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

Thousands of Google’s cafeteria workers have unionized

vox.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 203 posts

Re: Thousands of Google’s cafeteria workers have unionized

#171

Post by vjktyu »

notJim wrote: post #153
chomp wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All workers can be abused regardless of their salary. Examples for programmers that come to mind: - Companies that require workers to enter arbitration and give up their right to sue. - Companies that force workers to give up IP generated in their free time (not using company resources) - Companies that require programmers to work 12 hour days, "crunch times", minimal paid leave (game dev industry, VFX industry comes…

A lot of people on HN are interested in a 30-hour work week. A strong union movement could get that done, as they have been working on in Germany: https://www.businessinsider.com/german-workers-can-now-work-...

We need a stronger law: any employee should be able to choose how many hours or days per week to work AND work for any other company at the same time (NDA applies, but non compete bs doesn't). Execs do this all the time: they can be on boards in multiple companies, run other companies, while possessing material information about them all.

The way I see it's working is the total comp negotiation goes as usual, but the employer isn't allowed to ask how much time the employee indends to work and whether one works for other companies. The salary and other comp is paid bi weekly as usual, but is pro rated to the number of hours or days worked. All the machinery is already in place: big corps have very detailed per minutes compensation for vacations, various on call duties and so on.

This will be strictly better for the IRS, because more competition means more taxes, but much worse for the dividend seeking investors.

Obviously, this will be a decade long legal battle with tens of millions in expenses, and it can't be done without a full time team of motivated and very expensive lawyers. However if 100k engineers spend 1k/year as membership fees, this organization will have a 100m/year budget and can keep courts busy forever.

Re: Thousands of Google’s cafeteria workers have unionized

#172

Post by freeopinion »

filoleg wrote: post #111
freeopinion wrote: post #24

Imagine a gigantic apartment building in San Francisco. Let's say some 400-unit monster. Then picture a campus with four of those buildings. Then realize that such a campus could not house all the Google employees in the area. Then realize that such a campus could not house just the Google cafeteria workers in the area.

To make this clear, you are suggesting that having just those 4 buildings won’t solve the issue completely, despite making it better, so it isn’t worth doing?

No. I didn't suggest that. Not even remotely. I am not aware of any such undertaking and did not state any opinion on the worthiness of such an undertaking.

I was just a bit stunned by the sheer number of people that work in the cafeteria. I make no judgement here about those people, their abilities, working conditions, living conditions, or anything else except their quantity.

Re: Thousands of Google’s cafeteria workers have unionized

#173

Post by inerte »

reaperducer wrote: post #143
jkrems wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Entertainment unions handle such things like health insurance and retirement funds. Most actors aren't millionaires. Having the few millionaires in the same union is good for the non-millionaires. Because it means that studios only get the in-demand millionaires if they provide okay conditions for everybody else as well.

Most actors aren't millionaires Which is why I specified millionaires. Let the actors who are working paycheck to paycheck or earning a middle-class wage, or working second jobs as waiters or whatever join a union. But when an actor is making $10 million for a movie, they don't need a union. They have an accountant and an agent who take care of them.

Are you saying after a certain earning threshold actors would have to drop from the union / guild? And if they hit a dry spell, they can come back? Maybe is it better to base it on wealth?

Don’t you think the paycheck to paycheck actors like to know even the super successful are part of their group? Maybe the strength that emanates from the group and what binds them is the profession and the craft, not the earnings? Is a highly paid actor, a better actor than someone who makes 1 cents less then the threshold?

Seems very arbitrary and not something that creates group cohesion.

Re: Thousands of Google’s cafeteria workers have unionized

#174

Post by minimuffins »

JamesLeonis wrote: post #128
whatitdobooboo wrote: post #48

Does anyone have any good/neutral book recommendations on unionization?

A great book is No Shortcuts: Organizing for Power in the New Gilded Age by Jane McAlevey[1]. She specifically goes over history, organizing tactics, analysis about why some unions succeed vs others that don't, as well as how to transition from a bad/no union to one that is representative. Each have examples of recent strikes and efforts in the last decade. Here's a quote that jumped out at me. > According to Buffkin…

Just want to second this. It's a great read and McAlevy is a smart and experienced strategist and scholar. You can find her talking about her ideas in old episodes of the New York radio show Behind the News, all of which are online.

