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

Kickstarter employees vote to unionize

vice.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 1001 posts

Re: Kickstarter employees vote to unionize

#101

Post by nouveaux »

kleer001 wrote: post #53
stronglikedan wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> one man who does absolutely nothing that is useful Assuming all of the risk is useful. I understand the point, but it's undercut by that woefully inaccurate jab.

> Assuming all of the risk is useful. I've never seen a multi-millionaire, let alone a billionaire actually take the cost of failure on personally. Risk externalization is the theme of the era.

Elon Musk invested all of his funds. Let's be honest, tons of people believed Tesla and SpaceX was going to fail.

https://venturebeat.com/2010/05/27/elon-musk-personal-financ...

Re: Kickstarter employees vote to unionize

#102

Post by chimeracoder »

Someone1234 wrote: post #67
chimeracoder wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> That's not the case because the US Government and industry has spent the last 150 years crushing unions and weakening them. Anti-union propaganda is rampant. Well, no, the fact that almost all unions in the US use exclusive representation contracts (compared to Europe, where such contracts are range from "unheard-of in most industries" to "illegal") is not due to anti-union propaganda.

Unions being weak in the US is due to anti-union propaganda though, which as you likely know was the point I was making. Very few industries have even a single union let alone competition. Complaining about the lack of competition when union representation has been decimated, seems like pointless bikeshedding. I'll happily talk about the lack of union representation, but "unions bad because of [trivial complaint]" is…

> Complaining about the lack of competition when union representation has been decimated, seems like pointless bikeshedding

On the contrary, history shows us clearly that the fact that union membership has declined in the US and the fact that union membership in the US is typically on an exclusive representation basis are deeply linked.

In fact, you can still draw your same argument ("the US Government and industry has spent the last 150 years crushing unions and weakening them") from this fact - it just has little to do with propaganda, as you claimed.

> but "unions bad because of [trivial complaint]" is a distraction.

If you want to have that argument, please find someone who said that and argue with them, instead of responding to my post, which is saying something different altogether.

Re: Kickstarter employees vote to unionize

#103

Post by eej71 »

stronglikedan wrote: post #33
jdkee wrote: post #7

“ I am opposing a social order in which it is possible for one man who does absolutely nothing that is useful to amass a fortune of hundreds of millions of dollars, while millions of men and women who work all the days of their lives secure barely enough for a wretched existence.” -Eugene Debs

> one man who does absolutely nothing that is useful Assuming all of the risk is useful. I understand the point, but it's undercut by that woefully inaccurate jab.

If the world gets to the point where it really thinks their work is useless, I hope _they_ go on strike.

Re: Kickstarter employees vote to unionize

#104

Post by dubcanada »

_sbrk wrote: post #68

I worked in a union shop once, as a summer intern. Every day, we were told to be in the break room at 7:59am to begin promptly at the 8am bell. By 4:30 or 4:45pm, everyone was back in there, waiting for the clock to hit 5pm. One day, I needed to connect two PCs together, which was approved by boss as they would be isolated from the network. So, being the diligent type, I went off and found some network cards and a ca…

This is a very strangely specific comment.

I am not saying if I agree or disagree, it just seems that you had a rather specific instance.

Unions don't mean anything you said above, all a union does is have a strong-arm against the "company". And gives the company a way of communicating with everyone.

Unions don't make rules like what you experienced, a large amount of unneeded employees with nothing to do convince unions to do that.

Re: Kickstarter employees vote to unionize

#105

Post by umvi »

crankylinuxuser wrote: post #81
nimbius wrote: post #21

Speaking as an IAM union member, congratulations! now comes the hard part. You're probably (still) going to hear a lot of FUD from your employer but dont worry, things really do only get better from here. Once you get a union youll get more quarterly insight into your companies profits, losses, and a MUCH better picture of what the company intends to do in the next six to twelve months. Youll also get a direct say in…

I just formed a company back in December. Super easy to set up an LLC, C or S Corp. But I wanted it to be a worker co-op like Mondragon. And there's no real guidance or help. Democracy is cool, until we look at companies. Then it's dictatorships as the norm. And trying to do it right from the ground up is high impossible. As a obligatory comment: are there any other in the HN-sphere that focuses on worker cooperative…

> Democracy is cool, until we look at companies. Then it's dictatorships as the norm.

