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

Why top firms fire good workers

rochester.edu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 263 posts

Re: Why top firms fire good workers

#151

Post by wvbdmp »

Bombthecat wrote: post #136
raw_anon_1111 wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And when has a union ever stopped a multinational company from just closing shop and opening up overseas? If a company making physical things can do it, how hard do you think it would be for a software company?

Or close the location and just reopen later on. Story time: Berlin in Germany is pretty left leaning. So there was / is a MC Donalds which regularly formed union for employees, MC Donalds just closed the restaurant and reopened later, several times lol

I’m not familiar with that particular story, but it’s worth noting that there is a nationwide union for franchise restaurant workers called NGG. They negotiate standard wages with the franchise restaurant association BdS which all the big names adhere to (McDonald’s, Burger King, KFC, but also, for example, Starbucks). Your story sounds like it’s about a “Betriebsrat”, which represents workers within a specific workplace, complementary to wider unions.

Re: Why top firms fire good workers

#152

Post by autoexec »

tonyedgecombe wrote: post #134
z3dd wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think you know what you're talking about, or you are omitting western Europe. In Germany/Austria most workers are on collective bargaining agreements (different and specific for each industry, incl IT) which is regulated by unions plus org-specific councils (Betriebsräte in AT/DE, similar in other countries). Similar for Switzerland, also Collective labour agreements in Netherlands. Seems to be similar in Spa…

Yet isn't it a regular complaint that European tech salaries are half of what they would be in the US?

Isn't it a regular complaint that American tech workers don't get the kinds of benefits they would in Europe, especially healthcare? Even someone with a very nice American salary can be bankrupted by medical expenses very easily in America. When Americans do end up bankrupt it's usually medical debt that is to blame.

It seems like there should be room for a happy medium somewhere where some workers in the US maybe don't get the same salaries but are also not having to spend so much on healthcare, get more time with their families, get better just protections, etc. Once you make enough money that you're not really worried about meeting your bills and can pretty much buy what you want the peace of mind is more important than the bragging rights you get over who has a bigger paycheck.

Re: Why top firms fire good workers

#153

Post by mlrtime »

baq wrote: post #78
idiotsecant wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For whatever reason collective bargaining is wildly unpopular on HN, which is ironic because tech workers are exactly who should be organizing their labor.

Most everyone is a temporarily embarrassed unicorn founder around here.

This is such a cynical unoriginal take.

No, I don't care about being in a unicorn and I'm not a embarrassed billionaire. But I don't idolize unions either.

I don't want to be paid the same as all other workers with the same title, I like getting personal bonuses based on performance. I don't want to be in a union.

Re: Why top firms fire good workers

#154

Post by mlrtime »

instig007 wrote: post #130
vincnetas wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

sweden has unions and sweden has software companies. could it be that reasonable approach that benefits both parties can be achieved?

Sweden isn't famous for good tech salaries and stock grants though, even among the best/high profile engineers.

And this is where the union threads die, every time.

Top post is essentially saying Americans/SWE are dumb for not being in a union, then comparing to other countries. As soon as someone companies US SWE salaries to these union countries it falls apart quickly.

Re: Why top firms fire good workers

#155

Post by mlrtime »

autoexec wrote: post #150
gedy wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can only speak for myself, but I think there is a naive idealist view of (modern, American) unions that gloss over the tradeoffs. I don't want another bureaucratic layer that tells me what to do, and run by yet more HR admin-types. We aren't working in the coal mines or steel mills here in the 1920s. Sorry I'm not interested in that for office jobs. I'm glad they still work in some countries and cultures.

> I don't want another bureaucratic layer that tells me what to do, and run by yet more HR admin-types. That new bureaucratic layer would be designed to benefit you, and if it were to stop doing that and suddenly no longer served the interests of it's members you'd have the power to replace the leadership of that union or to leave it and start a new one. This is a huge improvement from the current bureaucratic layer…

Again, this is all very idealistic and not reality. Specifically for US SWE workers, this would not happen.

Re: Why top firms fire good workers

#156

Post by mlrtime »

blindhippo wrote: post #87
gedy wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can only speak for myself, but I think there is a naive idealist view of (modern, American) unions that gloss over the tradeoffs. I don't want another bureaucratic layer that tells me what to do, and run by yet more HR admin-types. We aren't working in the coal mines or steel mills here in the 1920s. Sorry I'm not interested in that for office jobs. I'm glad they still work in some countries and cultures.

I don't care what kind or style of job - if the balance of power in any labour relationship is overwhelmingly on the employer side, collective action is the only way labour can regain a modicum of negotiating power. To think that the style of job has any bearing on this relationship is naive.

>collective action is the only way labour can regain a modicum of negotiating power.

Does collective action mean everyone gets paid the same? If not, how does that work exactly?

Re: Why top firms fire good workers

#157

Post by mlrtime »

autoexec wrote: post #152
tonyedgecombe wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yet isn't it a regular complaint that European tech salaries are half of what they would be in the US?

Isn't it a regular complaint that American tech workers don't get the kinds of benefits they would in Europe, especially healthcare? Even someone with a very nice American salary can be bankrupted by medical expenses very easily in America. When Americans do end up bankrupt it's usually medical debt that is to blame. It seems like there should be room for a happy medium somewhere where some workers in the US maybe do…

No, I don't see those complaints anywhere. US workers are paid so much more that the lower salary + higher taxes are not worth it. Especially due to the fact that many of the high paying SWE jobs include very good health insurance.

So I so 0 benefit for me to join a union.

Re: Why top firms fire good workers

#158

Post by mlrtime »

distances wrote: post #111
zwnow wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because companies are going to base salaries on collective agreements with the union which are usually lower compared to the salary high paying jobs have. At least that's how unions work in my country. Unions are powerful because they can call for protests and employees who are in a union cant get laid off due to joining the protest. But its not worth if the job already has way better working conditions than like 80%…

I don't think your salary negotiation position is diminished by having some kind of a lower bound. Skilled employees should be able to get a higher salary if the employers value their skills, and that does happen all the time also in countries with strong unions, like those Nordics. Even without unions Europe wouldn't have US tech salary levels, those numbers come from other market dynamics.

So play it out with me. Use Faangs as an example please.

Say all the engineers in all the top engeering companies by pay were suddenly in a union, how does the collective bargaining work on pay. You don't think pay would be lowered for high level engineers?

Re: Why top firms fire good workers

#159

Post by mlrtime »

vincnetas wrote: post #112
zwnow wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because companies are going to base salaries on collective agreements with the union which are usually lower compared to the salary high paying jobs have. At least that's how unions work in my country. Unions are powerful because they can call for protests and employees who are in a union cant get laid off due to joining the protest. But its not worth if the job already has way better working conditions than like 80%…

"unions dont set max salaries" you are free to negotiate better salary. fact that union had agreed with company on minimum salary, does not change anything for you. yes the company can say "hey you asking too much, we talked with unions" but company can say the same either way "hey you asking too much, market is tough". so unions just the lower bar.

Who is free, individuals or the entire group?

Re: Why top firms fire good workers

#160

Post by mlrtime »

esseph wrote: post #86
zwnow wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hmm most people I know earn well above median and whenever I look at my regions statistics it confirms that... Joining an union would mean cuts to these people. I am a fan of unions for low pay jobs but not in tech.

Unions of low wage jobs have extremely limited bargaining power compared to a much smaller group of people with far more specialized skills that are in demand.

Those individuals with those skills already have negotiating power because they are in demand.
Post reply on HN