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

Google attempted to shut down a unionization meeting in Zurich

vox.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 229 posts

Re: Google attempted to shut down a unionization meeting in Zurich

#181

Post by defen »

barry-cotter wrote: post #178
defen wrote: post #171

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The first part of your post (seniority-based rules, certifications, etc) shows a lack of imagination in terms of what a union can be. > With software, what do you think will happen if a union somehow manages, via Swiss law, to unionize one Google office? It's software. Google will leave and hire elsewhere. Does Google hire the best people, or is it a "body shop"? If they just shut down their Swiss office and fire eve…

> The first part of your post (seniority-based rules, certifications, etc) shows a lack of imagination in terms of what a union can be. Precisely because unions are set up to treat members equally they negotiate for the benefit of the median member. Individual unions can fight against the incentives for a while, sure, but first in last out, seniority based pat and restricting entry to keep benefits concentrated among…

Professional sports, Hollywood writers, and Hollywood actors all have unions without seniority-based pay or restricted entry.

Re: Google attempted to shut down a unionization meeting in Zurich

#182

Post by CydeWeys »

joshuamorton wrote: post #54
CydeWeys wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Since when did unions stifle salaries? They generally get higher salaries for their employees, no? Isn't the typical complaint about union workers that they're "overpaid"?

The common complaint is that since unions (at least in a lot of classic union jobs) force pay based on tenure, its difficult or impossible for bright people to succeed and change things. And I'd agree that such a style of union would be antithetical to a company like Google, but its also not the only kind of union.

Yeah, I just don't see a tech union functioning like that. There's no reason a union would have to enforce strict tenure requirements on salary, especially if most workers in the union don't want that.

Re: Google attempted to shut down a unionization meeting in Zurich

#183

Post by barry-cotter »

Apocryphon wrote: post #149
marcinzm wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Silicon Valley is composed of humans with the same drives, limitations, etc. as everyone else. The fact that they think they're better than the rest of humanity doesn't mean they are. It just means they're more self delusional. Self delusion tends to make you repeat history more rather than less.

You're still making the assumption that labor unions are inherently limited by human nature, and not worth attempting a v2. That goes against the SV ethos of tinkering with existing systems and reinventing them.

Labor unions are inherently limited by human nature because they’re made up of humans, not cats. They’re also limited by economic facts which would be the same if they were made of lizard people. That doesn’t mean it’s not worth attempting version 2 but there are very real constraints on what’s possible.

Re: Google attempted to shut down a unionization meeting in Zurich

#184

Post by lonelappde »

trothamel wrote: post #10

I'm by no means familiar with labor law, but are companies (in Switzerland or the US) required to actively support unionization? It seems like it would be one thing to actively oppose unionization, and another thing to require the organizers to provide their own meeting rooms, space, etc. Looking at the article, it seems like this is the latter.

This is a company that dedicates office space and employee time to massage, coffee bars, LAN party rooms, rock climbing walls, bowling alley, all manner of perks, but not one hour per ever of discuss of employee rights.

Re: Google attempted to shut down a unionization meeting in Zurich

#185

Post by CydeWeys »

icelancer wrote: post #120
CydeWeys wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Since when did unions stifle salaries? They generally get higher salaries for their employees, no? Isn't the typical complaint about union workers that they're "overpaid"?

> They generally get higher salaries for their employees, no? Unions typically (almost always) bargain to improve the compensation of the average employee. Outlier events are flattened by definition, meaning it is harder to be fired, and harder to make outlier money.

I don't think that's correct, but even if it were, it sounds like it'd be a good thing as it'd raise salaries for most developers. Surely we don't all think we're the exceptional ones, right? That's simply not possible.

Re: Google attempted to shut down a unionization meeting in Zurich

#186

Post by IX-103 »

NotSammyHagar wrote: post #3

Better workplace protection for whistleblowers and protection from sexism and company retaliation seems like a good thing for google. There have been a stream of these court cases. I think this is actually something that would also benefit google - they seem to constantly struggle with this. I think google is no worse than other tech companies and based on my time there I think the company is well intentioned. They a…

Was the unionization for Google employees or for their contractors? In the case of contractors Google doesn't have direct control over their compensation or perks (except that they must be excluded from some perks to still be legally considered contractors).

The whole contractors vs employee distinction is rather sketchy and I think this is yet another symptom of that problem. Google wants contractors instead of employees (because reasons). They hire a contracting company to get workers. The contracting company treats the workers badly, but Google is legally and contractually bound in how it can interfere with workings of the contracting company. If Google just fires the contracting company, I'm not sure anyone would be better off.

Reminds me of a government job I had. We were required to have contractors for some portion of the workforce. The contracting company some co-workers worked for went bust and they had to shop around to find a new agency to work through. They ended up in a good bargaining position since they effectively already had placement. They ended up better off than the direct employees (stupid government pay grade scale).

They probably could have done better if they were allowed to create their own contacting agency, but they couldn't because it wouldn't have been on the government's whitelist.

Re: Google attempted to shut down a unionization meeting in Zurich

#189

Post by tomjakubowski »

daniel-cussen wrote: post #152
marmada wrote: post #100

Wouldn't unions at Google be bad. If unions imposed rules guaranteeing seniority benefits/tenure rules that would make it harder for younger workers. I am a fan of unions for blue collar work but unions/labor orgs for higher pay organizations seem to be bad because they prevent foreign workers from entering and they make it harder for young people.

The NBA and NFL are unionized and they don't make it harder for younger workers.

In both the NBA and NFL, younger players are subject to the draft and there are caps on rookie contracts, and in the NFL young players only get restricted free agency. Similar restrictions and caps for younger, less-experienced players also exist in organized baseball.

Re: Google attempted to shut down a unionization meeting in Zurich

#190

Post by YokoZar »

carapace wrote: post #188

Remember when Google, Apple, and "dozens more" stole billions of dollars in wage theft from their own devs? https://pando.com/2014/01/23/the-techtopus-how-silicon-valle... https://pando.com/2014/03/22/revealed-apple-and-googles-wage...

The illegal conspiracy here was real, but "wage theft" has a specific, different meaning.
Post reply on HN