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

Microsoft workers to form company’s first union in the U.S.

wsj.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 222 posts

Re: Microsoft workers to form company’s first union in the U.S.

#91

Post by Quarrelsome »

randomdata wrote: post #82
Quarrelsome wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I feel like this implication you're positing where unions and labour conflicts can only result in "rampant inflation" is untested.

If anything, it seems that increased unionization lags behind inflation. Which may not be surprising as high inflation discourages saving, meaning that people are more likely to buy the things they want now to not have to pay much more later, which results in businesses increasing production to fill the increased demand, requiring more labour, and thus labour finds itself in a stronger position. As the only power uni…

> If anything, it seems that increased unionization lags behind inflation.

Indeed, I think we could argue inflation is a cause of unionisation as opposed to our OP's position where it is implied that unionisation leads to inflation.

Re: Microsoft workers to form company’s first union in the U.S.

#92

Post by js8 »

susanasj wrote: post #28
lettergram wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Have you ever worked in a company with a union? Look what just happened to the railroad workers. The US government forced them back to work and gave everything to the companies. Unions are effectively a corporation running labor. So you go from working for the company to working for your union rep. They then pimp you out and get kick backs. Wanna leave your job for another company or role? Good luck, you drop in seni…

this is close to just straight up misinformation, but I'll point out the fundamental difference that you are ignoring in your analogy. You pay your union rep (via dues). It's not that you work for your union rep, it's that they work for you , just like you work for your company.

Also, aren't unions in the U.S. democratic in the sense that the union members elect their reps? AFAIK you don't vote for company management, so that's another power differential.

Re: Microsoft workers to form company’s first union in the U.S.

#93

Post by vsareto »

lettergram wrote: post #7
yakattak wrote: post #4

Game companies need this. It’s one of the “software engineering” adjacent subfields that is extremely exploited. The salaries are low, the work is stressful, crunch is high. The reason for this dangerous combo? You’re working your dream job. This is good, I hope the employees at ActivisionBlizzard can finalize their union if they’re purchased by Microsoft.

Have you ever worked in a company with a union? Look what just happened to the railroad workers. The US government forced them back to work and gave everything to the companies. Unions are effectively a corporation running labor. So you go from working for the company to working for your union rep. They then pimp you out and get kick backs. Wanna leave your job for another company or role? Good luck, you drop in seni…

None of these downsides are really much different than just being an employee, except without the union, you have lower pay and benefits.

Re: Microsoft workers to form company’s first union in the U.S.

#94

Post by phpisthebest »

toomuchtodo wrote: post #79
phpisthebest wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>>Because wage is all you care for. yes.. >>How about: maternity leave, paid sick leave, child support, paid vacation days, wage protections, etc. etc.? I have no children, I will never have children, and I rarely get sick, and I hate to travel so none of that matters to me. I am forced by my employer to take the vacation I do get, and my "vacation" is me sitting around my house doing chores or gaming which I do with…

Thank goodness you only need a majority of votes to unionize.

History shows the result of that is often the highly productive staff exits for greener opportunities where they are not penalized for doing more than the minimum not to get fired, and over all the entire operation suffers leading to outsourcing or closing of facilities.

Re: Microsoft workers to form company’s first union in the U.S.

#95

Post by bantunes »

itworkslikethat wrote: post #90
afavour wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Musicians are generally exploited, too. I don't really see the argument against forming a union just because you enjoy your job. More worker power is a good thing.

Making music is usually not a job. You're making your own intellectual property and sometimes you're successful in selling it. Should we subsidize other kinds of unsuccessful businesses too?

Making music is very much a job for studio and road crews, and those workers could benefit from a union.

And how are unions subsidization?

Re: Microsoft workers to form company’s first union in the U.S.

#96

Post by chii »

rainsford wrote: post #58
hiddencost wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think of it like this: It's the company's job to maximize shareholder value. It's the worker's job to maximize worker value. It's the market's job to push profit to zero. So the union is like a new force in the equation: they put pressure on the company to give the workers more value. Which could actually be good for business: if treating workers results in better work product, the shareholders might not push for t…

I always think of unions as less a new force in the equation you described and more of a labor side equivalent of the collective organizing and action that happens on the company/shareholder side to maximize value. Instead of individual workers all trying to maximize their value in isolation with the company trying to collectively maximize value for all shareholders, unions ideally make it more of a one-to-one balanc…

> only a small drop in shareholder value, for example, that could be considered a net win.

only the shareholders can decide if this is worth a drop. And i would imagine the majority of them would not accept a small drop like that.

Re: Microsoft workers to form company’s first union in the U.S.

#97

Post by mattficke »

giantg2 wrote: post #57

There are times I wish I had a union working for tech in finance. Although it seems like a real contract would fix most of the issues without unions. These one page "we make the rules and can change them at any time" contracts are bogus. There's no accountability, no fairness. Things become arbitrary. There's no accountability when the company violates it's own policies.

> Although it seems like a real contract would fix most of the issues without unions.

It’s hard to disentangle these, unions are effectively the only way for non-executive[0] employees (in the US) to get an employment contract that isn’t one-sided in favor of the employer. The primary function of a union is to obtain a contract.

[0] I highly recommend reading the “Executive Severance Plan” section of any publicly traded tech company’s SEC filings, they are fascinating.

Re: Microsoft workers to form company’s first union in the U.S.

#98

Post by cool_dude85 »

nonethewiser wrote: post #89
cool_dude85 wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I work in a white collar union in the US and this has not been my experience at all. I don't "work for my union rep", the "highest rank in the union" wouldn't decide what happens in case of layoffs, very little is based on seniority. Sounds like you have a very warped idea of what union work is like.

You quite literally do work for your union by definition of unions under US law.

No, I quite literally don't work for my union. They don't sign my check, hire or fire me, manage my day-to-day work, or do anything else that constitutes employment.

Re: Microsoft workers to form company’s first union in the U.S.

#99

Post by satvikpendem »

dmitriid wrote: post #9
lettergram wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Have you ever worked in a company with a union? Look what just happened to the railroad workers. The US government forced them back to work and gave everything to the companies. Unions are effectively a corporation running labor. So you go from working for the company to working for your union rep. They then pimp you out and get kick backs. Wanna leave your job for another company or role? Good luck, you drop in seni…

Or you end up like Europe. With long maternity leave, paid sick days, overtime pay etc.

And much lower wages, no?

Re: Microsoft workers to form company’s first union in the U.S.

#100

Post by camgunz »

lettergram wrote: post #38
rayiner wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I find it weird that nobody in the US seems to look beyond their country or similar systems for different models regarding this. Looking to European models would be great. But the current American union structure is written into federal statute, and there is approximately zero chance of the statute ever being amended.

> Looking to European models would be great. Europeans on average earn half of Americans https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._states_and_terr... https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_European_countries_b... Software engineers make 4x or more their European counterparts If unions were effective I’d expect at least somewhat comparable wages… but that’s not the case. Is it time off it optimized for? I mean tha…

Incomes are generally lower, but EU residents generally have a higher standard of living than US residents according to Human Development Indexes. Life expectancy is also better, infant and maternal mortality are lower, test scores are higher, etc.

This is because of the prevalence of socialism, which came about because labor broadly won in Europe. I think Europe's example makes the benefits of unions clear.

Post reply on HN