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

Google Had Secret Project to ‘Convince’ Employees ‘That Unions Suck’

vice.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

351–360 of 411 posts

Re: Google Had Secret Project to ‘Convince’ Employees ‘That Unions Suck’

#351

Post by jedberg »

floatingatoll wrote: post #340
jedberg wrote: post #255

A lot of people have this terrible notion of what a union is, where they force you to do things and set wages and work hours. But I suspect a union for programmers would look more like the Actors union or screenwriters union in Hollywood. They would negotiate minimum rates and benefits, but top performers would still be able to get significantly more. The union just sets the minimums.

Is it possible to take a page from the "YC Standard Deal" model and create a "Union Standard Deal" for tech workers, that offers an opinionated and non-comprehensive view of the basic necessities that any tech worker union should demand? Tech is known for shooting the moon, but if we can stand up opinionated examples of "minimum viable bargains", maybe that would help everyone grasp what's being proposed, and contras…

Part of the reason that the writers guild and screen actors guild works is because they have a single union that represents everyone with all employers, and their union members won't work with employers who don't honor the union agreement.

So it would need to be similar. A single programmers union that sets minimums, where union members won't work for companies that don't follow the union rules.

So like in Hollywood a tiny production will not follow union rules but are limited to using up-and-coming actors who aren't in the union. Startups would be similar -- they could hire up-and-comers, or agree to follow the union rules, one of which is not hiring anyone not in the union.

Re: Google Had Secret Project to ‘Convince’ Employees ‘That Unions Suck’

#352

Post by guyzero »

Crash0v3rid3 wrote: post #166
timmg wrote: post #161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree. To take it one step further: I have a pretty good relationship with my employer (coincidentally, Google). I don't need or want a third party to get in the middle of it.

Also, Googles largest union, AWU, does not focus on anything I care about, so why should I pay them dues?

You can be interested in fixing bad behaviour on the part of companies with a lot of power and leverage even if you're not the victim of it.

Sure, you can also do nothing.

Re: Google Had Secret Project to ‘Convince’ Employees ‘That Unions Suck’

#353

Post by choppaface »

Wow this got run down to page 3 really fast, like mid-day. Would really be curious how many flags it got, and what's the ranking story here. In particular because the OP mentions union-busting firms doing things like writing high-profile op-eds w/out connection to Google. That's major manipulation.

Re: Google Had Secret Project to ‘Convince’ Employees ‘That Unions Suck’

#354

Post by jakelazaroff »

0xy wrote: post #343
Kneecaps07 wrote: post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A union offers other protections. Right now, your employer can (I'm assuming) just fire you for whatever they want. If you have a union and a proper contract, then they need justification and the union will back you up.

Given how teacher's unions regularly protect sexual predators from firing, I'm not sure I want the same institution in tech protecting incompetent, malicious and/or predator co-workers.

I guess since tech companies themselves already protect sexual predators, a union would just be unnecessary overhead in that regard.

(/s, in case it's unclear)

Re: Google Had Secret Project to ‘Convince’ Employees ‘That Unions Suck’

#355

Post by VirusNewbie »

MandieD wrote: post #347
x0137294744532 wrote: post #285

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would and I am sane of mind.

30 days' vacation (24 by law, the extra 6 were because effective union), so much sick leave that I don't know anyone who exhausted it with anything less than a long term disability, and extremely strong employee protections once you're past an initial 6 month trial period, as well as amazing parental leave/part-time policies enshrined in the law, backed up by sector-wide unions and company Betriebsrat (Works Council)…

Ok so most SWEs in the US get 25 days of vacation and make what, 4x what the average SWE in germany makes?

Re: Google Had Secret Project to ‘Convince’ Employees ‘That Unions Suck’

#356

Post by benhurmarcel »

julienb_sea wrote: post #257
guyzero wrote: post #170

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Everyone has a good relationship with their employer _until they don't._ And when the relationship goes bad it also becomes very, very one-sided.

From what I can tell, a "bad relationship" with employer particularly in competitive tech fields is a direct result of poor performance by the employee, which actually seems reasonable. I don't think it makes sense to introduce bureaucracy with the explicit purpose of covering for poor performance, as that pummels incentives to actually perform well at work. It seems actively unfair to people that are doing their job…

Early in my career, HR refused to apply me a significant raise that they had written I would get, because I wasn’t old enough. I had support from my managers, great results and feedbacks. And yet it didn’t matter that it was illegal, illogical, and against their own written words, they still refused. I almost quit over it.

