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

New York Times tech workers vote to certify union

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 335 posts

Re: New York Times tech workers vote to certify union

#81

Post by morgante »

Spooky23 wrote: post #25
CSMastermind wrote: post #7

I'm surprised they weren't already in one. I worked at a competitor (the Wall St. Journal) years ago and all software engineers there had to be part of the union. Unions in the news industry are extremely common and powerful. My subjective experience with it was that union membership was mostly inconsequential for developers. The market for programmers is so strong that people would just leave if they weren't treated…

This of course isn’t a problem for HN posters, who are all 10x engineers or w/e. Overall though, not having a contract, recourse and representation in a large company is a pretty big risk factor unless you just toil away in silence.

> Overall though, not having a contract, recourse and representation in a large company is a pretty big risk factor unless you just toil away in silence.

Why? I have an in-demand set of skills and could easily find a new job if I wanted to.

I'd much rather negotiate directly with my employer than have a union intermediating that relationship. If anything, it feels far riskier to have a politically-motivated union boss control my employment.

Re: New York Times tech workers vote to certify union

#82

Post by woodruffw »

judge2020 wrote: post #69
Kalium wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oh, I get the idea . We're just talking about a situation described by the commenter above where the union is already formed . It is apparently unable to provide any substantial benefit except the hope that it might be useful at a future date. This leads me to wonder if it's really doing anything of value for the workers it's supposed to be defending, supporting, and empowering. Like the insurance policy that you sus…

This is generally why Insurance is more regulated in certain industries, eg. Motor vehicle insurance can’t drop you because the get a claim about how you totaled someone else’s Lamborghini. Are there similar protections that regulate unions themselves?

Yes. Unions are tightly regulated under the NLRA and by the NLRB, both of which constrain their collective bargaining powers, right to form, etc.

Re: New York Times tech workers vote to certify union

#83

Post by google234123 »

foepys wrote: post #74
throwaway73838 wrote: post #53

Problem is, unions are actually counter productive to any industry. They reduce available work and further incentivize off-shoring of jobs. In the post WW2 period, the UK and German manufacturing industries lagged behind the US in both wages and productivity, largely due to the former being unionized and latter not.

You mean the good old times when the US military just shot at people trying to unionize? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Blair_Mountain

No, he said post ww2 which is after 1921.

Re: New York Times tech workers vote to certify union

#84

Post by kelseyfrog »

riffic wrote: post #5

we'll probably see a long trend towards more tech labor unionization. If you're up to it you can join the one big union in solidarity today: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Industrial_Workers_of_the_Worl...

I've been on the fence and I've literally had the sign up page on tab for a week. Should I join?

Re: New York Times tech workers vote to certify union

#85

Post by lmm »

Kalium wrote: post #43
ceejayoz wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Forming the union when you have leverage helps later when you don't .

If a union formed when you have leverage doesn't deliver when you do , why would you expect it to deliver when you don't ?

A union is like an insurance policy, or a lawyer on retainer, or a contract in writing. It doesn't do anything when times are good, that's not what it's for.

Re: New York Times tech workers vote to certify union

#86

Post by TulliusCicero »

minhazm wrote: post #17
CSMastermind wrote: post #7

I'm surprised they weren't already in one. I worked at a competitor (the Wall St. Journal) years ago and all software engineers there had to be part of the union. Unions in the news industry are extremely common and powerful. My subjective experience with it was that union membership was mostly inconsequential for developers. The market for programmers is so strong that people would just leave if they weren't treated…

> all software engineers there had to be part of the union. Is that legal? Can unions or companies force you to join the union as a condition of employment?

Sure, just like companies can require you to work at certain times as a condition of employment, or wear a uniform as a condition of employment, or a hundred other things.

Letting it go the other way just results in freeloader syndrome: unions fight for improved work policies and work culture for all, but you can get much of the benefits without paying in. So many people don’t, which ends up weakening the union in the long run.

Re: New York Times tech workers vote to certify union

#87

Post by lmm »

wyager wrote: post #57
aaomidi wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm pretty sure going from "we can terminate your employment without cause" to "okay these are the reasons we will terminate your employment" is a HUGE stress relief for people. Unions, even when they're not doing much, bring in stability.

Turning the decision to fire someone into a hyper-formalized procedure mostly seems to result in environments where terrible people never get fired, like the DMV.

Only if the organisation is thoroughly incompetent, and in that case it's already a terrible place to work. Of course it's possible to put too much bureaucracy around firing people, but the correct amount is not zero.

Re: New York Times tech workers vote to certify union

#88

Post by aspenmayer »

jart wrote: post #22
Apocryphon wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's what I meant, actually. This is the time when workers have the most leverage to preserve that leverage for the long-term. Doing so through institutions like unions is one method.

Only if it's through industrial unionism like the wobblies. Craft unionism isn't scalable.

Can you explain the difference to me? I’m interested how small/independent businesses can unionize. I’d like to know more.

Re: New York Times tech workers vote to certify union

#89

Post by qbasic_forever »

Kalium wrote: post #28
the_duke wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's exactly the time to unionize! The employer has limited leverage to bust any union efforts. When the employment market is weak and you are scrounging for a job it's a lot easier to threaten/scare everyone into submission.

This also describes an environment where the union doesn't seem to be offering any significant benefits to developers. If unionizing doesn't improve your working conditions, what's the point of the union?

Keeping the good working conditions. Without it you're a new management team away from everything going to shit.

Re: New York Times tech workers vote to certify union

#90

Post by lmm »

morgante wrote: post #78
zorpner wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ok, so the union has negotiated a contract with the company, and as a part of this negotiation the company has agreed to specific terms of employment. Should they be prohibited from engaging in those negotiations, or agreeing to those terms?

Yes, because it is monopolistic/anti-competitive behavior. In isolated cases, it doesn't seem so bad. But you eventually end up with entire industries dominated by unions where you can't work at all without paying their protection money. We have laws against corporations using market power to force monopolies. Unions also should not be able to legally monopolize the labor market.

I would agree that if unions were significantly larger and more powerful than corporations then there might be an issue (just as corporations being significantly larger and more powerful than individual workers is an issue - that is after all what unions exist to address). But I highly doubt this union is bigger and more powerful than the NYT, and I rather doubt that any union is as big and powerful as Google/Facebook/Amazon/Apple/etc..
Post reply on HN