Live data from Hacker News

New Facebook tool allows employers to suppress “unionize” in workplace chat

theintercept.com

211–220 of 500 posts

Re: New Facebook tool allows employers to suppress “unionize” in workplace chat

#211
post #189
post #175

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is the same argument I see americans make a lot. "Unions are bad!", no, the concept is fine, you have some bad ones. "Police are bad!", no, the concept is fine, yours are just untrained and overburdened. "Public transport is bad, I need a car!", no, the concept is fine, you just have bad public transport and that forms your opinion.

"Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results." - Michael Scott We're not going to get different results when we form a union in the US unless we make an attempt to get different results.

No doubt about that.

I’m just arguing that the concept is fine, and the implementation is corrupted. Removing the corruption would be great but the issue is not the concept itself.

Re: New Facebook tool allows employers to suppress “unionize” in workplace chat

#212

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Unions will slow us down, and we'll become more bureaucratic Anyone who's actually had to deal with a union can agree with this point. At our company, a number of job functions are union-only work, meaning it is a violation of the union contract for any non-union employee to perform that work. In principle, you might think that makes sense, until you need to get something very simple done - that you are willing to…

Protecting work in this manner exists because the prevailing culture is that jobs solve social issues - we can't give the disadvantaged money directly because socialism, but we can pressure companies to make-work jobs because having a job means you deserve to be human, and it also creates situations where people want to protect their jobs for their income rather than any other reason. A UBI can possibly help prevent…

> A UBI can possibly help prevent this type of silliness.

I'm not so sure. That's a handwave past social issues, and sounds like a bandaid-for-a-bandaid.

So if we give UBI out, can I suddenly plug my monitor into a socket without violating a union contract?

Re: New Facebook tool allows employers to suppress “unionize” in workplace chat

#213

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's absurd, laughable and not how a single union works in Sweden and essentially the enrire country is unionized.

This is how unions work in America - and why we hate them. People throw the word "union" around a lot with their support, not knowing that it's not the same everywhere.

Careful with that “we” bud, lots of us Americans love unions.

Re: New Facebook tool allows employers to suppress “unionize” in workplace chat

#214
post #25

I used to work at Facebook, and it was always interesting to me to see just how many engineers were actively against - aghast, even - at the idea of unions. Whenever it would come up on the internal boards the arguments were usually along the lines of: * "People who don't deserve to be paid more will get more money under a union" * "I'll be paid less under a union" * "Unions will slow us down, and we'll become more b…

> Unions will slow us down, and we'll become more bureaucratic Anyone who's actually had to deal with a union can agree with this point. At our company, a number of job functions are union-only work, meaning it is a violation of the union contract for any non-union employee to perform that work. In principle, you might think that makes sense, until you need to get something very simple done - that you are willing to…

In general I think unions are like governments - they need to be regularly overthrown and rebuilt to ensure that they always represent the best interests of their members.

That being said, there are some obvious counter-arguments to your experiences, however they tend towards "guilds" as mentioned in another comment more than unions as I understand them.

> Oh, you want to move that folding table and a few chairs to the conference room so you can have a design meeting with the whole team? Sorry furniture movement is union-only work.

Bob grabs the table and lifts with his back, in a twisting, jerking movement. Bob is then unable to come in to work due to back pain for the next two weeks. The union keeps Bob from hurting himself unintentionally.

> Need that extra monitor moved between two adjacent cubes? Sorry, equipment relocation is union work.

Someone notices that a bunch of monitors have gone missing. Have you been burgled?! Noone has any record of where these monitors have gone, however you eventually track then down to Alice's cube where she has finally completed her dream 9-monitor nest. Phew, false alarm!

> Need to plug that new PC into the socket? Sorry, equipment installation is a union job

It gets cold in the winter, so Dan brings their own heater to put under their desk[1]. One day they forget to turn it off when going home and burns down the department; On the other side new employees don't just materialise out of the ether. The organisation should have plenty of time to set up their working environment

[1] Funnily enough, if Dan was part of a union they would have enough bargaining power to make sure their employers provide adequate working conditions, however their manager simply filed away their request away under 'C', for "Complainers - Fire these people first"

I'm totally on your side about these examples being ridiculous, but I do like to steelman the other-sides arguments

Re: New Facebook tool allows employers to suppress “unionize” in workplace chat

#215
post #155
post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Above these levels, it is what you negotiate with your employer Teachers cannot negotiate salary, thanks to unions. The best teacher in America is paid the same as the worst teacher.

