Employee activism in tech stops short of organizing unions • Hacker News Board

Re: Employee activism in tech stops short of organizing unions

#121

Post by wry_discontent » Mon, Jul 08, 2019, 7:00 PM UTC

malvosenior wrote: post #60

crimsonalucard wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What you say is true, however these things can be negotiated with a union. All a union does is give centralized power to the employees. If employees need to be cut for survival or salaries need to be lowered temporarily than these are things that an employer can provide proof of to the union and together with employees as a union work something out. A union prevents the laying off of employees as a profit boosting me…

Someone else made this point elsewhere in the thread but I think it's a good one: As engineers, we have the opportunity to move into management and become entrepreneurs at a rate much greater than traditional industries. I've moved between high level IC and senior management a lot in my career. I've also started my own company. I don't think that profile is unusual for senior people in our industry. As such I'm likel…

> As engineers, we have the opportunity to move into management and become entrepreneurs at a rate much greater than traditional industries.

I've observed this to be true myself, but don't really have a good understanding of _why_ that might be. Do you have any insights?

Re: Employee activism in tech stops short of organizing unions

#122

Post by blub » Mon, Jul 08, 2019, 7:01 PM UTC

Balgair wrote: post #89

ttcbj wrote: post #73

My Dad owns a construction company in a highly unionized region. He is an advocate for unions, although he acknowledges that quality varies among them. That said, many of the conditions where unions are beneficial don't seem to apply in tech: * Vocational training: unions in our area run schools to train craftsman (e.g. carpenters). This increases productivity and screens for quality. * Shifting workforce: Constructi…

In a lot of unions a major component is safety. Though it may not seem like safety is a big concern in tech right now, there are areas where it will be of concern. For example, Unions may be a good method to force safety concerns in self-driving cars and in IoT devices. Unions may help with health-care data and privacy. Unions may help with other forms of sensitive information like in judicial work and military work.…

Yes, unions and laws are the only surefire ways of pushing back when pressured by management.

Quitting right off the bat or folding like a wet biscuit after realizing that they do have power over you are not ways of pushing back.

Re: Employee activism in tech stops short of organizing unions

#123

Post by Spooky23 » Mon, Jul 08, 2019, 7:01 PM UTC

malvosenior wrote: post #38

Spooky23 wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem is that Sanders is in a democratic primary. If people in the circle of democratic party thinking aren't valid sources for reporting on a democratic political candidate, who is? Clinton was the party nominee -- all of the players will have done something connected to that campaign. The democratic party is a big-tent and demands consensus. When all of these connected folks eyeroll at the guy, it hints that…

The problem isn't that the democratic party is doing what's best for the democratic party. The problem is that The New York Times is doing what's best for the democratic party. They claim to be journalism but more and more, they are clearly biased political activism (as is the case with this story).

Who would you suggest that they talk to?

Journalists get stories, they do that by talking to people and getting information. The New York Times has a pretty obvious mainstream approach. Very few credible people in that community have anything to say about Sanders.

I didn’t notice lots of biased political activism when they were reporting on the prosecution of NY legislators and a governor. When did the switch flip?

Re: Employee activism in tech stops short of organizing unions

#124

Post by Apocryphon » Mon, Jul 08, 2019, 7:02 PM UTC

dsfyu404ed wrote: post #117

Apocryphon wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Surely a next-gen labor union based in the tech industry could find a new way to fight ageism without mandating a seniority system. Why does tech have to act the same way as before? I thought we were supposed to be innovators?

The status quo is pretty good, good enough that I (and a lot of people) don't want to make that bet.

When there is a proposal that is suggested, there are proponents and detractors. That is tautological. Blankly insisting that things are good enough is just as empty as blankly insisting that things aren't.

Re: Employee activism in tech stops short of organizing unions

#125

Post by moate » Mon, Jul 08, 2019, 7:06 PM UTC

docker_up wrote: post #102

rexpop wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

I believe people are different and there needs to be differentiation between those that are more skilled than those that are less skilled. I support that more skilled people getting paid more than those that are less skilled. I think it's fundamentally fair. In Silicon Valley, most tech jobs are not nooses around anyone's neck. And that's a great environment to live in that would have been ruined by unions. In fact,…

>>I think it's fundamentally fair.

That's the crux of the disagreement here. You assume that something fair is happening, and others don't. A meritocracy sounds great, but I've yet to see one actually implemented at any scale. Or rather, the skills that get rewarded don't feel like the skills that are actually important to the job (networking and personal skills often times up your earning ability more than your coding abilities).

>>I would rather live in a fair environment where I'm out of a job...

Sure you would, because you believe that you'd be able to find another job. And as long as that thought exists, you can rationalize that management is "fair" and a meritocracy is in place. Some of us think the system is broken and benefits the few at the expense of the many, and that doesn't seem "fair" to us.

