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

241–250 of 335 posts

Re: New York Times tech workers vote to certify union

#241

Post by staticman2 »

ceejayoz wrote: post #111
Dracophoenix wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People don't pay a monthly subscription for a lawyer their not likely to use even though a lawsuit or criminal charge is one bad day away. You're view of supply and demand matches that of a paranoid actor rather than a rational one. If ever the market were to contract, there are alternative solutions like savings, downsizing, or looking for another job. It's not as though one company has a monopoly on all the job opp…

> People don't pay a monthly subscription for a lawyer their not likely to use even though a lawsuit or criminal charge is one bad day away. Sure they do. TurboTax offers for an extra fee on filing legal insurance that covers a legal defense if the IRS challenges you. One of my past employers offered a legal program as an optional perk we could opt in to, as well. https://www.abajournal.com/web/article/law-firm-subsc…

I don't believe the Turbotax product pays for a lawyer. Non lawyers can represent you at the IRS though I'm guessing certain criminal matters would need a lawyer.

The turbotax product is also not called "legal defense" but "audit defense" presumably for that reason.

Re: New York Times tech workers vote to certify union

#242

Post by UncleMeat »

tootie wrote: post #62
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…

Honest question: why? Engineers are already compensated way, way above average and have loads of mobility opportunities. I actually work in a news org where most of the non-tech people are in one union or another but my team isn't. We have actually had a few union staff who wanted to do coding work and the union essentially blocked them.

Google made something like $300,000 in profit per employee in 2021. Engineers are indeed compensated way above average but they are not capturing their full economic output.

Re: New York Times tech workers vote to certify union

#243

Post by RhysU »

VictorPath wrote: post #234
freedomben wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can't speak for this situation, but before I moved to tech I worked in a heavily union industry, and all the union shops had in their bargaining contract that the employer could not hire anyone who wasn't in the union. For people in the union it was great. For people not in the union, it sucked. And before somebody says, "well just join the union" (do you really think I'm that stupid not to have thought about that?…

> they slacked off like crazy and never got in trouble for it. The heirs receiving dividends from the New York Times company slack off to the extent of never working a day in their life, yet receiving massive amounts of money from those doing the work and creating the wealth at the New York Times company. The union works so that the workers creating the wealth send less of it to these lazy, slacking "job creator" par…

For roughly $45/share you can too: https://finance.yahoo.com/quote/NYT

Notice that employees can also buy shares. Ownership and employment don't have to be disjoint.

Re: New York Times tech workers vote to certify union

#244

Post by ajsnigrutin »

beepbooptheory wrote: post #216

The general resistance in this thread is something. Every day on here we all find issues with the industry as a whole, have complaints, identify negative patterns grounded in investment goals or profit. A huge majority of people on here agree: there are problems and things as a whole need to change. Its not "what use is a union to me ", it is that there is an ethical imperative to try and fight against the destructiv…

The unions in slovenia opose the reduction of income tax for workers (after years of saying that they want to tax the capital more and work less). So yeah... unions in some places are politics first, their own pockets above that, and workers fifth.

Re: New York Times tech workers vote to certify union

#245

Post by datavirtue »

thinkharderdev wrote: post #225
beepbooptheory wrote: post #216

The general resistance in this thread is something. Every day on here we all find issues with the industry as a whole, have complaints, identify negative patterns grounded in investment goals or profit. A huge majority of people on here agree: there are problems and things as a whole need to change. Its not "what use is a union to me ", it is that there is an ethical imperative to try and fight against the destructiv…

I wouldn't frame unions as a "fight against the destructive force of profit seeking itself." Unions have every bit as much incentive to maximize profits as shareholders. It's about the distribution of profits between capital and labor.

It's about more than money. Workers should have veto power over management decisions that hurt the business' viability or that would violate ethical values. It is the next inevitable step in human institutional evolution--democracy making it's way into working life.

Some companies don't unions because they are built in. Messer Construction and Gore Industries are two examples. They are employee owned , operated, and managed.

Re: New York Times tech workers vote to certify union

#246

Post by dls2016 »

UncleMeat wrote: post #237
Kalium wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

Developers are constantly complaining about things. Unions could fight for * Access to remote work * Pay that isn't adjusted by location * Transparency in performance review and promotion processes * Better leave policies * Better equity access policies * Opportunities to fire shit managers * Elimination of forced attrition policies Software engineers are paid very very well. We have better working conditions than mo…

* Manage on-call rotations.

Re: New York Times tech workers vote to certify union

#247

Post by loudtieblahblah »

beepbooptheory wrote: post #216

The general resistance in this thread is something. Every day on here we all find issues with the industry as a whole, have complaints, identify negative patterns grounded in investment goals or profit. A huge majority of people on here agree: there are problems and things as a whole need to change. Its not "what use is a union to me ", it is that there is an ethical imperative to try and fight against the destructiv…

im just happy theres one more destructive force taking on the NYTimes.

i hope i live long enough to see the company perish.

Re: New York Times tech workers vote to certify union

#248

Post by pydry »

UncleMeat wrote: post #237
Kalium wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

Developers are constantly complaining about things. Unions could fight for * Access to remote work * Pay that isn't adjusted by location * Transparency in performance review and promotion processes * Better leave policies * Better equity access policies * Opportunities to fire shit managers * Elimination of forced attrition policies Software engineers are paid very very well. We have better working conditions than mo…

Im pretty sure if software development was unionized a brighter light would be shone on disastrous offshoring in the last two decades.

A lot of people lost a lot of money for a lot of shareholders with a lot of disastrous projects and by and large it was shrugged off and swept under the carpet as management realized that tech couldnt be treated as a production line affair.

Re: New York Times tech workers vote to certify union

#249

Post by refurb »

beepbooptheory wrote: post #216

The general resistance in this thread is something. Every day on here we all find issues with the industry as a whole, have complaints, identify negative patterns grounded in investment goals or profit. A huge majority of people on here agree: there are problems and things as a whole need to change. Its not "what use is a union to me ", it is that there is an ethical imperative to try and fight against the destructiv…

Nope. Your statement acts like unions don’t involve trade offs - whatever your situation, unions will make it better.

The truth is there are trade offs - recognition of merit replaced by recognition of seniority, protection of bad workers (and the toxic effect on work culture that has) and “lowest common denominator” bargaining.

I’m certainly not saying unions don’t have a place, but workers should have a choice and in some cases, no union is actually the smart choice.

Re: New York Times tech workers vote to certify union

#250

Post by pydry »

bigbillheck wrote: post #205
eru wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Competition is insurance against that, too. Alas, unions can have their own principal-agent problems and bureaucracy and hubris.

Competition usually turns into collusion and consolidation.

I find it weird that nobody is seeing this in tech.

The automovotive market used to have garage based startups a long time ago. It used to have fierce competition and workers could get pay raises without unions.

Then gradually everything fell under 3 big companies, workers fought the concentration of market power by unionizing (and lost) and for decades there was just the big 3.

It's not even a question of if or even who tech will consolidate under any more - it will be someone who is currwently a household name. It is when.

It's coming.

Post reply on HN