How do you reliably measure teacher quality?

The same way you measure anybody else: performance reviews, which are usually executed around here by an administrator or 2 coming to observe a class every semester. Coupled with standardized tests as a secondary measurement, it's pretty easy to tell who's good at their job.

Re: New Facebook tool allows employers to suppress “unionize” in workplace chat

#216

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Unions will slow us down, and we'll become more bureaucratic Anyone who's actually had to deal with a union can agree with this point. At our company, a number of job functions are union-only work, meaning it is a violation of the union contract for any non-union employee to perform that work. In principle, you might think that makes sense, until you need to get something very simple done - that you are willing to…

In general I think unions are like governments - they need to be regularly overthrown and rebuilt to ensure that they always represent the best interests of their members. That being said, there are some obvious counter-arguments to your experiences, however they tend towards "guilds" as mentioned in another comment more than unions as I understand them. > Oh, you want to move that folding table and a few chairs to t…

Governments can be fatally dysfunctional before they are overthrown. In this analogy, prior to a shareholder revolt (which do happen), usually the company just goes bankrupt.

Now introduce a powerful union - and now you have TWO incompetent authorities fighting one another, which often results in a hopelessly ineffective company - not a better one.

I appreciate the humor in your responses - but the difference is that my examples were real-world examples - not theoretical.

A company cannot put process in front of every theoretical risk - that will just run you into the ground because an unbounded inefficiency.

Re: New Facebook tool allows employers to suppress “unionize” in workplace chat

#217
post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Obviously, I have no idea how unions work in the US. But there was the example of Dwayne Johnson, earning 90 Million and being a union member. The collective bargaining I am used to, has the effect in some cases of maybe overpaying certain individuals. IMHO that always happens. It doesn't drag salaries anywhere but up so. And there is a cap on salary levels and job levels being covered by unions collective bargaining…

>Above these levels, it is what you negotiate with your employer Teachers cannot negotiate salary, thanks to unions. The best teacher in America is paid the same as the worst teacher.

In most parts of Europe teachers are public servants / state / government employeed. As such, they are bound to predefined salary ranges. Upside, they are employeed for life.

And no every union is about teachers, which are by defenition not comparable to white collar tech employees (coming back to the FB example).

Re: New Facebook tool allows employers to suppress “unionize” in workplace chat

#218
post #25

I used to work at Facebook, and it was always interesting to me to see just how many engineers were actively against - aghast, even - at the idea of unions. Whenever it would come up on the internal boards the arguments were usually along the lines of: * "People who don't deserve to be paid more will get more money under a union" * "I'll be paid less under a union" * "Unions will slow us down, and we'll become more b…

[deleted]

Re: New Facebook tool allows employers to suppress “unionize” in workplace chat

#219
post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And yet guilds are traditionally vehicles for monopoly and control. All the things Americans complain about with regards to unions, are actually guild-like behaviour.

And in labour organisations "guild" has some unfortunate racist conations in the USA.

Serious question - maybe the word "union" or "guild" is a branding problem? We could do some basic user research and come up with a more appealing name.(Think Universal Basic Income -> Freedom Dividend)

I'd be more likely to join an organization called "Gathered Friends for Salary Negation And Fair Treatment".

Re: New Facebook tool allows employers to suppress “unionize” in workplace chat

#220
post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, sorry to be blunt but that's fucking stupid. Contrast that with my experience with Unions in Sweden; and that is that they basically don't exist except to ensure that workers rights are not infringed. So they'll be involved in a termination, or help negotiate overtime pay. There is no such thing as a "union job", it's just having what's referred to as a "collective agreement".

You don't need to be rude to the parent poster. They have real experiences of a union in their company. You have examples of unions in your country. Who is correct? If your answer is yourself, then you're not understanding the point or the concern that people who are against unions have. It doesn't matter if Sweden implemented it well and somewhere else implemented it poorly. Bottom line is that the poorly-implemente…

The way to prevent "the wrong way" is to have a collaborative relation to the unions, rather than one of all out war.

Don't like your deal, which doesn't let everyone move tables? Negotiate a new one. Maybe you can offer them something they'd rather want instead.

Having a let hostile environment also let smaller, more agile unions thrive, instead of forcing them to all join together.

Post reply on HN