161–170 of 383 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Engineers are a lot more fungible than movie stars.
And so are background actors and actors you've only ever seen on infomercials, yet they're represented by the same SAG-AFTRA as movie stars.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Unions are just another idea that sounds great on paper, only if you don't consider second and third order effects. They don't serve the workers, they serve themselves (like pretty much any organization). Tech workers are in so much demand that they don't really suffer such a disparity of negotiating power, like workers in other industries. Many software companies offer equity, which makes employers the shareholders.…
They don't serve the workers, they serve themselves (like pretty much any organization). Unions are owned/compromised of workers. Workers vote on issues that affect them. Tech workers are in so much demand that they don't really suffer such a disparity of negotiating power, like workers in other industries. Absolutely true, but if demand wasn't so high and supply wasn't so short, what happens to worker leverage and t…
"We the people" is a founding myth, and it's our myth, but it's still a political myth similar to the divine right of kings, a way of justifying the rule of the many by the few. The leaders are not the masses, no matter what anyone pretends.
(I'm not saying I have a better idea, but let's not be naive about principal-agent problems.)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Well, not anything . Some specific things. For instance, I don't fear a union of Appalachian postal workers. If you go help them unionize, you won't find me standing in the way. If you want to unionize Colorado glass workers, I will cheer you on from here. If the proletariat in the steel mills of Pittsburgh wish to unite, I wish them well. But tech is dominated by rampant xenophobia from the have-nots. They fear the…
I'm a first generation Taiwanese American naturalized citizen. My main experience with the H-1B system is that tech companies play an awful game of locking in workers who may be happier working for a different employer. Others have compared it to indentured servitude, which seems apt. I don't know enough about the system to see how it should be reformed, but I heartily agreed it shouldn't be used to restrict immigrat…
I'm asking for the equivalent of an ignition interlock device. It is not the world. It merely prevents subversion against the cause. Easy to do. Shuts down my line of argument entirely and honestly, I'll be fine with that.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Right, which is why there are basically no unionized software engineering jobs in USA. I'd rather not be forced to change jobs just because you want to join a union. Your love for strict unions means that most people who want a software union isn't allowed to get one since most of their colleagues don't want one.
I mean, by definition, if someone's workplace voted to unionize, most of their colleagues would want one, because it takes a majority vote in an NLRB election to unionize a workplace.
37 people voted against unionization of kickstarter, that is 37 people who were forced to join a union against their will. "Nobody is forcing you, except if a majority of your colleagues wants to force you of course..." isn't a good argument.
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/02/18/technology/kickstarter-un...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm a first generation Taiwanese American naturalized citizen. My main experience with the H-1B system is that tech companies play an awful game of locking in workers who may be happier working for a different employer. Others have compared it to indentured servitude, which seems apt. I don't know enough about the system to see how it should be reformed, but I heartily agreed it shouldn't be used to restrict immigrat…
I'm glad you made it. Congratulations. Happy to share this land with someone as articulate as you. And I'm glad you share my fears. I'm asking for the equivalent of an ignition interlock device. It is not the world. It merely prevents subversion against the cause. Easy to do. Shuts down my line of argument entirely and honestly, I'll be fine with that.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I looked through several pages of that HN thread for people discussing unions in any context. I found your comment[1] and an anti-union comment by rayiner[2]. The only other comments I found were by union proponents, who celebrated the fact that with unions, it wouldn't matter if someone was an immigrant, or how many immigrants worked in the US, because unions would protect them and native citizens alike and equally[…
A fair objection, but as you well know, it takes work to extract information. Rarely will anyone show you their hand. If you never lift a rock, you never find the snake below, but the snake may exist below nonetheless. And if that rock has had a snake below it before then maybe you don't put your hands underneath to lift the rock. But you can win me over trivially. Take your union. Add a single immutable tenet: This…
I think you will find that most unions support immigration, and provide protections for immigrants.
