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

Fastmail Employees Form a Union

union.place

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 303 posts

Re: Fastmail Employees Form a Union

#131

Post by bee_rider »

tobyjsullivan wrote: post #70
coldpie wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unions don't always indicate there is a problem in need of solving. It's just a group of employees agreeing to bargain collectively with their employer, which helps balance out the negotiation power between employees and the employer and creates a stable, well-defined employment relationship.

I struggle to imagine a scenario where employees would unionize despite already feeling like they are treated fairly. The union/employer relationship is inherently hostile. The whole idea is that unionized employees can threaten production/profits as negotiation leverage. Choosing that path means the employees have already given up on cooperation based on goodwill. It must take a very sour relationship to reach that…

The union/management relationship is maybe inherently adversarial in the sense that they represent different interests, but this doesn’t need to be hostile. The idea is that the unionized employees have the ability to threaten collective action, if they need to.

Maybe neither side is planning on doing anything hostile, and they are all happy to have things clearly defined.

Re: Fastmail Employees Form a Union

#132

Post by jamiequint »

rini17 wrote: post #88
shortrounddev2 wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You know a company is morally bankrupt if they fight their employees unionizing Any company would oppose their employees unionizing; they have a fiduciary duty to do so

Everyone has a duty to maintain human dignity, too.

That's a non sequitur, the existence or nonexistence of unions says nothing about human dignity.

Re: Fastmail Employees Form a Union

#133

Post by _cenw »

buzzert wrote: post #114

Does anybody know what motivated the unionization effort? This is relevant to me as a Fastmail customer, because if the employees aren't being treated well that's a very poor reflection of the company.

Fastmail's podcast seems to be pro union, at least for actors:

https://www.fastmail.com/digitalcitizen/the-future-of-ai-wit...

I wouldn't read too much into it. Unions are just a counterweight to corporate interests in the best case. The places that union bust out in the open are usually the worst offenders, and Fastmail doesn't seem to be that.

Re: Fastmail Employees Form a Union

#134

Post by kevin_thibedeau »

mvexel wrote: post #24

LinkedIn says Fastmail has 116 U.S. based employees. I may be completely off base here, but if you're that small an org and employees feel the need to form a union, wouldn't that indicate a significant problem with company culture?

If they're generating massive profits and not receiving proportional compensation then collective action can produce a fairer outcome.

Re: Fastmail Employees Form a Union

#135

Post by coldpie »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #115
givemeethekeys wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's quite small. Having worked at a few companies in the 30-50 employee mark, while it is true that I could speak to management almost any time, it was also obvious that they were very busy.

> companies in the 30-50 employee mark, while it is true that I could speak to management almost any time, it was also obvious that they were very busy Sure. But if you had a grievance, you could voice it. And if you needed to pull some like-minded coworkers together to underline it's shared, that could be done ad hoc . If a 50-person company needs a union (because e.g. management refuses to listen) that's a problem.…

> But there is very obviously a point below which unionization is a sign of dysfunction.

FWIW I don't think that's obvious at all. Even a small group of happy employees could form a union to set the current policies everyone is happy with in stone and protect themselves and future employees against potential changes in ownership or a downturn in company health.

Re: Fastmail Employees Form a Union

#136

Post by r2_pilot »

jamiequint wrote: post #128
r2_pilot wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would argue they have a fiduciary duty to NOT do so, as "unfair labor practices" are illegal per the National Labor Relations Act.

You don't need a union to go after a company in violation of the NRLA ...

That's not what I said nor was responding to. The GP asserted that companies have a fiduciary duty to avoid unionizing, and my counterargument is that such activity could be illegal which is actively detrimental to a company's fiduciary duty.

Re: Fastmail Employees Form a Union

#137

Post by tfourb »

vasco wrote: post #104
dagw wrote: post #97

Slightly off topic, but could someone explain why employees in the US keep having to form their own union at each company, rather than the employees just joining an existing union? If I wanted to join a union where live, I'd just pick a relevant union, go to their home page, and click 'join'.

