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

Tech's Elite Hates Labor

ez.substack.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 434 posts

Re: Tech's Elite Hates Labor

#121

Post by thebradbain »

dlkf wrote: post #61
thebradbain wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

WGA is just one of many unions, but you’re right— getting into the “best” guilds is itself a process; but ostensibly, it’s to ensure that the guild keeps its prestige as a genuine body of talent. It’s a balancing act for sure, and I don’t know if tech wants to emulate everything exactly with the Hollywood guild system, but it’s worth taking inspiration from.

Would you trust unions over markets to determine which programmers are skilled? How would they determine that?

It’s a fine line, but I don’t see anyone saying the members of the Hollywood guild aren’t talented— it’s a (perhaps already too hard) battle just to get in it.

However, just because you’re in the guild does not mean you have a job. Productions still have to hire and choose to work with you. Generally, if you don’t get work within sometime between 1-2 years you lose membership.

If you’re not “skilled enough” for the minimum floor pay, then the studio or show has no obligation to hire you. Don’t see why that model can’t work for tech?

Re: Tech's Elite Hates Labor

#122

Post by sixothree »

seydor wrote: post #71

Except that , when people see the "compensation" that people get for doing tiny changes in css files, they start disbelieving this kind of talk. Silicon valley people are not "labor" to the common man, they are ... something else. Sorry, it's part of the package Imagine calling investment bankers as typical "labor"

If you think "tiny changes in css files" is what IT work consists of you are in a fantasy world.

Re: Tech's Elite Hates Labor

#123

Post by toss1 »

habosa wrote: post #65

I think because individual tech workers are so highly paid relative to other industries, we fail to see how low our pay is relative to what the people at the top are making. A high performing Google engineer may make 500k+ in total comp, Sundar Pichai makes $100M+ in many years. That's 200x as much ... and the baseline is already super high. You see startup founders who exit with generational wealth (tens or hundreds…

Does a CEO provide 10x, 100x, 200x, 500x, or 1000x the value of ordinary employees?

Doubtful, especially for the higher multiples (although they can certainly cause orders of magnitude more financial damage than ordinary employees).

In 1977, the late Peter F. Drucker, arguably the most famous management thinker, suggested the pay ratio between CEOs and employees be a maximum of 25-to-1. Yet the CEO-to-employee pay ratio has increased from 20-to-1 in 1996 to 202-to-1 in 2018. [0]

"The average S&P 500 company’s CEO-to-worker pay ratio was 324-to-1 in 2021." For NuSkin Enterprises, the ratio is 22,092:1, for Amazon, it is 6,474:1 ... pretty amazing chart. [1]

And this is why the tax system should recognize and tax excessive pay ratios. These are nothing but the financial result of abusive relationships between the executives and the workers, and the other taxpayers who pay more than their share of the burden. It is also easily measured to tax fairly (which of course corporations will hate, since it is hard to game). But of course, all the tech bros will cry that we need no govt so why should we be taxed? (Not incidentally, the same tech elites and wannabes as the article properly exposed as abusers.)

[0] https://www.corporate-rebels.com/blog/ideal-ceo-to-employee-...

[1] https://aflcio.org/paywatch/company-pay-ratios

Re: Tech's Elite Hates Labor

#124

Post by sdiupIGPWEfh »

> I realize I sound conspiratorial, but to be clear, I do not think they all got together and planned this.

I'm not so sure the possibility should be dismissed so easily. It's hardly a secret that CEOs gather periodically gather at various retreats. Is it really talking conspiracy theories to recognize they actually do talk business with each other and at least informally coordinate their actions? They don't all need to be at the same location just to get a few massages.

Re: Tech's Elite Hates Labor

#125

Post by baron816 »

treis wrote: post #15

Sometimes I can't even begin to comprehend the POVs I read on the internet. The FAANGs and adjacent companies treat their workers better than pretty much any other company in the world. The idea that workers there are somehow this abused underclass is ridiculous.

A lot of Leftist tech workers like to think they’re working in a coop. They think the company should exist to serve their needs, rather than the needs of investors and customers. It’s a recipe for catastrophe.

Re: Tech's Elite Hates Labor

#126

Post by duped »

EduardoBautista wrote: post #110
habosa wrote: post #65

I think because individual tech workers are so highly paid relative to other industries, we fail to see how low our pay is relative to what the people at the top are making. A high performing Google engineer may make 500k+ in total comp, Sundar Pichai makes $100M+ in many years. That's 200x as much ... and the baseline is already super high. You see startup founders who exit with generational wealth (tens or hundreds…

Recent events might mislead us, but I believe Musk has had a huge net-positive impact on the world. Crashing Twitter into the ground will never come close to diminishing what he has helped achieve with SpaceX, putting his money where his mouth was to the point of almost going broke, and, to a lesser extent, Tesla where, despite not being a founder, he was the biggest investor at the beginning.

SpaceX does not belong in the same conversation as "net positive impact."

Re: Tech's Elite Hates Labor

#127

Post by croes »

treis wrote: post #15

Sometimes I can't even begin to comprehend the POVs I read on the internet. The FAANGs and adjacent companies treat their workers better than pretty much any other company in the world. The idea that workers there are somehow this abused underclass is ridiculous.

Just because they treat better doesn't mean they treat good, just because it could be worse doesn't mean it's good either.

Re: Tech's Elite Hates Labor

#128

Post by GAN_Game »

treis wrote: post #15

Sometimes I can't even begin to comprehend the POVs I read on the internet. The FAANGs and adjacent companies treat their workers better than pretty much any other company in the world. The idea that workers there are somehow this abused underclass is ridiculous.

> The idea that workers there are somehow this abused underclass is ridiculous

The heirs who own the majority of most of the FAANG stock created none of the wealth, did none of the work. These rich kids of Instagram never worked, never will - nor did their parents, nor did their parents.

So your argument is the workers creating the wealth should fork over the amount of surplus labor value to these heirs, that is being expropriated.

What about these parasitical heirs you are arguing for? The ones who live off the dividend check wealth created by those who work? "I can't even begin to comprehend your POV". If the worker creating wealth keeping it is an entitled attitude, what is the attitude of these parasitical heirs who do not work?

Re: Tech's Elite Hates Labor

#129

Post by JumpinJack_Cash »

EduardoBautista wrote: post #110
habosa wrote: post #65

I think because individual tech workers are so highly paid relative to other industries, we fail to see how low our pay is relative to what the people at the top are making. A high performing Google engineer may make 500k+ in total comp, Sundar Pichai makes $100M+ in many years. That's 200x as much ... and the baseline is already super high. You see startup founders who exit with generational wealth (tens or hundreds…

Recent events might mislead us, but I believe Musk has had a huge net-positive impact on the world. Crashing Twitter into the ground will never come close to diminishing what he has helped achieve with SpaceX, putting his money where his mouth was to the point of almost going broke, and, to a lesser extent, Tesla where, despite not being a founder, he was the biggest investor at the beginning.

> > Recent events might mislead us, but I believe Musk has had a huge net-positive impact on the world.

I always hear this argument about the supposed great impact on the world, society etc.

But I am a citizen of the world and think this guy is a scam because he actually hasn't done nothing for me but he keeps pushing his name into my face. Kinda like the POTUS except the POTUS is forced to do media and speeches whereas this guy injects himself into every situation or debate out of his own will to shill his products.

For a regular individual who is not concerned about climate change or has a deep desire to life off the grid (but still wants internet) mr. Musk is like the Kardashians with the trash entertainment unfolding on twitter instead of E!

Post reply on HN