291–300 of 335 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The police union is famously regarded as different than other unions, but I have heard of many teachers getting fired (see sibling comment)
And I've heard of teachers who are universally disliked by students, teachers, and administrators who are too difficult to fire. These are people who get switched to a new co-teacher every single year because the last one refuses to work with them again. I'm not anti-union but it's a double edged sword.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I would leave a company if they forced a 2% tax on me to join a union I didn’t want to join after I started working there.
Vote with your feet, just if management changed the role materially. The role would likely be filled quickly by replacement talent desiring the protections such representation offers.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Vote with your feet, just if management changed the role materially. The role would likely be filled quickly by replacement talent desiring the protections such representation offers.
You mean by someone who would be okay with their compensation being negotiated by collective bargaining? How many of the most aggressive, most talented engineers would be willing to give up their negotiating leverage to a union?
The data is pretty clear that most folks aren't good at or able to negotiate an outlier comp package (with some orgs not even allowing comp negotiation for equity purposes), so collective bargaining would net them more than them attempting to negotiate on their own. Of course folks at the high end of the comp structure complain, but that seems to be a given regardless and will be ever present.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It is in spite of these differences that employers have great leverage, not because of them. It's plain to see that the inherent coordination problems facing workers are much harder than the ones facing managers. It's plain to see that a capitalist is far better positioned to negotiate a labor contract than someone trying to feed their family. Please explain how history has repeatedly shown capitalists more ready, wi…
"It's plain to see that the inherent coordination problems facing workers are much harder than the ones facing managers" It is not plain to me. Employers are just people too, but if they try to conspire with other employers they must do so in secret lest their conspiracy be discovered and punished. Your example of wage fixing in the valley shows this in action perfectly. Yet if employees want to do the exact same thi…
The history of labor is full of people killed and injured by police and other thugs-for-hire by capitalists who couldn't be bothered to care about anything but their profits.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Theres a lot more reasons that can lead to job loss other than technical competence. Being in a union gives you a slice of ownership in the company you're working in. It allows you to have support if you're getting bullied. It also creates a wonderful dynamic with your coworkers. But yeah, framing this as a technical problem is missing the point entirely.
I realize that. My financial livelihood is not dependent on my current job. It’s dependent on my ability to get another job. It is purely about you taking control of your own career and not wait for the union or government to protect you. The demand for software developers is not new. It’s been there since I started working in 1996.
This is what you're saying: Do you use any type of insurance? If so why are you waiting for these companies to compensate you? Just take control of your own life and don't use them.
Unions are a system of mass negotiation. The same systems that make our economy work.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> The unions kept pushing for increased pay. Sure, that's their job. Individuals do the same thing; unions just mean everyone negotiates as a group instead of one at a time, with a more balanced power dynamic. > But regardless, what good would unions be to prevent outsourcing? Unions aren't magical. That doesn't mean there's zero value in such a scenario. They can negotiate rules and limits on layoffs, they can negot…
How are they going to “negotiate”? If they say “no” what are the union members going to do strike? The company is trying to get rid of them anyway.
Unions negotiate in advance. They set up multi-year contracts between employees and management. These often involve limitations on the company's ability to lay people off, or otherwise meaningfully change employment conditions.
They're not unlimited, and they don't go forever, but it tends to mean there's a lot fewer "surprise! you're all fired tomorrow!" scenarios, because there's contractual protections in place that companies won't give individuals without bargaining power.
Again, unions aren't magic - they can't prevent all layoffs. They can make them harder to do, and they can protect employees better during one.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You mean by someone who would be okay with their compensation being negotiated by collective bargaining? How many of the most aggressive, most talented engineers would be willing to give up their negotiating leverage to a union?
Most engineering roles don't require a "most aggressive, most talented" engineer. Someone less aggressive of modest talent is likely still a great fit for the work to be done. 10x-100x developers are overrated unless at an early stage startup where that skill level is crucial to get to product market fit and onward from there to sustainable hyper growth. Also, Dunning–Kruger. If you think you're super talented, allow…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Most engineering roles don't require a "most aggressive, most talented" engineer. Someone less aggressive of modest talent is likely still a great fit for the work to be done. 10x-100x developers are overrated unless at an early stage startup where that skill level is crucial to get to product market fit and onward from there to sustainable hyper growth. Also, Dunning–Kruger. If you think you're super talented, allow…
So, by your definition, the unionized shops would attract only “average” developers. How competitive will they be against companies that are more aggressive about recruitment by offering more talented people more money?
Higher level, I have a hypothesis that this boils down to empathy capacity, which some cohorts have more than others (and there is likely a genetic component [2] [3]), and therefore appeals are unlikely to sway opinions). You believe in optimizing for the individual, others believe in optimizing for the collective.
[1] https://www.google.com/search?q=aws+sweatshop
[2] https://www.cam.ac.uk/research/news/study-finds-that-genes-p...
[3] https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2018/03/180312085124.h...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I realize that. My financial livelihood is not dependent on my current job. It’s dependent on my ability to get another job. It is purely about you taking control of your own career and not wait for the union or government to protect you. The demand for software developers is not new. It’s been there since I started working in 1996.
Taking control of your own career could mean supporting a union. This is what you're saying: Do you use any type of insurance? If so why are you waiting for these companies to compensate you? Just take control of your own life and don't use them. Unions are a system of mass negotiation. The same systems that make our economy work.
Our economy works based on supply and demand and individuals making the best choices for themselves. Again I get back to Amazon (where I work). They weren’t forced to completely redo their compensation packages across corporate because of a union. They were forced to do so because SDEs were quitting like crazy.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
How are they going to “negotiate”? If they say “no” what are the union members going to do strike? The company is trying to get rid of them anyway.
I'm not sure how useful this is going to be if you only read portions of the replies. Unions negotiate in advance . They set up multi-year contracts between employees and management. These often involve limitations on the company's ability to lay people off, or otherwise meaningfully change employment conditions. They're not unlimited, and they don't go forever, but it tends to mean there's a lot fewer "surprise! you…