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

Re: Employee activism in tech stops short of organizing unions

#171

Post by vcarl » Mon, Jul 08, 2019, 9:19 PM UTC

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 reads like you're equating collective bargaining with salary negotiation, but there are a ton of other dimensions where negotiating as a group would be beneficial. I've worked at a number of companies where I was well paid, but had an expectation of overtime. The environment of crunch produced a product that was so unstable I had to be on call, and was occasionally awoken in the middle of the night by things that would never have made it to production if there had been industry-standard practices in place.

That's where collective bargaining could come in handy in software. There needs to be some recourse for when shitty companies abuse its employees.

Re: Employee activism in tech stops short of organizing unions

#172

Post by walshemj » Mon, Jul 08, 2019, 9:22 PM UTC

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…

You know all the advanced research and tech used in the UK telecom industry system post ww2 (first electronic exchange etc) was built by union employees.

Re: Employee activism in tech stops short of organizing unions

#173

Post by chongli » Mon, Jul 08, 2019, 9:23 PM UTC

blub wrote: post #159

chongli wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We can't organize because the people with good leadership qualities and other important organizing skills tend to get promoted to management. It's very difficult for people to spontaneously organize without a leader.

To me it seems that we can't organize because we're selfish and naive. I don't see anyone except you fretting because of our collective organization skills :)

Collective action has been the challenge of humanity since the dawn of time. We've only been successful with one strategy: picking a leader.

If you want to learn more about this phenomenon, read Meditations on Moloch [1].

[1] https://slatestarcodex.com/2014/07/30/meditations-on-moloch/

Re: Employee activism in tech stops short of organizing unions

#174

Post by kiliantics » Mon, Jul 08, 2019, 9:24 PM UTC

shados wrote: post #146

enraged_camel wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

How do we agree that everyone needs more vacations? Too many voters are swayed by the talking points of the wealthy who tend to have a lot of influence in the media we consume. The counterargument can even be phrased in ways that are made to look like it supports the "little guy" rather than the oligarchs that are promoting the message, for example: "More paid vacation means small businesses will have more difficulty remaining competitive, and they are the cornerstone of the US economy. Don't limit our freedom by imposing this unamerican law"

Unions were the right way in the past because employers were typically the most powerful actors in society, with the ability to sway the actions of government. Unions represented an opposing force to their employers, reigning in that power. Today, employers are still the most powerful actors in society -- arguably even moreso than before -- and some kind of worker organising or other form of bottom-up/grassroots power is needed to counter the abuses of power by the wealthy. There are already good examples of gains being won by unions or similar organisations in tech. A good example of a modern conception of worker power in tech is the tech workers coalition:

https://techworkerscoalition.org/

Re: Employee activism in tech stops short of organizing unions

#175

Post by walshemj » Mon, Jul 08, 2019, 9:27 PM UTC

Apocryphon wrote: post #158

enraged_camel wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

By macroeconomic I'm referring to the post upstream about how unions function as cartels and price-fixers. I do not believe that is true, but it seems like an argument that union supporters ought to debunk.

Why would unions set prices they might set a floor price in some industries SAG IATSE, BECTU.

And they might take a lead in setting industry best practice eg around $700 for a 1 in 4 on call minimum call out of 4 hours and TOIL at OT rates

Re: Employee activism in tech stops short of organizing unions

#176

Post by walshemj » Mon, Jul 08, 2019, 9:28 PM UTC

onion2k wrote: post #21

javagram wrote: post #10

“In other cases, highly compensated engineers may see themselves as independent operators who have plenty of leverage on their own and thus do not need to join a union effort.” This is definitely my feeling. When I can just open up LinkedIn and browse all the unsolicited interview requests I get, I don’t end up feeling like I really need a union to protect my current job - I can always just leave and go somewhere els…

I can always just leave and go somewhere else if I’m unhappy. You think you can, and hopefully you actually can, but your employer might have other ideas... https://www.cnet.com/news/apple-google-others-settle-anti-po... I'll expand on that slightly - the point is that employers are not beyond illegally getting together to restrict our access to alternative jobs. While it feels like we can just get a new role with a…

Right now in the longest stock market boom you might - might not always be able to do that.

Re: Employee activism in tech stops short of organizing unions

#177

Post by walshemj » Mon, Jul 08, 2019, 9:29 PM UTC

dawhizkid wrote: post #8

Biggest question is if a union or union-like system makes sense in companies where the average tenure is ~2-3 years mostly due to employee choice.

Works in Film and TV.

Re: Employee activism in tech stops short of organizing unions

#178

Post by shados » Mon, Jul 08, 2019, 9:37 PM UTC

kiliantics wrote: post #174

shados wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

How do we agree that everyone needs more vacations? Too many voters are swayed by the talking points of the wealthy who tend to have a lot of influence in the media we consume. The counterargument can even be phrased in ways that are made to look like it supports the "little guy" rather than the oligarchs that are promoting the message, for example: "More paid vacation means small businesses will have more difficulty…

> How do we agree that everyone needs more vacations?

Certainly not at the major tech employer level with their tech workers? A software engineer can already work at any of these and get vacations benefit similar to what's law in those European cities, and that's not doing any movement at the government level. And my non-tech colleagues at the same companies have the same benefits for the most part (commission sales folks probably excluded, but that field is unique)

So you're suggesting we organize to even out the power with our employers to...get something we already have so that...this influence that's currently not spreading will bubble up?

Re: Employee activism in tech stops short of organizing unions

#179

Post by spamizbad » Mon, Jul 08, 2019, 9:40 PM UTC

ben_jones wrote: post #64

ahelwer wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This current state of affairs gives employees a lot of power, as you observed, but it's important to realize it will not last. The downturn will come. The question is whether we want to use our current ephemeral labor power to protect ourselves when the downturn comes, because organization will be 100x more difficult when things go to shit and people don't think they have the luxury of risking their career to build a…

There's a dichotomy in software development between the developers who represent single points of failure in an organization and the increasing number of "replaceable" developers i.e. developers versed only in popular frameworks or who hold introductory/recent-grad levels of domain knowledge with no desire to go further. I think right now were in a "golden age" where the latter group still holds power and can command…

I think you're right. And we've had a "golden age" end twice already: first in the 1980s, which was double-whammied when they cracked-down on contractor labor practices, and again after the dot-com burst. Both times left a lot of carnage and a lot of bitter people who swore off the industry.

And both resulted in a labor shortage a few years later.

I suppose an argument could be made that unionization would increase the output of the technology sector by virtue of preserving the labor pool, along with all the expertise and domain that would normally evaporate, during down-cycles.

Also, lots of people seem to be equating unionizing to having some sort of fixed wage. In reality, it comes down to how the union decides to structure its contracts -- several unions simply dictate a minimum rate/wage, and leave room for negotiation. It's why SAG offers people minimum day and weekly rates and SAG movie star can negotiate a multi-million dollar contract.

Re: Employee activism in tech stops short of organizing unions

#180

Post by throwaway132435 » Mon, Jul 08, 2019, 9:41 PM UTC

I already feel distrust for my outspoken colleagues who purport to speak for me when making demands of management, but would treat me like James Damore if I dissented from their opinions.

The last thing I want is to let those same people formally represent me in a union. Given the current climate, those are very likely to be the people who would be running it.