And then what other than paying the fees? I'm not pro union, but without organizing with your peers in the same company I even see less point. The main aspect that I could see in unionizing is representing the voice of the workers of the company together. If you're alone working with an external entity or if your colleagues all join different ones I can't see any way of it working.

At least in Germany we have "sectoral bargaining" enshrined in law. The relevant union and the coalition of employers negotiate a deal (sometimes this process involves strike actions, if common ground can not be found initially). This deal automatically applies to all employees in the sector (i.e. metal workers).

Some sectors do not have sectoral bargaining but certain unions have agreements with some subset of employers in that sector to have all their workers covered by any deal that is struck. The incentive for employers in those sectors (i.e. automotive) to join these agreements is that desirable employees usually prefer unionized shops, as they have better overall compensation packages and perks. Also they might not want to become the target of strikes.

Not directly tied to unionization, workers in companies above a certain size have to be included in decision making (i.e. in public companies worker representatives get board seats) so a pro-union position often has a certain groundswell of support within a shop.

For historic reasons, in some sectors union membership is part of the "culture", as well. Historically, unions have had an important role in upwards social mobility, popular education, culture, etc.

Re: Fastmail Employees Form a Union

#138

Post by hiAndrewQuinn »

niels8472 wrote: post #53
haolez wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unions are really powerful in corrupt and underdeveloped countries. Correlation is not causation, but still, it's frustrating for workers in those regions.

The least corrupt countries per the corruption perceptions index also (mostly) have strong unions. Danmark and Finland topping the list have 70% membership.

US-Finland expat here, and yes, I quite like my union. But I especially like my unemployment fund: 100 euros a year gets me 50% of my pre-tax salary for a year if I lose or leave my job.

Unemployment insurance plans seem underrated in general by FTEs, both in the US and elsewhere. Without it, your ability to exercise both halves of "voice or exit" in the corporate world are severely curtailed. Like life insurance, it's relatively hard to game as a policy - it's usually pretty clear when you lose your salaried job, just like it's usually pretty clear when you die. I see few downsides, especially if you live cheap enough to pay all of your bills on that X% of your income anyway.

Re: Fastmail Employees Form a Union

#139

Post by bee_rider »

shortrounddev2 wrote: post #77
Freak_NL wrote: post #7

As a Fastmail customer: great! More power to them. If anything, any negative reaction by Fastmail, the corporation will act as a signal for me to start thinking about moving away. You know a company is morally bankrupt if they fight their employees unionizing. I don't think Fastmail will do that though.

> You know a company is morally bankrupt if they fight their employees unionizing Any company would oppose their employees unionizing; they have a fiduciary duty to do so

Do you have any examples of case law to support this claim you’ve made? As a layman my understand of fiduciary duty is not very good, it is easy to imagine how things might in the long term interest of the business, or might not be, and it seems like it would be extremely difficult to prove either way in court.

Re: Fastmail Employees Form a Union

#140

Post by treyd »

legitster wrote: post #125
dagw wrote: post #97

Slightly off topic, but could someone explain why employees in the US keep having to form their own union at each company, rather than the employees just joining an existing union? If I wanted to join a union where live, I'd just pick a relevant union, go to their home page, and click 'join'.

Unions in the US are a much different beast. Counterintuitively, Unions in the US have much more legal power in some ways than international counterparts - if they get officially recognized . But official recognition is only workplace-to-workplace and has an election process to follow: https://www.nlrb.gov/about-nlrb/what-we-do/conduct-elections Since it's more all-or-nothing per workplace, your membership is basical…

Also of note is that the US doesn't really have sectoral bargaining like, say, France does. This would prevent scenarios where nonunionized companices in a sector can start up and outperform established unionized ones just by hiring desperate people and paying them below the fair rate.
Post reply on HN