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

Id Software devs form "wall-to-wall" union

rockpapershotgun.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 377 posts

Re: Id Software devs form "wall-to-wall" union

#191

Post by jimbokun »

Manuel_D wrote: post #44
popalchemist wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If the company's existence depends on the unfair exploitation of its staff, its foreclosure is inevitable and justified, and that is simply the price everyone involved must pay to maintain equilibrium.

The workers aren't drones, they have the agency to choose another job. If a company is underpaying workers relative to the rest of the market, they'll struggle to hire and retain employees without the interference of a union.

There are a lot of defacto cartels where all of the corporations determine a ceiling on wages they won't go over.

There was a big case with Apple and other Silicon Valley corporations were found to have colluded to not hire employees working for any of the other companies.

Re: Id Software devs form "wall-to-wall" union

#192

Post by Manuel_D »

salawat wrote: post #189
Manuel_D wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The workers aren't drones, they have the agency to choose another job. If a company is underpaying workers relative to the rest of the market, they'll struggle to hire and retain employees without the interference of a union.

Oh, yes, because we've never seen a case where large companies entered into no poach agreements to suppress worker wages, right? Oh wait... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-Tech_Employee_Antitrust_L... Quit the gaslighting.

This collusion affected 8 companies, and stopped over a decade and a half ago. Is there any evidence that Id employees are being subject to this kind of no poach agreement?

Re: Id Software devs form "wall-to-wall" union

#193

Post by jimbokun »

Manuel_D wrote: post #107
IshKebab wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is the magical "perfect competition" view of the market that often doesn't match reality at all.

What's keeping any one of these Id software developers from accepting a competing job offer elsewhere? Yes, there are scenarios where employees are stripped of agency. E.g a factory owner taking and holding foreign worker's passports. But if you're going to allege that something is preventing these works from accepting competing offers, you have to offer evidence for that claim.

Corporations have been caught colluding to suppress wages by refusing to hire anyone working for one of the other companies.

How many of these collusions have not been brought to light?

Re: Id Software devs form "wall-to-wall" union

#194

Post by autoexec »

pie_flavor wrote: post #155
autoexec wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, I'm not sure Id Software, backed by their billion dollar parent company ZeniMax Media, who in turn is backed by their parent company Microsoft, has to live in fear of being exploited by the 165 employees who just signed onto a union.

You're trying to minimize the power of the union by quoting dollar amounts, when the whole point of the union is to have power, and the whole point of unionization is to defeat superior dollar amounts by capturing the organizational memory that money cannot buy. You cannot replace your entire gamedev team at once without destroying what makes your company, your company. You cannot respond to your entire gamedev team…

It's not just about dollar amounts, it's about security and consequences. If a developer finds out that he got laid off his life is completely upended. If the CEO of microsoft finds out that the subsidiary of a subsidiary goes under, his life doesn't change. One of those two people is in a position of power so much greater than the other that they have absolutely nothing to fear from having to treat a small number of twice removed employees a little more fairly.

The whole point of the union is to have any power at all and to try to improve their working conditions, not to overpower the giants who rule over them. No one joins a union because they want to put themselves out of a job.

Re: Id Software devs form "wall-to-wall" union

#195

Post by nix0n »

Alupis wrote: post #175
prewett wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That assumes that the union never unfairly exploits the company. I think historical evidence shows that unions sometimes do exploit the company (and that union leaders sometimes exploit the members). Humans exploiting other humans is a flaw of all of us, not just corporate management.

The Union is a business too - and it's product is the labor of it's members. Always follow the money - there's no free lunch. The Union negotiates incremental raises not because it is righteous and just - no, it negotiates incremental raises because the Union wants more revenue. Sometimes the goals of a Union and it's members align - but often they do not. Unions get a lot of free positive PR, but in modern times the…

> We used to have 12-16+ hour workdays, no days off, etc. None of that is true anymore - the great battles have been fought and won, and nobody is going back.

The 8 hour workday is not guaranteed to office workers anymore.

See HN discussion of 996: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45149049

Re: Id Software devs form "wall-to-wall" union

#196

Post by popalchemist »

prewett wrote: post #43
popalchemist wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If the company's existence depends on the unfair exploitation of its staff, its foreclosure is inevitable and justified, and that is simply the price everyone involved must pay to maintain equilibrium.