In the end one of the unions helped me, and collaborated with my manager to push HR to give me an even slightly bigger promotion based on my more recent results.

I drastically changed opinion on the unions after that, and have subscribed ever since. They’re not perfect, but HR can be worse, even if you make them money.

I was an engineer in Europe in a Fortune 500 company, for the record.

Re: Google Had Secret Project to ‘Convince’ Employees ‘That Unions Suck’

#357

Post by busterarm »

danans wrote: post #349
busterarm wrote: post #288

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The American Mafia ran it's biggest and most profitable racket, concrete for construction in NYC, aka the Concrete Club, from 1977 to 1985...long after the period you're talking about. You can even read about the corruption and (non-mafia) racketeering involved in NYC's lifeguard union, which continues literally to this very day. In most major cities, the mafia controlled a majority of the unions and used them to eff…

> It's also easy for you to bring up teachers and nurses' unions not being mafia controlled -- jobs predominantly staffed with women. The American mafia literally cannot have women members per its own rules, so of course they couldn't influence those unions. How about the Aerospace Engineer's union, then: https://www.speea.org/ Pretty sure it's predominately male. > If you do your research though, you'll see that the…

> How about the Aerospace Engineer's union, then: https://www.speea.org/ Pretty sure it's predominately male.

And up until a decade or two ago had maybe a single-digit number of possible employers you could be working for. Also fucking goombahs don't have engineering degrees. Again, you're talking about another field the mafia, largely uneducated street people, could never penetrate.

Let's at least start your argument from a place of intellectual honesty.

Re: Google Had Secret Project to ‘Convince’ Employees ‘That Unions Suck’

#358

Post by philistine »

mleonhard wrote: post #334
e40 wrote: post #279

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It really bothers me that we've all accepted (not you or me specifically, but every time I see unions discussed it's the subtext) that we have two choices: no union or a shitty union. Why can't we work for a union that is good? If the answer is that humans are involved and it'll never be possible, then that could be applied to anything and is an absurd answer. This is not a strawman, I've heard that argument many tim…

In USA, unions mostly represent blue-collar workers who tend to elect low-quality union leaders. A union at Google could end up with better leaders than the company itself.

This is a very wise answer.

Re: Google Had Secret Project to ‘Convince’ Employees ‘That Unions Suck’

#359

Post by SpicyLemonZest »

p_j_w wrote: post #329
SpicyLemonZest wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem is that it's always true. If you're open to changing your mind in response to evidence and arguments, then your current beliefs will depend on which information you've seen, and thus you will have been influenced by organizations who chose to promote information supporting their own beliefs. We're affected by the machinations of tech, but also the machinations of retailers and unions and political parties…

>The problem is that it's always true. Is it, though? We've got here an article about a multibillion dollar company using its money and influence to peddle a view that's beneficial to them and trying very hard to make it look like it's not actually coming from them. This is absolutely not always the case. This is more than just run of the mill people being open to changing their minds then, is it? >in every instance…

> Is it, though? We've got here an article about a multibillion dollar company using its money and influence to peddle a view that's beneficial to them and trying very hard to make it look like it's not actually coming from them. This is absolutely not always the case.

Every multibillion dollar organization I'm familiar with has a PR team who's responsible for shaping news coverage in ways that benefit the company. We just don't normally think about it this way. Nobody looks at the coordinated release of reviews about a week before video game launches and says "aha, Nintendo has dishonestly manipulated the media once again".

Re: Google Had Secret Project to ‘Convince’ Employees ‘That Unions Suck’

#360

Post by floatingatoll »

jedberg wrote: post #351
floatingatoll wrote: post #340

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is it possible to take a page from the "YC Standard Deal" model and create a "Union Standard Deal" for tech workers, that offers an opinionated and non-comprehensive view of the basic necessities that any tech worker union should demand? Tech is known for shooting the moon, but if we can stand up opinionated examples of "minimum viable bargains", maybe that would help everyone grasp what's being proposed, and contras…

Part of the reason that the writers guild and screen actors guild works is because they have a single union that represents everyone with all employers, and their union members won't work with employers who don't honor the union agreement. So it would need to be similar. A single programmers union that sets minimums, where union members won't work for companies that don't follow the union rules. So like in Hollywood…

Okay, so, is there a relative comparison of available union pricing plans and their offered features and the cut they take per paycheck? We have this for AWS/GCP, and for app stores, so what’s the equivalent in tech unions?
Post reply on HN