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

Union Is Formed at Los Angeles Times and Publisher Put on Leave

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 266 posts

Re: Union Is Formed at Los Angeles Times and Publisher Put on Leave

#11

Post by ProAm »

untog wrote: post #4
chollida1 wrote: post #2

I thought this was interesting because if knowledge workers like journalists can do so, why not programmers, or what ever term you'd prefer to be called?

It is interesting that programmers (as a whole) seem resistant to it. It's often described as being unnecessary, but when you go one or two posts down HN you find people decrying long hours, open plan offices, weekend callouts, etc. etc. I suspect it's just that when the going is good, people don't really think they need a union. If the prophecies come true and AI starts writing code for us, you can bet people will s…

> It is interesting that programmers (as a whole) seem resistant to it.

Mostly because our working conditions are not bad, we are more or less paid fairly, there are a lot of options to move around.

Also it'd be bad if we had other people negotiating on our behalf, for what we probably feel is less pay than we are worth, and the concept of seniority would ruffle and stop a lot of newer grads from getting higher paying jobs over people that have been working already for 25 years in the industry.

Re: Union Is Formed at Los Angeles Times and Publisher Put on Leave

#12

Post by ng12 »

e1ven wrote: post #7
chollida1 wrote: post #2

I thought this was interesting because if knowledge workers like journalists can do so, why not programmers, or what ever term you'd prefer to be called?

I've talked to people in the past who associate a union with factory work, and they don't feel like it applies to them. I sometimes point out that every movie star they've ever heard of is a member of a union. I think part of the problem comes from the decline in unions in the US over the last few decades. New industries aren't unionizing, and older unions are being undermined where possible.

The unions aren't for the A-list, they're for the struggling actors who would get paid minimum wage otherwise (or worse, you'd see a lot of "unpaid internships").

Re: Union Is Formed at Los Angeles Times and Publisher Put on Leave

#13

Post by CogitoCogito »

problems wrote: post #8
chollida1 wrote: post #2

I thought this was interesting because if knowledge workers like journalists can do so, why not programmers, or what ever term you'd prefer to be called?

I'm a programmer who's currently in a union position - I want out. I pay dues and get basically nothing for them, as developers we're generally in decent negotiating positions. Unions are great when you're not in that position, but just an extra cost when you are.

> I'm a programmer who's currently in a union position - I want out.

Why not quit and find a non-union job?

Re: Union Is Formed at Los Angeles Times and Publisher Put on Leave

#14

Post by lr4444lr »

ng12 wrote: post #5
chollida1 wrote: post #2

I thought this was interesting because if knowledge workers like journalists can do so, why not programmers, or what ever term you'd prefer to be called?

Why do we need a union in a seller's market? If I'm unhappy with my job I can quit and get a new one in a week. It's not about being a knowledge worker. Screenwriters are unionized because there are many more people who want to write than there are gigs, therefore there's a high potential for abuse.

For the sake of argument, you could ask for protected work hours, overtime, etc. I don't think we need it for this industry, mind you, but more so because there's no monopsony on the labor market from a select few large employers, not because of the supply and demand.

Re: Union Is Formed at Los Angeles Times and Publisher Put on Leave

#15

Post by debt »

ng12 wrote: post #5
chollida1 wrote: post #2

I thought this was interesting because if knowledge workers like journalists can do so, why not programmers, or what ever term you'd prefer to be called?

Why do we need a union in a seller's market? If I'm unhappy with my job I can quit and get a new one in a week. It's not about being a knowledge worker. Screenwriters are unionized because there are many more people who want to write than there are gigs, therefore there's a high potential for abuse.

I'm sure there's an argument lying around somewhere that would tell that the best time to start a union is in a seller's market.

Re: Union Is Formed at Los Angeles Times and Publisher Put on Leave

#16

Post by AnimalMuppet »

dmix wrote: post #6

I'm curious what effect this will have on all the constant cries for more "real journalism" instead of companies pushing for low budget high volume output and semi-digitized content milling. Hiring "real journalists" full time just got a lot more expensive for a company that was already attempting to reinvent itself in a struggle for profitability in a strained industry. Also, can't the LA Times easily just buy up mo…

> Also, can't the LA Times easily just buy up more freelance material from non-employees (not only journalism, graphics, web work, etc)?

Not if the union's any good.

Re: Union Is Formed at Los Angeles Times and Publisher Put on Leave

#17

Post by untog »

ProAm wrote: post #11
untog wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is interesting that programmers (as a whole) seem resistant to it. It's often described as being unnecessary, but when you go one or two posts down HN you find people decrying long hours, open plan offices, weekend callouts, etc. etc. I suspect it's just that when the going is good, people don't really think they need a union. If the prophecies come true and AI starts writing code for us, you can bet people will s…

> It is interesting that programmers (as a whole) seem resistant to it. Mostly because our working conditions are not bad, we are more or less paid fairly, there are a lot of options to move around. Also it'd be bad if we had other people negotiating on our behalf, for what we probably feel is less pay than we are worth, and the concept of seniority would ruffle and stop a lot of newer grads from getting higher payin…

> the concept of seniority would ruffle and stop a lot of newer grads from getting higher paying jobs over people that have been working already for 25 years in the industry.

That's not a required part of a union. I think one of the misconceptions people have is that if you have a union it looks and operates exactly like one on a Ford factory floor. If you formed a union it could do exactly what you want it to do, and not do the things you don't want it to do. If you wanted a union to do nothing other than negotiate payment for overtime and a new Macbook every year you could just do that.

Re: Union Is Formed at Los Angeles Times and Publisher Put on Leave

#18

Post by untog »

ng12 wrote: post #12
e1ven wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've talked to people in the past who associate a union with factory work, and they don't feel like it applies to them. I sometimes point out that every movie star they've ever heard of is a member of a union. I think part of the problem comes from the decline in unions in the US over the last few decades. New industries aren't unionizing, and older unions are being undermined where possible.

The unions aren't for the A-list, they're for the struggling actors who would get paid minimum wage otherwise (or worse, you'd see a lot of "unpaid internships").

Sure. But a lot of the A-list started as struggling actors. It helps everyone in the industry over the long run.

Re: Union Is Formed at Los Angeles Times and Publisher Put on Leave

#19

Post by FussyZeus »

lr4444lr wrote: post #14
ng12 wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why do we need a union in a seller's market? If I'm unhappy with my job I can quit and get a new one in a week. It's not about being a knowledge worker. Screenwriters are unionized because there are many more people who want to write than there are gigs, therefore there's a high potential for abuse.

For the sake of argument, you could ask for protected work hours, overtime, etc. I don't think we need it for this industry, mind you, but more so because there's no monopsony on the labor market from a select few large employers, not because of the supply and demand.

Also don't forget it would make it much easier for individual engineers to argue back at Management about employing dark patterns, or directives to make apps/websites addictive and generally harmful.

For as much as people like to gripe about LinkedIn and their variously deceptive practices, marketing heads and executives don't write code. There are engineers in there making that stuff happen.

Re: Union Is Formed at Los Angeles Times and Publisher Put on Leave

#20

Post by ng12 »

untog wrote: post #18
ng12 wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The unions aren't for the A-list, they're for the struggling actors who would get paid minimum wage otherwise (or worse, you'd see a lot of "unpaid internships").

Sure. But a lot of the A-list started as struggling actors. It helps everyone in the industry over the long run.

Right, but there are no struggling software engineers. Even college kids won't touch an internship for less than $20/hour, much less be forced to take a gig for "exposure".
Post reply on HN