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

A group of Google workers have announced plans to unionize

theverge.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 1001 posts

Re: A group of Google workers have announced plans to unionize

#121

Post by damagednoob »

Cthulhu_ wrote: post #86
objclxt wrote: post #38

When I talk to colleagues in tech about unions I hear a lot of misconceptions, seemingly based in stereotypes about what unions are for and who they serve. People often seem to think of unions as being purely blue-collar operations, and this just isn't true. For example, I've had people tell me that they don't support unions in tech because they'll be "paid less", or less competent engineers will be promoted faster.…

It's also funny because blue collar work is / can be ridiculously well-paid, in part thanks to the union's efforts.

That's what happens when you control supply. Your politics determines whether it's to maintain standards or the wages of its members.

Re: A group of Google workers have announced plans to unionize

#122

Post by prepend »

the_other wrote: post #108
karl11 wrote: post #60

Don't think we've ever seen Hollywood in the modern era without unions, so not sure how you can claim it's "undeniable" the industry is better off. We basically have no clue if it's better off or not. Unions are intended for industries where a worker doesn't have a marketplace of options as there is a single or just a few employers (e.g. Hollywood, teachers, coal mining towns, hospital staff, etc.). Unionizing at Goo…

The idea that leaving equates to collective bargaining is false, and even if it had a ring of truth it would be ineffectual at FAANG companies. Leaving changes nothing, it just accelerates the bad behaviour because the obstacle to the bad behaviour removed itself. A single person, even a team of engineers, leaving a FAANG company will have near-zero impact on the behaviour, functioning or profitability of that compan…

> Leaving changes nothing

Leaving improves conditions for the worker and that’s the biggest thing for me, the worker.

Re: A group of Google workers have announced plans to unionize

#123

Post by John23832 »

zthrowaway wrote: post #91

Some of the most highly paid, privileged and marketable individuals in our industry, easily in the top 5% of income in the economy... what’s the point of this? Google employees are a far cry from the romanticized proletariat fighting against the bourgeoisie.

If you read the article, you would see content about contract workers.

Re: A group of Google workers have announced plans to unionize

#124

Post by throway1gjj »

fovc wrote: post #52
objclxt wrote: post #38

When I talk to colleagues in tech about unions I hear a lot of misconceptions, seemingly based in stereotypes about what unions are for and who they serve. People often seem to think of unions as being purely blue-collar operations, and this just isn't true. For example, I've had people tell me that they don't support unions in tech because they'll be "paid less", or less competent engineers will be promoted faster.…

One positive byproduct is that union membership is a quality signal for both employers and employees. I.e., as a producer, I know non-union candidates will be less experienced; as an employee I know a movie using non union labor is not going to run as smoothly. Could be good for the startup market if this additional data point becomes reliable

In addition, I know union workers labor will cost more and be less efficient

Re: A group of Google workers have announced plans to unionize

#125

Post by OJFord »

objclxt wrote: post #38

When I talk to colleagues in tech about unions I hear a lot of misconceptions, seemingly based in stereotypes about what unions are for and who they serve. People often seem to think of unions as being purely blue-collar operations, and this just isn't true. For example, I've had people tell me that they don't support unions in tech because they'll be "paid less", or less competent engineers will be promoted faster.…

> You have vocally supportive multi-millionaire card-carrying members of the Screen Actors Guild, the Writers Guild, and the Directors Guild to name a few.

I'm not familiar with that industry (nor the US) but those sound more like professional bodies than unions? I am a Member of the IET; I wouldn't join a union.

Re: A group of Google workers have announced plans to unionize

#126

Post by giantg2 »

zthrowaway wrote: post #91

Some of the most highly paid, privileged and marketable individuals in our industry, easily in the top 5% of income in the economy... what’s the point of this? Google employees are a far cry from the romanticized proletariat fighting against the bourgeoisie.

I somewhat agree. Most tech workers are above the median salary in the US ($35k). I don't make nearly as much as a Google employee, but I would like a union for a couple reasons (they could mostly fix this through legislation and avoid the unions) like removing forced arbitration, or having an actual contract rather than a one pager that says they make the rules and can change them anytime without notice.

And speaking of income. It seems like 1% of that group's income is a high number for supporting the union.

Re: A group of Google workers have announced plans to unionize

#127

Post by [deleted] »

mhb wrote: post #112
fovc wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One positive byproduct is that union membership is a quality signal for both employers and employees. I.e., as a producer, I know non-union candidates will be less experienced; as an employee I know a movie using non union labor is not going to run as smoothly. Could be good for the startup market if this additional data point becomes reliable

So the way that educational outcomes have been improving as a result of union teachers with seniority being paid more?

[deleted]

Re: A group of Google workers have announced plans to unionize

#128

Post by avianlyric »

chrisseaton wrote: post #95
avianlyric wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> People don't want to leave a cushy job for one where they would have to work harder for their money, so instead, they are trying other means to have their cake and eat it too. You're saying this like it's a bad thing. Why shouldn't employees expect, and get, better working conditions? > engineers can "collectively bargain" with Google by simply leaving and working somewhere "better" How is individuals leaving "coll…

Aren't most employees also shareholders, in the tech industry? Don't we have representation through that mechanism and why isn't it enough?

Not sure who told you that. Most employees with either have options (which can become shares, but aren't) or Restricted Stock Units (RSU's) which are useless till vested.

Either way their holding will be miniscule, even in aggregate, compared to other shareholders. Even if it wasn't miniscule, they would still need to organise, maybe form some sort of coalition, or "union", in order to leverage their collective voting power against other large, unified, shareholders.

Re: A group of Google workers have announced plans to unionize

#129

Post by ahelwer »

mondoshawan wrote: post #100
ahelwer wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not to put too fine a point on it, but usually the people who know about the union before it's announced are those who are understood to support the idea & are unlikely to go to management about it :)

This is the first I've ever suggested an opinion on it publicly, and I'm a line engineer, not management. Internally, I don't usually talk about things like this, either.

Ah, then it's likely that by chance someone just never got around to talking to you about it. It's a big company! Hopefully you'll soon get to talk to an organizer about your specific doubts.

Re: A group of Google workers have announced plans to unionize

#130

Post by kenhwang »

humanrebar wrote: post #104
kenhwang wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The unions (edit: film industry) require a certain amount of work experience to join and some have different levels of membership depending on how much work you do after joining. Because everyone prefers union workers, it creates a situation where the non-union worker has to get noticed somehow (nepotism or exceptional work) to convince someone to take a risk and hire them to earn enough work to gain union membership…

It's worth pointing out that in those situations unions aren't better for all workers. Also notice there's a strong gig economy component to establishing professional credentials.

Of course. Which can be evidenced by the working conditions in the film industry for the typical staff and the lack of diversity at the top.
Post reply on HN