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

Tech Workers Deserve a Union: An Interview with Ethan Marcotte

workerorganizing.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

361–370 of 380 posts

Re: Tech Workers Deserve a Union: An Interview with Ethan Marcotte

#361

Post by ryandrake »

idiotsecant wrote: post #209
consz wrote: post #196

It’s absolutely incredible to me how much animosity unions have in the US and how self defeating the typical programmers attitude is (maybe this is just selection bias for HN?) — and I say this as someone who’s definitely not a laborer. But if I was one, I would hope I wouldn’t vote against my own class interests like it appears developers often do. Luckily, even speaking openly against my own interests here is zero…

Its a mix of crabs in a pot and 'f u I got mine' syndrome. I've largely given up trying to convince HN readers that tech work in the future will be the modern equivalent of bricklaying and will need its own protection for workers. Workers enjoy a high demand now and think that will always be the case but blacksmiths and telegraph operators thought so too.

Exactly. Crabs in the pot. "How dare you suggest lifting everyone up. Only I should be lifted up!" A lot of HN thinks they are Captains Of Industry who would somehow make less money in a union. The rest point to the least-pleasant union they can think of and declare "They are all necessarily like that one."

Re: Tech Workers Deserve a Union: An Interview with Ethan Marcotte

#362

Post by AnimalMuppet »

workingjubilee wrote: post #356
AnimalMuppet wrote: post #312

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So? Unions also bought and influenced media outlets. They also lobbied. It's not like unions just sat there while management poisoned the country's mind against unions. Unions were not able to make a compelling case. They had every chance to do so, starting with them being the default option in many industries. America abandoned unions for a reason. It may have taken a concerted effort by corporate capitalists to get…

It can be the case that people didn't feel that unions were a net positive from the 1960s~2000s and now, starting from somewhere in the late 2010s, have begun reconsidering whether unions are net positive. All that needs to change is conditions altering which make unions seem to be a net positive.

Sure. It can even be the case that unions were a net positive before 1960, too. It can even be the case that the gains achieved by the unions are what made conditions less terrible from ~1960 to ~2000, and that the absence of the unions is what allowed conditions to get worse after 2000. (I don't think that's the whole story, but it's a defensible reading of events...)

Re: Tech Workers Deserve a Union: An Interview with Ethan Marcotte

#363

Post by adrianovaroli »

alphazard wrote: post #22

Don't unions work best in fields where quality is very uniform and expertise counts for very little? I'm thinking about low skilled jobs that can be mastered in months or years. Unions create salary progression, and benefits for seniority where there is otherwise no reason for them to exist. When no one does anything better than anyone else, it makes sense to negotiate as a block, individuals have no power. Now compa…

Volkswagen workers are unionized. Their expertise counts for a lot.

Re: Tech Workers Deserve a Union: An Interview with Ethan Marcotte

#364

Post by adrianovaroli »

itsoktocry wrote: post #66
frant-hartm wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you are on an assembly line and you have 45 s to do your job you either do it, or don't. If you do it fast and wait for 40 s you don't add any value.

> If you are on an assembly line and you have 45 s to do your job you either do it, or don't. If you do it fast and wait for 40 s you don't add any value. Have you worked on an assembly line? I have. You may not add value by doing it faster, but you certainly cause problems if you do it slower.

With all due respect, why are you both talking about yourselves as if you were machines? If your job is so mechanical it can be automated, you're screwed. If it's not, but your boss wants to downsize it bc "savings", a union would help you.

Re: Tech Workers Deserve a Union: An Interview with Ethan Marcotte

#365

Post by adrianovaroli »

dartos wrote: post #171
itsoktocry wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The best engineers are worth literally 10x the worst engineers Uh, I'm pretty sure the best employees in any field are worth 10x what the worst employees are, whether you're writing code, assembling a car or gutting fish. The economics of labour suggest unions are most valuable where there's a monopsony buyer of labour. Big Tech might fit that bill, especially when we know they colluded to depress salaries.

Specifically in the software development field, a good engineer increases the productivity of all other engineers in a way that allows engineers to increase the productivity of each other in a compounding way. A “10x” engineer is worth a compounding amount more than their peers. I don’t think that holds for every field.

Jorge Luis Borges colleagues at the National Library forced him to go slower because he could catalogue books in a fraction of the time they needed.

So yeah, if you're an absolute genius, you don't need a union. Everybody else does. Your common people colleagues do.

Re: Tech Workers Deserve a Union: An Interview with Ethan Marcotte

#366

Post by adrianovaroli »

Many of the top replies are about "I'm a top programmer, why would I need a union? change my mind"

And, you don't. Not right now. When you're just "a common worker" you do. Because your bosses have convinced you everybody has to be a top programmer or they can die in a ditch even when it's impossible. It's called Stackhanovism.

Re: Tech Workers Deserve a Union: An Interview with Ethan Marcotte

#367

Post by advisedwang »

nhumrich wrote: post #93

What about a union that spans companies something akin to the directors guild of america, whom almost all Hollywood creatives are apart of? I think it's purpose is very similar to how software engineers work on practice.

Labor law makes it difficult to achieve, sadly. The NLRA only provides for bargaining units within one employer. Unless you can get an industry wide coalition to voluntarily recognize your union, it is not happening.

Re: Tech Workers Deserve a Union: An Interview with Ethan Marcotte

#368

Post by pyreticRitual »

bjornsing wrote: post #249
pyreticRitual wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do terrible NBA players get to keep their jobs? The pithy response is to point at like, James Harden, but on the whole professional basketball is very meritocratic and yet they have a union. Pro sports in general. Netflix said they run their company like a pro sports team, why not include that players have a union?

> Do terrible NBA players get to keep their jobs? Sports is different because there’s only a certain number of spots on the field. This changes the dynamics and keeps the crab mentality at bay. The same is not true for most workplaces.

How so? The limited number of spots seems like it would enhance negative behavior, not curb it.

Re: Tech Workers Deserve a Union: An Interview with Ethan Marcotte

#369

Post by atmavatar »

jhgfjhgfjhfgjhg wrote: post #188
itsoktocry wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The best engineers are worth literally 10x the worst engineers Uh, I'm pretty sure the best employees in any field are worth 10x what the worst employees are, whether you're writing code, assembling a car or gutting fish. The economics of labour suggest unions are most valuable where there's a monopsony buyer of labour. Big Tech might fit that bill, especially when we know they colluded to depress salaries.

You would depress the wages of 10x engineers with unions. Look at teacher unions for an example.

Actors and athletes don't seem to have that problem despite having unions.
Post reply on HN