Re: Employee activism in tech stops short of organizing unions

#126

Post by ivl » Mon, Jul 08, 2019, 7:13 PM UTC

sigstoat wrote: post #101

ivl wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The gaming industry has an interesting problem: a lot of fresh college grads that want to work on games because they are passionate about games. In that case, I'm unsure of how unionizing would help much, as publishers could simply invest in games from non-union shops, and happily abandon the studios that are unionized.

> In that case, I'm unsure of how unionizing would help much, as publishers could simply invest in games from non-union shops, and happily abandon the studios that are unionized. and game development work is probably the most trivial software development to move to foreign jurisdictions. unless the union promoters would like video game tariffs.

This may seem snide, but it's extremely rare for a union not to be protectionist. Mostly on account of how unions join together with unions for adjunct industries.

That said, I'm not convinced game development would be easily outsourced. Games are some of the most highly optimized pieces of software out there, as it's in their interest to squeeze every bit of performance out of consumer hardware. You can think of their target as an intersecting line between the game being playable on consumer hardware vs. the graphics quality users expect that would lead to the game selling. Optimization has a big payoff to increase the possible market to buy a given game.

Re: Employee activism in tech stops short of organizing unions

#127

Post by lallysingh » Mon, Jul 08, 2019, 7:22 PM UTC

LarryDarrell wrote: post #9

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…

Also it's an opportunity to put in employer paid continuing education. Lots of shops think that waterfall is a good process.

Re: Employee activism in tech stops short of organizing unions

#128

Post by moorhosj » Mon, Jul 08, 2019, 7:28 PM UTC

paxys wrote: post #107

moorhosj wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unions could help in each of these case, so you haven't answered the question or provided any evidence.

There is no help needed. People are perfectly happy switching employers, and companies are perfectly happy paying to get or retain talent. This ecosystem has made Silicon Valley what it is today.

==This ecosystem has made Silicon Valley what it is today.==

I assume this is referring to the technological innovation and corporate profits of Silicon Valley. I would ask you to consider, from a broader perspective, what Silicon Valley is today. Specifically, in relation to elevated levels of depression [1], suicide [2] and inequality [3].

Isn't it worth exploring whether the same working conditions that benefit the top 10-20% are having a negative effect on the other 80-90%?

[1] https://money.cnn.com/mostly-human/silicon-valleys-secret/

[2] https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2015/12/the-sil...

[3] https://fortune.com/2018/10/16/silicon-valleys-income-inequa...

Re: Employee activism in tech stops short of organizing unions

#129

Post by sixplusone » Mon, Jul 08, 2019, 7:37 PM UTC

vcarl wrote: post #83

ttcbj wrote: post #73

My Dad owns a construction company in a highly unionized region. He is an advocate for unions, although he acknowledges that quality varies among them. That said, many of the conditions where unions are beneficial don't seem to apply in tech: * Vocational training: unions in our area run schools to train craftsman (e.g. carpenters). This increases productivity and screens for quality. * Shifting workforce: Constructi…

Vocational training absolutely could be done in tech, web/app development is much closer to carpentry than it is to computer science in my view. Unions are definitely complex, it's not a silver bullet to solve issues in the workplace. But at its core it's a group of people negotiating as a unit: the rest is just the natural evolution of a group where some power has been attained. More members means more organization…

Carpentry/electrical/plumbing/factory product and process is very standardized, but IT is still quickly evolving and requires adaptation and innovation, making it harder to predict how well someone will handle a new problem based on previous work.

Welders or house framers take designs from engineers and (mostly) work to spec. I have to be the architect, engineer, and builder, usually only based on the approved visible UI, or rough description of a problem.

Re: Employee activism in tech stops short of organizing unions

#130

Post by malvosenior » Mon, Jul 08, 2019, 7:38 PM UTC

wry_discontent wrote: post #121

malvosenior wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Someone else made this point elsewhere in the thread but I think it's a good one: As engineers, we have the opportunity to move into management and become entrepreneurs at a rate much greater than traditional industries. I've moved between high level IC and senior management a lot in my career. I've also started my own company. I don't think that profile is unusual for senior people in our industry. As such I'm likel…

> As engineers, we have the opportunity to move into management and become entrepreneurs at a rate much greater than traditional industries. I've observed this to be true myself, but don't really have a good understanding of _why_ that might be. Do you have any insights?

I think it's because technology is incredibly powerful and code + hardware can act as not only organizational structure but as a sort of pseudo employee. When you code you are often designing and implementing business rules, thus acting in a managerial or executive capacity. Software also scales incredibly well. One person may be responsible for building a system that generates immense value (extreme example: Linux and Git both initially created by one person).

The level of responsibility and authority you have as the person responsible for a $10M system can be leveraged to move to different leadership career tracks. I think this bleeds out into the industry at large so VCs recognize that smart engineers make good financial bets.