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

Fastmail Employees Form a Union

union.place

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 303 posts

Re: Fastmail Employees Form a Union

#31

Post by tumult »

jmcphers wrote: post #20
elektor wrote: post #9

Congrats to the team! This might be the reminder I needed to finally subscribe. Gmail’s spam filter has been nonexistent for the past month (300+ clearly spammy email reaching my inbox).

I'm a happy Fastmail customer, but I would not recommend them on the basis of their spam filter. It's competent but makes at least a few mistakes a week. Google's was better for me.

I had the opposite experience. Gmail's filter was useless, letting in tons of spam, and then putting normal emails from family members, also using gmail, and who I have emailed many times in the past, into spam. Fastmail's is drastically better for me.

Re: Fastmail Employees Form a Union

#32

Post by sundaeofshock »

righthand wrote: post #12
nightski wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can't unionize your way to a better economy, that's not how that works.

It’s not about unionizing to a better economy, it’s about protecting workers and preventing c-suite from making irresponsible decisions. Wage negotiation is just a benefit.

Taking money out of the C-Suite and putting it in the pockets of workers is better for the economy.

Re: Fastmail Employees Form a Union

#33

Post by morvita »

mvexel wrote: post #24

LinkedIn says Fastmail has 116 U.S. based employees. I may be completely off base here, but if you're that small an org and employees feel the need to form a union, wouldn't that indicate a significant problem with company culture?

There's power in bargaining as a collective, whether you're a collective of ten or ten thousand. Either way, it helps with the power imbalance between employees and management.

Re: Fastmail Employees Form a Union

#34

Post by diob »

nightski wrote: post #10
righthand wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because software workers should start looking to form unions as large companies take to stagnate wages with large hire/layoff cycles that flood the employment market.

You can't unionize your way to a better economy, that's not how that works.

I mean, you can be certain the big heads of companies are unionizing / conspiring against you (meeting behind closed doors to keep wages down, not poach, fix prices / rent, etc.).

It's fascinating how the lower class has been indoctrinated against them.

Re: Fastmail Employees Form a Union

#36

Post by AlexandrB »

nightski wrote: post #10
righthand wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because software workers should start looking to form unions as large companies take to stagnate wages with large hire/layoff cycles that flood the employment market.

You can't unionize your way to a better economy, that's not how that works.

One could argue that distributing more money to workers would stimulate the economy more than aggregating it at the top.

Re: Fastmail Employees Form a Union

#37

Post by chrismorgan »

jedberg wrote: post #8
mattl wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Because if an employer already treats you well it just adds unneeded bureaucracy. I'm a big fan of unions, but I'm also a big fan of treating employees well. I would hope that my employees would never feel the need to unionize because I already hear their feedback and give them the benefits they want. Unions create an adversarial relationship between labor and management. That shouldn't be necessary if labor and mana…

And in the case of Fastmail, it’s already an employee-owned business (not sure on the AU/US split from the Fastmail/Pobox merge, but I believe that all shareholders are employees except one who is a brother of an employee). As a former employee of Fastmail (AU, 2017–2020), I’m a bit puzzled by this, and curious about it.

Re: Fastmail Employees Form a Union

#38

Post by brightball »

taurath wrote: post #16
mfer wrote: post #6

Unions are fascinating to me. When you are in a Union, part of your money goes to the union in order to, hopefully, make things better for you. This means the relationship between Union leadership and the Union members is just as important as between Union leadership and the company. Historically, we have seen Unions bring things like worker safety to the forefront and do numerous things to help people out. More rece…

I would always rather be in a union than not. Sometimes unions can be opaque or byzantine especially in older industries, but what is always opaque is management. Having fair pay and time off is something I’d rather not leave to whoever happens to sit in the chair above me, because who sits in the chair above me can change on a whim. Congrats to the Fastmail team!

As long as there's an option to not be in the union, it's completely fine IMO.

In a free market, the best option will win. When non-union jobs are better than union jobs the need for the union should vanish (in theory).

Re: Fastmail Employees Form a Union

#39

Post by otachack »

mattl wrote: post #3
superduty wrote: post #2

[flagged]

[flagged]

There's a very strong, anti-union sentiment in HN IMO as it's contrary to the "bootstrapping" image venture capitalist that drives so much here. But if fellow readers put aside any resentment and look at it objectively: we prosper in ways due to past unions, and hopefully see it as a tool to push back on broken hiring/firing processes, at the least.

Low hanging fruit: We all think we are strong or can bounce back to a new job easily. What happens when we cross that line of ageism we hear about often? Not everyone is going to be able to retire in their 40s/50s. A union can push back in this practice.

What about not being granted lengthy paternal leave to spend with new family members and the state you reside in doesn't offer assurances?

What about the lengthy contracts we all fool ourselves into signing, thinking the companies won't come after us as long as we treat and be treated as "part of the family" and we leave it to luck and withstand unfair practices to not rock the boat?

We even tell ourselves "HR is not our friend, they are there to protect the company" and in the same breath say "unions are useless"

Like I've been hearing: It's better to start and be in a union when you don't need one.

Re: Fastmail Employees Form a Union

#40

Post by JumpCrisscross »

KittenInABox wrote: post #11
mfer wrote: post #6

Unions are fascinating to me. When you are in a Union, part of your money goes to the union in order to, hopefully, make things better for you. This means the relationship between Union leadership and the Union members is just as important as between Union leadership and the company. Historically, we have seen Unions bring things like worker safety to the forefront and do numerous things to help people out. More rece…

Yes, unions are super nuanced and have their pros and cons. I think the writers strike on hollywood forcing them to pay for using written work in streaming is a good choice. I think gatekeeping participating in studios on union work effectively gatekeeps tv writing to the already-connected, also. Overall I guess unions are only as good or as bad as the people in them.

The writers' and UPS strikes were a good juxtaposition of where (private sector) unions work and when they don't. The writers got, approximately, squat. Most of them got laid off. The pay raises don't compensate for the months of lost work. The advantages of hedging with foreign content was laid bare. They struck when they had no leverage and it showed.

The UPS strike, on the other hand, was a resounding success. Swiftly resolved. Material pay and safety improvements. And a stable workforce for UPS in the midst of a broader labor shortage. Win win. (Yellow got fucked, but that's a different story.)

Post reply on HN