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

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

theintercept.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

271–280 of 500 posts

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

#271

Post by logicalmind »

BiteCode_dev wrote: post #81
ShamelessC wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Rocket League's approach to this is very good. The D-pad is bound to several predefined words and phrases that are useful such as "Nice shot!" or "Great pass!". Because of the fast paced nature of the game it's pretty tough to try to abuse this system (maybe by spelling words with the first letters of allowed phrases?) but no one does that. To appease the folks who wanted to express that they were using a curse word,…

> That reminds me of Rocket League's approach. The D-pad is bound to several predefined words and phrases that are useful such as "Nice shot!" or "Great pass!". Because of the fast paced nature of the game it's pretty tough to try to abuse this system (maybe by spelling words with the first letters of allowed phrases?) but no one does that. Dota has that, and it didn't work. People just used the nice phrases sarcasti…

> People just used the nice phrases sarcastically, and repeatedly.

As an avid player of rocket league, this happens. For example, if one team scores a goal, if they want to be mean they can spam "What a Save!" quick chat. Making fun of the other team for not saving the ball. The same for "Nice Shot!" when the opposing team misses, or "Great Pass!" if the other team makes a bad pass.

But it is still a decent system. People who abuse it are always gonna find ways to abuse things.

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

#272

Post by rock_hard »

shp0ngle wrote: post #89

Workplace is very very very annoying to actually use, btw. Workplace is basically "facebook, but in a corp"; but all the nags and annoying notifications that kind-of work in Facebook, because you can chose what pages and groups to follow, just flat out don't work there, because you have to follow certain group. And you keep getting these annoying notifications that you cannot easily filter. So you still have one stre…

Interesting

I love workplace and hate that I have to use Slack at my current gig

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

#274

Post by sideshowb »

Angostura wrote: post #267
koheripbal wrote: post #61

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…

> 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. This is known as a 'closed shop' in the UK. Closed shops are not synonymous or required for unions to function.

Yeah, we have a union at work and can confirm we're allowed to move chairs, monitors... actually I can't imagine any work our employer would stop us doing unless there is a health and safety, ethical or PR issue

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

#275

Post by clarkmoody »

take_a_breath wrote: post #171
koheripbal wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> ...a union does is balance the leverage. Without them, the employer has all of it. Maybe that's true of low labor jobs, but Employees in six figure jobs have tremendous power. One of the reasons companies try to create anti-potching rules is exactly to try to get back some power. The unemployment rate in the US was 4% prior to covid, and even lower for tech and white collar desk jobs. This issue simply must take a…

== This issue simply must take a back seat to bigger problems in America.== What if labor rights is actually the single biggest problem that drives all the others? I can think of things like a higher minimum wage, paid sick leave, anti-discrimination in hiring, maternity/paternity leave, and guaranteed PTO that could be helped by unionization to make us a stronger country, collectively.

Nah, that only makes the labor market less dynamic. It might protect the workers that already have a job, but it will definitely hurt those who don't.

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

#276

Post by adrianmonk »

objclxt wrote: 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…

> Myself and others would end up pointing out that yes, that's true of some blur collar unions, but that's not what we're talking about.

I'm not totally against unions, but it seems like that's probably how all the messed up union situations started.

As far as I know, they probably all started with good intentions to improve conditions where change was really needed. None of them started with the intention of creating a bunch of bureaucracy, nor to negotiate wages higher than the market can handle, thus jeopardizing the financial health of their employer, etc.

But, like all organizations (every type in every sphere of life -- government, private sector, charity, religious, and more), there is always the danger that once the organization gets enough power to fulfill its mission, it then moves on to using the power for things it shouldn't.

That's not a reason to dismiss the idea of starting a union, but it is a hazard to be avoided. So it should probably be part of the discussion, just not in a way that's used to instantly shut down the idea.

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

#277

Post by waheoo »

dijit wrote: post #211
jcims wrote: post #189

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"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.

What if the concept is what leads to the corruption?

E.g. communism.

Im for unions, it beats the current situation, but im weary of the sales pitch.

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

#278

Post by Mxs2000 »

adamsea wrote: post #224
koheripbal wrote: post #61

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…

> > 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. What about the Writers Guild and the NBA players union? Would the people in those unions say that? Semi-genuinely asking? ;)

NBA players Union is a great example of how top performers get penalized. The Max contracts that the union agrees to is why top players are underpaid versus what they could command absent that, with most of the bench being overpaid.

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

#279

Post by aspenmayer »

ttwinder wrote: post #268
aspenmayer wrote: post #262

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This kind of thinking reminds me of biotruths, eugenics, social Darwinism, and other authoritarian concepts which seek to explain why it’s okay to have inequality between and within countries. We should seek to raise rights and standards of living for all people. The focus on whether other people have cultures compatible with specific forms of government seems very suspect. Such talk keeps people down. Self-determina…

>kind of thinking reminds me of biotruths, eugenics, social Darwinism, and other authoritarian concepts which seek to explain why it’s okay to have inequality between and within countries. I don't know where to start with this comment. Perhaps you should stop grouping arguments by stereotype. At an individual level, different people require different interventions, because they have different personalities. Some peop…

All people should have self-determination, culture be damned. All societies should have self-determination. Period.

That’s why I drew the logical connection to authoritarian concepts. No one is forcing anyone to be more free. That would be impossible. Freedom is a choice one makes for oneself, individually. Keeping someone from being free can be forced upon another. Society can do this collectively through laws. These are nuanced differences between freedoms and liberties, which some people don’t have.

I don’t know why you focus on the culture when people are why the culture exists as it does, not the other way around. The status quo benefits from dominant culture and from keeping established power structures in place. You can’t use the culture as an argument to justify a form of government that removes human rights. Just like I can’t sign a contract that gives up my Constitutional rights. Those in less free countries are not given the choice of more freedom.

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

#280

Post by yjftsjthsd-h »

kaybe wrote: post #155
0xy wrote: 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?

How do you reliably measure developer quality?
Post reply on HN