For example, the largest union in the US, the AFL-CIO, is currently running a "Protect All Workers" campaign[1] specifically for immigrant protections:
> In recent weeks, the federal government took vital steps to address our national health emergency and mitigate its economic damage by passing a series of COVID-19 bills. Unfortunately, millions of immigrant workers who help to build, serve and feed our nation were excluded from the essential coverage and benefits in these bills.
> Congress is currently at work on a fourth COVID-19 bill, and it is vital this one addresses the needs of our nation’s immigrants. It should lift immigrant restrictions on emergency Medicaid testing and treatment, extend work permits for essential workers under the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals and temporary protected status programs, provide cash payments and other vital benefits to all taxpayers, and halt immigration policies that elevate risk in our communities.
I highly doubt that any of the anti-immigrant posters in the H1B thread would agree with any of those benefits being given to immigrants of any status.
Though that might seem superficial and only skin deep, however the AFL-CIO has been promoting immigration reform for years[2].
Here's what they say about immigration on their site[3]:
> Since our nation’s founding, immigrants and refugees have enriched the fabric of our communities, our workforce and our labor movement. Like it was for generations of immigrants before, the labor movement is the natural home for new immigrants struggling to achieve economic security and win social justice, and our commitment to building an immigration system that represents the needs and interests of all working people is fierce and unwavering.
> The only way to stop the race to the bottom in wages and standards is for working people of all races, religions and immigration status to stand together and demand an end to policies that put profits over people. The entire workforce suffers when millions struggle to support their families without a way to speak up on the job, and ramping up fear in our workplaces only serves to increase exploitation. Instead of deporting immigrants, we need to ensure that all working people have rights on the job and are able to exercise them without fear of retaliation. Enacting meaningful immigration reform is critical to our long-term efforts to lift labor standards and empower workers, and the labor movement will continue to stand in solidarity with all working people.
> America's labor movement is never backing down, not an inch, on its commitment to full immigrant rights in this country.” -Tefere Gebre
> $900B: The amount in lost revenue over 10 years that mass deportation would cost the federal government.
[1] https://actionnetwork.org/letters/protect-all-workers-3
[2] https://aflcio.org/resolution/labor-movements-principles-com...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Well, I think you'll find from my previous arguments that immutability of the tenet is crucial. If it is an essential part of the belief system, only good can come from stating it to be so. The hesitance indicates to me a desire to tack into shifting winds: useful, perhaps, to you who only has goals accidentally coincident to mine, but deleterious to me. But that's overly judgmental, perhaps you simply haven't had th…
Perhaps they did not need to state that tenet because it is obviously self-evident.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
A fair objection, but as you well know, it takes work to extract information. Rarely will anyone show you their hand. If you never lift a rock, you never find the snake below, but the snake may exist below nonetheless. And if that rock has had a snake below it before then maybe you don't put your hands underneath to lift the rock. But you can win me over trivially. Take your union. Add a single immutable tenet: This…
> But you can win me over trivially I think you will find that most unions support immigration, and provide protections for immigrants. For example, the largest union in the US, the AFL-CIO, is currently running a "Protect All Workers" campaign[1] specifically for immigrant protections: > In recent weeks, the federal government took vital steps to address our national health emergency and mitigate its economic damage…
Today, they feel this. When tomorrow they must cast us aside to win something more essential to them, will they stand strong? They didn't in the past. Why would they now?
Even 2 million strong they are subject to Stolper-Samuelson.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Perhaps they did not need to state that tenet because it is obviously self-evident.
Certainly no priest starts a sermon to his flock with "Since God exists". But this is not a church. I'm not a parishioner. And your creed have aimed to harm me in the past. It will take more.
When has a modern day labor union operating in the tech industry harmed you in the past?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I mean, by definition, if someone's workplace voted to unionize, most of their colleagues would want one, because it takes a majority vote in an NLRB election to unionize a workplace.
> with 46 employees voting in favor of the move and 37 opposing it. 37 people voted against unionization of kickstarter, that is 37 people who were forced to join a union against their will. "Nobody is forcing you, except if a majority of your colleagues wants to force you of course..." isn't a good argument. https://www.nytimes.com/2020/02/18/technology/kickstarter-un...