That assumes that the union never unfairly exploits the company. I think historical evidence shows that unions sometimes do exploit the company (and that union leaders sometimes exploit the members). Humans exploiting other humans is a flaw of all of us, not just corporate management.

What you say is true but it does not represent the spirit of what has happened historically. Historically the means of production exploit labor vastly more frequently and with greater degrees of extremity than the inverse.

This comment puts it in perspective:

>Yeah, I'm not sure Id Software, backed by their billion dollar parent company ZeniMax Media, who in turn is backed by their parent company Microsoft, has to live in fear of being exploited by the 165 employees who just signed onto a union.

Your comment is inane in the context of the reality of the situation.

Re: Id Software devs form "wall-to-wall" union

#197

Post by Manuel_D »

jimbokun wrote: post #191
Manuel_D wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The workers aren't drones, they have the agency to choose another job. If a company is underpaying workers relative to the rest of the market, they'll struggle to hire and retain employees without the interference of a union.

There are a lot of defacto cartels where all of the corporations determine a ceiling on wages they won't go over. There was a big case with Apple and other Silicon Valley corporations were found to have colluded to not hire employees working for any of the other companies.

> There was a big case with Apple and other Silicon Valley corporations were found to have colluded to not hire employees working for any of the other companies.

And there's some factories in Asia that confiscate foreign worker's passports.

Nobody is claiming that workers' ability to move jobs is never compromised by employees. The question is, is there any evidence to back up that Id employees are in this situation as commenters are claiming in this thread?

And it sure looks like the answer is "no", given that the best people can come up with is point to a decades old no-poaching agreement and speculate that something like that might be happening at Id.

Re: Id Software devs form "wall-to-wall" union

#198

Post by autoexec »

jimbokun wrote: post #188
autoexec wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, I'm not sure Id Software, backed by their billion dollar parent company ZeniMax Media, who in turn is backed by their parent company Microsoft, has to live in fear of being exploited by the 165 employees who just signed onto a union.

If the union has no power to influence Id Software, what's the point of the union?

Why would they be terrified of a handful of employees just for having the ability to influence the company? The point of a union is to improve working conditions and job security, not to murder your bosses and kill off the company. Funny thing about workers is that they like having jobs, especially ones where they have any influence at all. If a company is fearful that treating workers a little more fairly will sink them, the company deserves to go under.

Re: Id Software devs form "wall-to-wall" union

#199

Post by AnthonyMouse »

kristofferg wrote: post #117
appreciatorBus wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You forgot that collective ruin is also an option and we have seen this many times when societies attempted to do away with economic & market concepts.

Unions are part of a healthy market economy. The succesful suppression of unions is a market failure.

Unions are basically useless in a healthy market economy because then companies have to compete for customers and employees instead of having a monopoly, which causes them to have thin margins and therefore leave nothing on the table for collective bargaining to extract that wasn't already being extracted through competitive pressure.

Meanwhile unions in a consolidated market have the perverse incentive to sustain the monopoly because then the union is extracting a portion of the monopoly rents the corporation is squeezing out of consumers at the expense of the 99% of workers who don't work for that specific company. Which is why consolidated markets need not unions but antitrust enforcement.

Re: Id Software devs form "wall-to-wall" union

#200

Post by salawat »

Manuel_D wrote: post #187
linuxftw wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Remember when the tech companies got caught making deals not to poach each other's employees? Maybe they can just start their own company. Well, you can't for the existing players to peer traffic with you if you need heavy network access.

Do you have evidence that Id is being subject to some sort of no poach deal? Nobody doubts that employers can curb worker's ability to accept competing offers. The question is whether there's actually any evidence backing up the claim that Id employees aren't free to leave.

Doesn't need it to justify unionizing. Unionizing is a right, and it was previously not exercised because there was no evidence of the will of the market to defraud or conspire against workers. It is now written plain for all to see that indeed, these types of arrangements are kept in board members back pockets. It is not their job to protect a companies interest in renumeration execs and shareholders. It is their job to get their share in spite of the management class's proven track records of the proclivity to engage in shenanigans and lies.

The fact you can't understand solidarity is your problem, not theirs.

Post reply on HN