11–20 of 256 posts
Biggest question is if a union or union-like system makes sense in companies where the average tenure is ~2-3 years mostly due to employee choice.
Unions make sense when labor doesn't have any power. Do programmers have enough power? I'd say yes. Maybe not across the board but -- in general -- yes. We aren't coal miners, that's for sure.
Tangent - there was an article on the NYTimes the other day about how their editorial work was trivializing Bernie Sanders political impact the last election and actually using misleading headlines to distort the truth. I’ll try to find the link (on my phone now). It was pretty eye opening and had links to sources as well as exposing some of these editors and their role working for the Clinton camp. I call this out b…
The democratic party is a big-tent and demands consensus. When all of these connected folks eyeroll at the guy, it hints that he would have trouble governing. An "out-there outsider guy" persona works for the GOP because the GOP is a political machine party... some state senator from North Dakota would kill kittens on TV if instructed to.
This can happen for a number of reasons:
1. In cases of specialized skills (like working at a factory where you've trained on a particular machine). 2. In cases of natural or artificial monopolies (like working for a federal government). 3. In cases where companies and workers incentives are misaligned (like that of a construction worker).
Probably more that I'm missing.
I don't see how the current software engineer market meets this condition.
There are more open software engineering jobs than there are software engineers. If my employer mistreats me, I'll leave and go to a different company, and likely I can find a job just as good very easily.
I'm not sure how a union would benefit me personally.
The countries with the best human welfare indicators also have the highest percentage of people in unions. It’s the only countervailing force against plutocratic power.
"Only?" It can itself, become a nexus of plutocratic power. The best antidote to corruption is transparency and the dispersal of power.
I used to be all around anti-union. Now that I'm older I regret that position. There are bad unions and there are good unions. Sometimes they can be corrupt, but they never really exceed the corruptness of the corporate powers they negotiate with. It's an imperfect solution, but it's the only one that seems to work. The idea that we are all lone super stars that need to negotiate for ourselves is not only selfish, bu…
I'm not convinced that is the case, nor is it an either or (union or corporate powers).
Your protection by the union depends on what the union negotiates... beyond that their ability to effect change pretty much stops there. Then you are again at the mercy of your employer. I've had first had experience with "oh yeah they can do that" union situations.
Also premature organization IMO is much like premature optimization, more likely to be a bigger problem and miss any real issues.
“In other cases, highly compensated engineers may see themselves as independent operators who have plenty of leverage on their own and thus do not need to join a union effort.” This is definitely my feeling. When I can just open up LinkedIn and browse all the unsolicited interview requests I get, I don’t end up feeling like I really need a union to protect my current job - I can always just leave and go somewhere els…
In my opinion, unions are very valuable in cases where employees cannot effectively realize market value for their skillset. This can happen for a number of reasons: 1. In cases of specialized skills (like working at a factory where you've trained on a particular machine). 2. In cases of natural or artificial monopolies (like working for a federal government). 3. In cases where companies and workers incentives are mi…
Biggest question is if a union or union-like system makes sense in companies where the average tenure is ~2-3 years mostly due to employee choice.