111–120 of 493 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
With regard to the lazy worker, honestly, who cares? You still get paid. The company isn't going under. No doubt like most situations of abuse, this is a minority case because in general people like being productive.
I'd care if I were an investor in such a company.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
With regard to the lazy worker, honestly, who cares? You still get paid. The company isn't going under. No doubt like most situations of abuse, this is a minority case because in general people like being productive.
Isn't it a fairly common thing to not appreciate it when other people get the same reward for no contribution? It's like when you're a kid and you win some sweets, and your parents decide you have to share them with your little brother. There may be a desire to do so, but does he get half your sweets?
Having worked for both union and non-union employers - it's a mixed bag. Unions have advantages and disadvantages. They are great for worker representation - but that's a double-edged sword. Ideally, unions protects worker's interests. In practice, they often lead to abuse, stagnation and corruption. I've personally witnessed union employees who contributed nothing for years, get perpetually shifted from team to team…
So I guess unions do suck, thanks for clarifying. Hopefully people will be smart enough to not interfere with a firm's epic struggle for efficiency and polishing out the friction of overbearing worker compensation and benefits. Sounds like unions are too corrupt and will just interfere with the purity of corporate practices. I love how people have an easier time imagining colonies on mars than giving labor a platform…
Having worked for both union and non-union employers - it's a mixed bag. Unions have advantages and disadvantages. They are great for worker representation - but that's a double-edged sword. Ideally, unions protects worker's interests. In practice, they often lead to abuse, stagnation and corruption. I've personally witnessed union employees who contributed nothing for years, get perpetually shifted from team to team…
But could you imagine if we spoke about corporations in this manner? "I've worked for corporations and they are a mixed bag. In practice, they often abuse their employees. I've personally witnessed bosses who contributed nothing for years and just played politics."
For some reason we hold unions to an incredibly high standard of "no problems, ever" but this is never used to discourage all participation in the labor force because employers are often shitty.
Unions are democratically controlled worker organizations. Like democratic nations, they can contain abusers, they can be inefficient, and they can fail to solve problems effectively. But like democratic nations, they provide a powerful resistance to authoritarian abuse and on balance improve the quality of life for their people.
If I were to join a union it would have to have the following: 1. No protection for incompetent people 2. No seniority based pay or privileges 3. Narrow focus on comp and quality of life Any of these would be a deal breaker for me. And I just don't see it happening. The people who seem to be into unions are the type of people that can't STFU about politics at the office. And if I hear one word about pronouns instead…
It won't happen because those criteria are antithetical to the purpose of a union. Unions are about solidarity as a working class against corporations. It doesn't work unless members see eachother as on the same side regardless of perceived competence
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The issue many have is the union dues. If the union doesn't help me, but still take 5% (or whatever) of my paycheck, I'd be pretty peeved off. It's the same issue many people have with raising taxes: politicians tout all the benefits it'll allow, but then costs go up and no visible product results.
5% does seem excessive. I worked at a unionized tech company, and I paid 0.5% as union due.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
So I guess unions do suck, thanks for clarifying. Hopefully people will be smart enough to not interfere with a firm's epic struggle for efficiency and polishing out the friction of overbearing worker compensation and benefits. Sounds like unions are too corrupt and will just interfere with the purity of corporate practices. I love how people have an easier time imagining colonies on mars than giving labor a platform…
US unions are like US healthcare, regulatory capture makes them suck. Unions working well in other countries doesn't mean it works well in USA. And neither party wants to improve the state of unions, democrats are on the side of union leadership while republicans are just anti unions in general, none wants to support workers on this.
A related topic would be collective bargaining - which is often (but not always) associated with a unionized workplace. If you're a sub-standard employee, you win big through collective bargaining because pay bands will move toward the mean. If however, you are a high-performer, you will likely be under-compensated in a collective bargaining environment because your excess effort will be used to compensate those who…
Individuals, even stellar performing ones, also have significantly less bargaining power than the collective bargaining power of either a union or the employer. There are plenty of companies that know this, and it is the primary source of their antagonism towards unions.
If you're a stellar technician specialised in fixing stuff in the only employer in the only industry in town, sure, the company knows you need that job even more than they need you and so you're poorly paid just like all the other technicians. If you're a stellar software developer and your bosses know it, not so much. You can, individually, take your 10x-more-productive skillset to loads of other high paying companies, and that gives you a much better individual negotiating position than "everyone deserves a raise", especially since your colleagues won't go on strike to help you get a new top salary band at a large multiple of what they're earning even if you really deserve it.
A related topic would be collective bargaining - which is often (but not always) associated with a unionized workplace. If you're a sub-standard employee, you win big through collective bargaining because pay bands will move toward the mean. If however, you are a high-performer, you will likely be under-compensated in a collective bargaining environment because your excess effort will be used to compensate those who…
If FAANG-type companies unionize, one can see a possible positive outcome for the smaller competitors, as the quality talent will leave $BIGCO for better opportunities in the smaller companies.