a guild with membership fees and staff lawyers that would sue the state for allowing binding arbitration and non compete agreements Serious question: How is this kind of a guild different from a union in your view?

Apparently guilds are for independent contractors and unions are for employees. A developer guild would be for freelance devs and the like

Ah. Thanks for the clarification. All I could piece together in my mind were the medieval guilds of Belgium. But I guess this isn't that far removed.

Re: Thousands of Google’s cafeteria workers have unionized

#62

Post by tehjoker » Tue, Dec 31, 2019, 7:29 PM UTC

dominotw wrote: post #5

ppl also talk a lot about union for tech workers. Its not feasible in tech because a sizable majority of tech workers are on various visa's that precludes them from joining a strike, making the union essentially ineffective. This needs to be addressed first. Chicago has teachers union but filipino teachers on J1 cannot participate in a strike, it works for CTU because there are only a tiny fraction on J1 visa.

You can strike if you're on a visa, but it does put you at enhanced risk of retaliation. You can strike even if it is illegal. The question is the balance of power.

For example, if the company retaliates against visa workers, and the other workers strike in protest, the company will probably not continue to try that. This is why solidarity between workers of different dispositions is so important.

Re: Thousands of Google’s cafeteria workers have unionized

#63

Post by hindsightbias » Tue, Dec 31, 2019, 7:30 PM UTC

asdfasgasdgasdg wrote: post #46

remote_phone wrote: post #37

I’m glad they were able to unionize but why should they deserve to have similar or same benefits as Google workers? Sorry to be blunt but they are cafeteria workers working for Bon Appetit. If I were Google I would just close all the cafeterias in order to avoid further precedent setting actions. The meals are going to get taxed by IRS anyway so might as well bite the bullet now and get rid of free food entirely.

Google would be pretty unique among high tech companies and large companies in general if it didn't have cafeterias at all. I doubt they would close the cafeterias. If Compass is unable to negotiate a cost effective labor contract, the more likely outcome would be google switching to another provider. But that in itself doesn't seem very likely considering the optics, and the relatively small cost of this labor. But,…

Or it would be a renaissance for urban restaurateurs and workers, who could afford the city again. Some of these tech areas are surrounded by dead zones.

Re: Thousands of Google’s cafeteria workers have unionized

#64

Post by turtlecloud » Tue, Dec 31, 2019, 7:30 PM UTC

remote_phone wrote: post #37

I’m glad they were able to unionize but why should they deserve to have similar or same benefits as Google workers? Sorry to be blunt but they are cafeteria workers working for Bon Appetit. If I were Google I would just close all the cafeterias in order to avoid further precedent setting actions. The meals are going to get taxed by IRS anyway so might as well bite the bullet now and get rid of free food entirely.

some people don't want to create a servant caste despite all the pressure from Sundar Pichai to recreate Indian society in Google HQ.

Re: Thousands of Google’s cafeteria workers have unionized

#65

Post by pjc50 » Tue, Dec 31, 2019, 7:30 PM UTC

kmlx wrote: post #55

BiteCode_dev wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Interesting account. Created 15 days ago, negative rep, and every comments are on the same nature: https://news.ycombinator.com/threads?id=greatscott404

yours is created 71 days ago. is this the path we want to take?

Mine was created 2,367 days ago. Do I win a prize?

Re: Thousands of Google’s cafeteria workers have unionized

#66

Post by greatscott404 » Tue, Dec 31, 2019, 7:30 PM UTC

pjc50 wrote: post #51

greatscott404 wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Am I committing thought crimes?

In the West we tend to believe in free association and the right of people to perform political activity without being beaten up by the police, at least most of the time.

Wow. I myself hail for your fabled "west", and I'm not suggesting that free association should be scrapped nor that violence be committed against its practitioners.

Re: Thousands of Google’s cafeteria workers have unionized

#67

Post by quotemstr » Tue, Dec 31, 2019, 7:31 PM UTC

joshuamorton wrote: post #38

greatscott404 wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you suggesting that employee cartels squeezing money from consumers is justified? Want worker protections ask for that, no need to burden businesses any further.