Re: Thousands of Google’s cafeteria workers have unionized

#175

Post by vjktyu »

reaperducer wrote: post #50
vjktyu wrote: post #2

Good for them. As for the tech workers, they need something like a guild with membership fees and staff lawyers that would sue the state for allowing binding arbitration and non compete agreements (i.e. do what California did).

they need something like a guild with membership fees and staff lawyers that would sue the state for allowing binding arbitration and non compete agreements Serious question: How is this kind of a guild different from a union in your view?

Afaik, a union can tell you what you can and cannot do, while I only want a team of well funded lawyers to change some laws. And the u word attracts unnecessary attention. Let's call it a club, actually.

Re: Thousands of Google’s cafeteria workers have unionized

#176

Post by minimuffins »

bransonf wrote: post #109
whatitdobooboo wrote: post #48

Does anyone have any good/neutral book recommendations on unionization?

I don’t think many people write light reading on the topic of unionization. That said, you should be able to find plenty of modern material on class, law and labor. If all else fails, read some classic sociology.

Jacobin magazine, In These Times, Labor Notes and other publications like that cover contemporary union movements thoroughly, and it's pretty much light reading imo.

Re: Thousands of Google’s cafeteria workers have unionized

#177

Post by pandaman »

tehjoker wrote: post #62
dominotw wrote: post #5

ppl also talk a lot about union for tech workers. Its not feasible in tech because a sizable majority of tech workers are on various visa's that precludes them from joining a strike, making the union essentially ineffective. This needs to be addressed first. Chicago has teachers union but filipino teachers on J1 cannot participate in a strike, it works for CTU because there are only a tiny fraction on J1 visa.

You can strike if you're on a visa, but it does put you at enhanced risk of retaliation. You can strike even if it is illegal. The question is the balance of power. For example, if the company retaliates against visa workers, and the other workers strike in protest, the company will probably not continue to try that. This is why solidarity between workers of different dispositions is so important.

IANAL but when I had H1B visa it was for working for a particular company, not striking. I don't know if it's been tested yet but not working definitely had and it is a violation of H1B status. Google for "h1b bench NOIR".

Re: Thousands of Google’s cafeteria workers have unionized

#178

Post by minimuffins »

zelon88 wrote: post #129
ryanseys wrote: post #8

Disclaimer: FTE at Verily (Google Life Sciences) Sounds like this isn't the first time this has happened and won't be the last. Both Compass (the firm that employs these cafeteria workers) and Google both have experience working with unions and are committed to working through this. Happy that these employees are getting the representation they deserve. I hope this means that these people will get better benefits tha…

> I look forward to seeing this issue continue to get light and hope that business priorities evolve to incorporate the more humanistic aspects of running a business instead of simply focusing on the bottom line all the time. Do you really? Because the next step is automating the cafeteria. When was the last time business priorities evolved to become more expensive?

The corporation can only do things like automate away the cafeteria if its employees let it. The point of a union is that workers - the people who do all the work and keep the profits rolling in - take back some control and decide things like this for themselves.

It's defeatist, and extremely unrealistic, to think we just have to roll over and let the bosses do whatever they want just because that's what we've always done up til now.

There's not some deterministic invisible power that says immiseration via automation is inevitable. It's just a matter of collective will as to whether we accept or reject power's desire to screw us over in that particular way.

Re: Thousands of Google’s cafeteria workers have unionized

#179

Post by minimuffins »

mr_toad wrote: post #168
tehjoker wrote: post #76

This was a really great Twitter thread about how capitalism isn't really about meritocracy but about bargaining power and by implication how necessary unions are for workers to be treated humanely and paid more than the bare minimum for survival: https://twitter.com/ArashKolahi/status/1210332075787608065

> how capitalism isn't really about meritocracy Who said it was? Classic example of a straw-man argument. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capitalism

Anyone in their right mind knows that meritocracy is a basic tenet of capitalist ideology, especially the Silicon Valley variety.
Post reply on HN