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

351–360 of 500 posts

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

#351

Post by rdtwo »

jcims wrote: post #252
omginternets wrote: post #249

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How many times must others get it right before you'll consider your own execution to be poor?

Well in the US we can only really vote on two opinions. The 'left' argues for unions based on the concept. The 'right' argues against them based on their execution. So we go round and round and round and round because neither is willing to consider or admit that we might be talking past each other. Makes for great web traffic though.

The democratic left absolutely does not want unions outside of government which is probably the worst place for unions in general

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

#352

Post by strictnein »

omginternets wrote: post #242
dijit wrote: 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".

>There is no such thing as a "union job", it's just having what's referred to as a "collective agreement". I won't retort with a similarly vulgar comment because: 1. we probably agree on the value of unions 2. I understand your exasperation with American ignorance and cultural bias on the subject 3. it's not constructive However, it brings me no joy to assert that you are dead wrong. Union jobs can and do exist in pl…

> "I understand your exasperation with American ignorance and cultural bias on the subject"

"Ignorance and bias" is apparently now equivalent to "decades of experience that differ from your preferred reality".

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

#353

Post by ttwinder »

pietrovismara wrote: post #346
x86_64Ubuntu wrote: post #338

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So because you can't move a piece of furniture, you believe it cancels the amount of protections and good from unionization?!

That kinda shows you what privilege is and how it conditions the political discussion. If you never had to face a problem (never needed someone to protect you against greedy employers), it is so hard to understand why that it's relevant.

It's offensive to see this valid point of view dismissed with such shallow accusations of privilege.

The point in bringing up trivial issues like moving monitors is to emphasize the greed and absurdity that ensure that even simple, quick tasks become cash sinks and long term blockers, directly because of common union practices. This is the inefficiency that unions tend to breed, and it is a direct consequence of their purpose: protect members even at the expense of nonmembers and the rest of the corporate collective.

No one is complaining that they aren't allowed to move their own monitors. We are explaining that these ubiquitous policies in sum do more harm than good to greater modern society.

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

#354

Post by kenned3 »

adamsea wrote: post #232
RHSeeger wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But it's also ridiculous to pretend they're all rainbows and sunshine, too. Some people have valid reasons for not wanting to be part of a union, and some people have valid reasons for wanting to be part of a union. Dismissing either group is wrong.

I think the difference is in the US there is a strong history of busting up unions specifically to disempower workers. There absolutely are legitimate reasons to not want to join a union. However, “both sides can be right” so to speak, whitewashes (word chosen deliberately) away the historical fact and current reality of systemic suppression of and propaganda against union organizing by US workers.

"busting up unions specifically to disempower workers."

Let us review GM.

They knew they needed to cut down product, would the union let them?

They knew they needed automation as their labour costs are too high.

The union position was always the same, use the profits from some cars to subsidize the losses from others. How long can that go on for when you continue to lose marketshare?

Their pension is a mess as fewer and fewer workers are supporting it.

Or, you can review Daewoo motors (sold to GM).

The banks flat out told them to cut costs or no loans and they would go bankrupt. Did the unions agree to anything?

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

#355

Post by thelean12 »

pietrovismara wrote: post #346
x86_64Ubuntu wrote: post #338

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So because you can't move a piece of furniture, you believe it cancels the amount of protections and good from unionization?!

That kinda shows you what privilege is and how it conditions the political discussion. If you never had to face a problem (never needed someone to protect you against greedy employers), it is so hard to understand why that it's relevant.

Doesn't this make the point of tech works who are against tech unions (not other unions)? We're all generally paid extremely well and are privileged. Why risk changing things?

I personally come from a pretty poor upbringing. I can see why it's scary for some to change something that 1. is working relatively well and 2. got them out of poverty.

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

#356

Post by ciupicri »

yibg wrote: post #316
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…

I don't think it's necessarily based on misconceptions about what unions are, but also their own experience and from what they hear from people they know. We've already seen in this thread very different personal experiences with unions, often based on where they are. e.g. folks in Europe seems to have mostly positive interactions, where as folks in the US negative. I personally don't want an union in my work place.…

I live in a Romania - an European country - and I don't know of any good union, be it police, transportation, or healthcare. All they do is basically ask for more and more, while doing nothing else.

Their leaders earn a lot, so they have an interest in maintaining the status quo. As one parent mentioned, you can't do much without their approval. Take for example the underground. The commercial property from the subway stations was under the control of the union, all the kiosks and small shops paid rent to the union.

Also some of their former leaders went into politics and got involved in corruption scandals.

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

#357

Post by ciupicri »

bamboozled wrote: post #225
KorfmannArno wrote: post #178

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Please give an example of good public transport. (I'm living in Germany)

Tokyo Subway is the most impeccably run system you'll ever seen in the world, it's really quite perfect. The trains even have warm seats in winter.

Aren't Japanese subway trains so crowded that a pusher is needed?

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

#358

Post by gdulli »

0xy wrote: post #77
KaiserPro wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

ok, but hear me out on this: how do you know you are earning as much as you should? I mean if we take facebook as an example, you can't negotiate pay. You're slapped on a scale and thats it. You might be able to up your share offer, but actual pay is fixed on a scale. Which is the same as what it would be if it was unionised. Also, you have chosen two professions that are run by public organisations, so pay is always…

>I mean if we take facebook as an example, you can't negotiate pay Stocks basically are pay, because anyone who doesn't immediately sell them as they vest is fiscally irresponsible. >Which is the same as what it would be if it was unionised Firstly, no. The scale is wide and you are placed somewhere between the low and high points of the scale for your level. Not every L5 engineer earns the same thing. Secondly, tota…

> Stocks basically are pay, because anyone who doesn't immediately sell them as they vest is fiscally irresponsible.

I got stock 10 years ago at $13/share and now it's worth $201/share. I don't feel irresponsible for still holding it.

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

#359

Post by chiefgeek »

capdeck wrote: post #347
jimmaswell wrote: post #324

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'll never forget the union at a convention center that forced vendors to pay them to move anything from their own car they couldn't carry. Nothing but extortionist bullies squeezing every cent of protection money they could out of the people there who actually make things and add value to the world. In contrast, these union employees were nothing but parasites. They did nothing the vendors couldn't do themselves, wh…

This is an excellent example why unions are wrong solution to a bigger problem - lack of universal healthcare, free education and guaranteed pension. If we had the three above - there won't be a need for unions because you are not loosing _everything_ when you are loosing a job. Until this bigger problem is fixed unions will remain one of the very few things workers can do to improve their odds in life. So you can't…

That's a great point that never occurred to me! I always sort of hold both sides of the argument over unions in my head and can never reconcile them.
Post reply on HN