A union is just the free market at work. Much as a business is a collection of individuals working toward the common goal of supplying a product, a union is a collection of individuals working toward the common goal of supplying a product (labor). If you believe a union is a cartel that squeezes money from consumers, you must necessarily believe that a company is the same thing.

> A union is just the free market at work.

That's not the case. A union is an organization for extracting rents above those the market would ordinarily bear. Rent-seeking activity --- no matter who does it --- makes society as a whole worse off. Bastiat showed that a long time ago.

When corporations organize to extract rents, we call them cartels and apply strict penalties under the law. Why should employees have a right to use these same tactics? The market for thee, but not for me?

Re: Thousands of Google’s cafeteria workers have unionized

#68

Post by tehjoker » Tue, Dec 31, 2019, 7:31 PM UTC

greatscott404 wrote: post #45

shantly wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Cool cool. We can have our government stop recognizing the existence of corporations at the same time we outlaw unions. Deal?

Why? Corporations are largely great assets to a country, labor unions on the other hand are parasitic cartels.

Management is the parasite sucking up the benefits produced by the masses of workers. If employees owned the corporations, things would be very different.

Re: Thousands of Google’s cafeteria workers have unionized

#69

Post by iudqnolq » Tue, Dec 31, 2019, 7:31 PM UTC

sfink wrote: post #44

jayd16 wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don't forget child labor. The market demands child labor.

I probably shouldn't say this here, but I'm a bit confused about child labor. The phrase brings to mind images of a crowd of muddy children sewing cheap shirts long after dark, and I strongly agree with regulations to prohibit that. At the same time, why is it a problem for children to work? I grew up helping my dad out in his job as a handyman. [To be clear, this is legal and not what I'm arguing about.] Not every p…

Government is way ahead of you there. The law may be flawed, but not for a lack of thinking about if children should get work experience.

For example, should you have always wanted your children to learn how to build gazebos, all they have to do is be excused from highschool

> FLSA Section 13(c)(7) creates a limited exemption from the youth employment provisions for certain minors 14 through 17 years of age who are excused from compulsory school attendance beyond the eighth grade. This exemption allows eligible youth to be employed inside and outside of businesses that use machinery to process wood products (such as sawmills, furniture manufacturers, garden shed and gazebo manufacturers, cabinet makers and pallet shops) with some restrictions, but does not allow them to operate or assist in the operation of power-driven woodworking machinery.

In addition to the working for parents exception

> The Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) provides for certain exemptions. Minors under age 16 working in a business solely owned or operated by their parents or by persons standing in place of their parents, can work any time of day and for any number of hours. However, parents are prohibited from employing their child in manufacturing or mining or in any of the occupations declared hazardous by the Secretary of Labor. Other exemptions to the FLSA are detailed in the links listed below.

There are also many special cases for other traditional occupations of children

> Employment as motion picture, theater, radio, or television actors, working at home in the making of evergreen wreaths, and delivering newspapers are among the jobs exempted from FLSA child labor provisions.

Those do get oddly specific...

> - Youth employed as actors or performers in motion pictures, theatrical, radio, or television productions;

> - Youth engaged in the delivery of newspapers to consumers;

> - Youth working at home in the making of wreaths composed of natural holly, pine, cedar, or other evergreens (including the harvesting of the evergreens).

There are also exceptions to the exceptions...

> Limited exemptions from some of the hazardous occupations rules allow 16- and 17- year-old apprentices and student-learners to perform otherwise prohibited work (hazardous jobs) under certain conditions. The hazardous occupations in which youth may work if the those conditions are met are: HO #5 Power-driven woodworking machines; HO #8 Power-driven metal-forming, punching and shearing machines; ...

https://webapps.dol.gov/elaws/whd/flsa/cl/exemptions.asp

Re: Thousands of Google’s cafeteria workers have unionized

#70

Post by pjc50 » Tue, Dec 31, 2019, 7:32 PM UTC

greatscott404 wrote: post #66

pjc50 wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In the West we tend to believe in free association and the right of people to perform political activity without being beaten up by the police, at least most of the time.

Wow. I myself hail for your fabled "west", and I'm not suggesting that free association should be scrapped nor that violence be committed against its practitioners.

You literally started this thread by demanding that a policital association be banned. History tells us what that looks like in practice, and how much violence is involved in having the police break a strike.