Democracy is a horribly inefficient system of government. Its only redeeming quality is that it seems effective at (so far) deterring tyranny and abuse of power.

However, like I said, it's horribly inefficient. Changes that are easy to make under a dictatorship can be extremely hard to make under a democracy. Not exactly a quality you would want for a project or company, especially if you (the founder) have a vision.

IMO, part of the reason Linux and Python were so successful was that they had a "benevolent dictator" with a strong vision. Imagine the gridlock that would occur with Linux development if we had a 2-party system that polarized on controversial issues and got mired at every vote.

Re: Kickstarter employees vote to unionize

#106

Post by amyjess »

_sbrk wrote: post #68

I worked in a union shop once, as a summer intern. Every day, we were told to be in the break room at 7:59am to begin promptly at the 8am bell. By 4:30 or 4:45pm, everyone was back in there, waiting for the clock to hit 5pm. One day, I needed to connect two PCs together, which was approved by boss as they would be isolated from the network. So, being the diligent type, I went off and found some network cards and a ca…

Any union in the tech industry is going to resemble professional unions such as Hollywood unions or sports unions much more than the punch-clock unions seen in manufacturing and government.

Re: Kickstarter employees vote to unionize

#107

Post by Dirlewanger »

ughitsaaron wrote: post #20
exabrial wrote: post #8

They'd be wise to learn from history: There are many people willing do your job for cheaper, most of them in other countries working for smaller wages.

This is a perfect description of a race to the bottom.

And this is what open and free markets will allow for.

Re: Kickstarter employees vote to unionize

#108

Post by claudiawerner »

strictnein wrote: post #85
kleer001 wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Assuming all of the risk is useful. I've never seen a multi-millionaire, let alone a billionaire actually take the cost of failure on personally. Risk externalization is the theme of the era.

Probably because a lot of that risk was taken before the success and you're looking at a filtered selection of results (the ones who succeeded).

So if the risk was taken before, why does that entitle the risktaker to seek constant gains on it? If I wrote a program essential for the success of the company, before the success of a company, would it entitle me to a perpetual percentage of the company's profits? The benefits of that program, by current standards, belong to the company perpetually. Why does the risk, taken on behalf of the company, only belong to the person in charge?

By looking at employees, you're also looking at a filtered selection of results (the ones who were able to gain employment). The person who took the initial risk (say, a founder) may often leave the company or sell it. Who in the company has then assumed all of the risk? The person who bought the company?

Even then, we're not living in a just world. What's admirable, or a social justification, for taking a risk in a business that operates in immoral ways, or illegal ways? I'm not saying this applies to Kickstarter, but it certainly applies to a great many other companies.

And when GP said "assuming all the risk", I can't think how that's possibly true. Workers in all professions assume some level of risk every day - either to their safety, career prospects, or continued employment.

Re: Kickstarter employees vote to unionize

#109

Post by joncrane »

mason55 wrote: post #99
_sbrk wrote: post #68

I worked in a union shop once, as a summer intern. Every day, we were told to be in the break room at 7:59am to begin promptly at the 8am bell. By 4:30 or 4:45pm, everyone was back in there, waiting for the clock to hit 5pm. One day, I needed to connect two PCs together, which was approved by boss as they would be isolated from the network. So, being the diligent type, I went off and found some network cards and a ca…

> Unions, in my experience, exist to help keep mediocre, unmotivated employees employed. One has no incentive to excel, as promotions are based on years "served", much like prison. There is nothing inherent in unions that make them operate like that.

It's something inherent in human nature, unfortunately.
Post reply on HN