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

Employee activism in tech stops short of organizing unions

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 256 posts

Re: Employee activism in tech stops short of organizing unions

#141

Post by themacguffinman »

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…

Your points make sense, but it stands in contrast to unions of other industries like voice acting (SAG-AFTRA) where voice actors/actresses can vary a lot in quality/desirability and aren't exactly a commodity. I actually honestly don't know how voice acting unions could be successful.

Re: Employee activism in tech stops short of organizing unions

#142

Post by enraged_camel »

Apocryphon wrote: post #104
noego wrote: post #26

This is going to be a unpopular opinion. I think a tech union would likely be good for the average tech worker - and bad for absolutely everyone else, broader society included. Cartels and price-fixing agreements are extremely lucrative, which is why they were commonplace until outlawed by antitrust legislation, and why cartels like OPEC still operate today. Unions and collective bargaining are no different. Unions a…

This comment is worth discussing about because it actually criticizes the macroeconomic effects of unions, not just another "well I don't need a union and I don't want to be stuck paying dues" personal complaint. It's an interesting point for union proponents to debate, and perhaps a next-gen tech union should try to address the concerns. Another solution to add to the ones you mentioned can be the promotion of found…

The macroeconomic effects of unions have been overwhelmingly positive. Workers across the entire spectrum of the workforce enjoy and take for granted many labor rights and leisure opportunities today that simply would not have come into existence if it wasn't for heavy activism by unions back in the day. For example, did you know that the 40-hour workweek became standard in 1937 because of a militant labor movement?

Re: Employee activism in tech stops short of organizing unions

#143

Post by jimcsharp »

lonelappde wrote: post #135
ttcbj wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

True, but one difference is that the market for carpentry talent is local. So, a company that is supporting a union in city X has a reasonable expectation of benefiting from its training. With remote work, computer science is much more global, so someone could easily be trained by a union and then go work for a company that doesn't support the union. Interestingly, this is one of my Dad's main complaints about unions…

Seems that a fix for that would be to attach a loan/bond to the training that gets repaid by cash or by credits for working at a member employer.

Unions were started in part as a response to indentured servitude. I'm not sure that would fly, politically.

Re: Employee activism in tech stops short of organizing unions

#144

Post by shados »

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…

> not after worker supply has increased

Ironically, not only do tech workers aren't worried about this, they embrace it and encourage it. An enormous amount of work is being done to lower the bar, make things more accessible, reduce the need for diplomas and certifications, downplay the value of experience, etc. Basically ensuring that they'll see significant competition in the future (those initiatives don't help "a little". They literally change the landscape of the industry).

So it's a bit hard to convince people that they should work to protect their job when they're already working so hard to do the opposite (with the well being of others in mind, of course)

Re: Employee activism in tech stops short of organizing unions

#145

Post by lonelappde »

moorhosj wrote: post #128
paxys wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 th…

Those suicides are the children of wealth obsessed rich adults abusing their children. The workers aren't the victims, they are the perpetrators.

Re: Employee activism in tech stops short of organizing unions

#146

Post by shados »

enraged_camel wrote: post #142
Apocryphon wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This comment is worth discussing about because it actually criticizes the macroeconomic effects of unions, not just another "well I don't need a union and I don't want to be stuck paying dues" personal complaint. It's an interesting point for union proponents to debate, and perhaps a next-gen tech union should try to address the concerns. Another solution to add to the ones you mentioned can be the promotion of found…

The macroeconomic effects of unions have been overwhelmingly positive. Workers across the entire spectrum of the workforce enjoy and take for granted many labor rights and leisure opportunities today that simply would not have come into existence if it wasn't for heavy activism by unions back in the day. For example, did you know that the 40-hour workweek became standard in 1937 because of a militant labor movement?

Maybe that shows that its the right level to address these issues? Were unions the right way before because doing things globally wasn't realistic. But could it be today?

Like, if employers don't give enough vacations, is the solution to unionize and bargain for better vacations, or could we agree that everyone needs more vacations and just encode it as labor right?

Sure seems to work well for my colleagues in Dublin, for one.

Then you get your cake and eat it too. Everyone's better off, and we don't have to deal with the negatives of unions.

Re: Employee activism in tech stops short of organizing unions

#147

Post by ap3 »

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…

Unions & guilds also serve to keep other workers out

There are laws that work has to be assigned to union shops, etc

Re: Employee activism in tech stops short of organizing unions

#148

Post by wrong_variable »

shados wrote: post #144
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…

> not after worker supply has increased Ironically, not only do tech workers aren't worried about this, they embrace it and encourage it. An enormous amount of work is being done to lower the bar, make things more accessible, reduce the need for diplomas and certifications, downplay the value of experience, etc. Basically ensuring that they'll see significant competition in the future (those initiatives don't help "a…

Not only that, by expanding the industry - tech has been able to "eat" other industry, due to its inclusiveness.

20 years ago the internet was less than 0.01% of global GDP. Tech will continue eating industries that are structured unfairly.

Re: Employee activism in tech stops short of organizing unions

#149

Post by benaiah »

dsfyu404ed wrote: post #96
vcarl wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not sure where "tying pay to tenure" came up, unless that's how you view what unions do? A union just means a group of employees negotiating as a unit, what changes they ask for isn't dictated in advance.

>Not sure where "tying pay to tenure" came up, This is how basically every union workplace in the US works. The pay-scale becomes very rigid. Why would tech be different?

> This is how basically every union workplace in the US works. The pay-scale becomes very rigid.

How do you address, other than dismissal, the existence of the SAG and other unions for industries with vastly varying pay levels?

Re: Employee activism in tech stops short of organizing unions

#150

Post by dragonwriter »

dsfyu404ed wrote: post #96
vcarl wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not sure where "tying pay to tenure" came up, unless that's how you view what unions do? A union just means a group of employees negotiating as a unit, what changes they ask for isn't dictated in advance.

>Not sure where "tying pay to tenure" came up, This is how basically every union workplace in the US works. The pay-scale becomes very rigid. Why would tech be different?

> This is how basically every union workplace in the US works.

Well, in that the vast majority of union jobs are either public sector blue-collar, or both, sure.

Non-blue-collar, private-sector union jobs don't work that way, though they often have firm minimums (like SAG-AFTRA “scale” pay.)

Post reply on HN