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

301–310 of 335 posts

Re: New York Times tech workers vote to certify union

#301

Post by ceejayoz »

scarface74 wrote: post #300
ceejayoz wrote: post #296

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

If the company isn’t competitive and can’t pay their negotiated rates - they file for bankruptcy. When has a union ever protected workers when a company was in distress? The auto industry? The airline industry? Flight controllers in the 80s?

> If the company isn’t competitive and can’t pay their negotiated rates - they file for bankruptcy.

That's hardly the only scenario. Sometimes they're chasing more profits.

> When has a union ever protected workers when a company was in distress? The auto industry? The airline industry? Flight controllers in the 80s?

Auto is a good example. In the last recession, UAW made significant compromises to keep the industry afloat. https://newrepublic.com/article/155088/gm-uaw-workers-strike When the industry bounced back, they struck to ensure those concessions were rewarded: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2019_General_Motors_strike

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2021_John_Deere_strike is another recent example of unions winning significant concessions after a company threatened to offshore.

Re: New York Times tech workers vote to certify union

#302

Post by dbsmith83 »

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…

Please, just because something is not perfect doesn't meed you need a union. I can speak from actual experience about how shitty unions are. Can you say the same? If you want to be treated like a child and micromanaged so that the company can protect itself against the worst employees, then by all means, join a union. If you want to sacrifice your individual privileges to help prop up everyone who works less hard than you, then join a union. This lofty idea about opposing destructive forces is naive hogwash.

Re: New York Times tech workers vote to certify union

#303

Post by igorkraw »

zarkov99 wrote: post #274
igorkraw wrote: post #213

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't want to start a debate about solidarity or not since you made your position implicitly clear, but I am genuinely interested: Do you apply the same logic to having a police force while not being robbed, getting insurance or paying taxes? (these are various degrees of the same logic to me, not the same)

Solidarity to whom? A group of people that have the same super valuable skills as me? Why do they deserve any of my solidarity any more than anyone else? As to your point, I agree, it is all about degrees, and in my mind the degree to which we, in tech, need unions is 0. I don't buy, at all, the argument that if we should get unionized, with all the negative that implies, just in case we cannot do it when it is neede…

As a start, you could join unions that organise cross-domain and make life for QA, tech support and many others nicer. Or achieve any other corporation specific goal that you can't change achieve your own (higher quality standards, 20% time etc., Better bonuses...make sure you get as much of the value you create as possible). Life could be even nicer basically.

If you are convinced you can still do it when programmers aren't in demand anymore and they won't immediately offshore those jobs, I won't convince you otherwise.

Re: New York Times tech workers vote to certify union

#304

Post by ajsnigrutin »

kiliantics wrote: post #265
ajsnigrutin wrote: post #244

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

This very same argument could be made against liberal democracies, where there is a potential for similar dynamics of corruption to develop. However, almost no one would argue that liberal democracy isn't preferable to a system where one person or a small group can decide everything. Unions give you a vote and that is better than the alternative. Preventing a union from becoming corrupted is another problem and there…

If most of the unions were good, and just a few corrupt, people would look differently at them... When the situation is reversed, with many corrupt ones, and only a few not, people stop supporting them.

Re: New York Times tech workers vote to certify union

#305

Post by Frondo »

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.

Indeed, even in our beloved tech industry, the biggest employers have absolutely colluded to keep workers' wages down:

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2014/apr/24/apple-goo...

And still people trust management...

Re: New York Times tech workers vote to certify union

#306

Post by scarface74 »

toomuchtodo wrote: post #298
scarface74 wrote: post #297

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

You work at a digital sweatshop (AWS [1], who cannot hire fast enough for the talent they bleed) but still don't believe in the merits of organization, so what would the value be in attempting to change your mind? Not rhetorical, I am genuinely curious. 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])…

I work in Professional Services. I don’t have those issues. I am very much in control of my own projects and calendar. I manage my customers expectations and make sure that they understand the holy trinity - time, cost and requirements. We agree on the scope of work before we start on a project and I manage the timelines not to overwork myself.

This goes back to ensuring that I had a set of skills and experience so when I was initially contacted about an SDE position, I could say “no”, and they suggested I apply for a position in the consulting department.

I also didn’t go through the DS&A leetCode monkey dance and could apply for a remote position.

I was very much prepared to say “no” to Amazon if all I could get was an SDE position which required me to be on call or relocate.

If AWS ProServe does every get to be an environment where I don’t like the work life balance, I will leave here just like I left my other 7 jobs.

Re: New York Times tech workers vote to certify union

#307

Post by TulliusCicero »

baud147258 wrote: post #193
TulliusCicero wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 th…

Though if paying union dues is optional, the unions present in a company will have to show they can do something to actually improve the situation of the workers and not just collect dues by just existing

The problem here is that much of a union’s work is improving the general work culture and policies to be more labor-friendly. Letting people pay union dues optionally means they get a lot of the benefit of the union without paying for it. Classic free rider problem.

Re: New York Times tech workers vote to certify union

#308

Post by scarface74 »

rdtwo wrote: post #277
scarface74 wrote: post #255

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I happen to work at AWS (ProServe). You know what people did when they saw the wages weren’t competitive? They started leaving in droves forcing Amazon to be competitive. https://www.geekwire.com/2022/amazon-more-than-doubles-max-b... The free market and free will is a great thing isn’t it? So wouldn’t unions also prevent top performers from negotiating wages? How much did unions help the auto industry?

In tech the workers have a lot more negotiating power because you aren’t trapped by heavy capital equipment costs. Still unions help with some of the shitty practices you see like the pip shenanigans at Amazon. There is a cost but if you need or want a stable place to work for more than a few years without burnout they help with work life Protections

I mentioned I work in ProServe specifically to imply that I don’t have those issues. “I control my calendar”. I make sure the scope of work is well defined before I take on any work if I’m not involved in the pre sales part and I am responsible for setting reasonable expectations with my customers.

In my org, it’s a sign of poor project management and customer management skills if you are constantly overbooked and it’s considered a negative.

Of course all that went out of the window during the first three months after Covid.

Re: New York Times tech workers vote to certify union

#309

Post by scarface74 »

rdtwo wrote: post #279
scarface74 wrote: post #267

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is this really what we want as a society? https://fortune.com/longform/unions-workplace-technology/ And they fight against merit pay. https://www.econlib.org/archives/2010/10/why_do_unions_o.htm...

If you think you are the top 10% of management favorites then you will not benefit. If you are a middling engineer then you will

I don’t have to be the top 10%. I just have to be better than the median. I should be better than the median in my mid 40s.

Re: New York Times tech workers vote to certify union

#310

Post by [deleted] »

scarface74 wrote: post #306
toomuchtodo wrote: post #298

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You work at a digital sweatshop (AWS [1], who cannot hire fast enough for the talent they bleed) but still don't believe in the merits of organization, so what would the value be in attempting to change your mind? Not rhetorical, I am genuinely curious. 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])…

I work in Professional Services. I don’t have those issues. I am very much in control of my own projects and calendar. I manage my customers expectations and make sure that they understand the holy trinity - time, cost and requirements. We agree on the scope of work before we start on a project and I manage the timelines not to overwork myself. This goes back to ensuring that I had a set of skills and experience so w…

[deleted]
Post reply on HN