As unions decline, inequality rises • Hacker News Board

Re: As unions decline, inequality rises

#351

Post by willcipriano » Sat, Dec 17, 2022, 9:03 PM UTC

cycomanic wrote: post #291

surement wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Why did I deserve to make more money than a teacher or a nurse? prices are largely based on supply and demand, not some vague notion of "deserve"

If they would be based on supply and demand shouldn't nurses salaries gone through the roof recently? In every country I read the news shortage of nurses (and teachers to a lesser degree) is a huge topic and many places are badly understaffed. So why did their salaries not increase dramtically?

They did, in the US at least[0]. Just not for the saps who signaled any sort of loyalty to the company, those people got hosed. Nurses need to adopt the "f you pay me" attitude the hospital administration has, doing things like working without protective gear is a great way to tell your boss that you will accept anything he does to you.

[0]https://khn.org/news/highly-paid-traveling-nurses-fill-staff...

Re: As unions decline, inequality rises

#352

Post by nightski » Sat, Dec 17, 2022, 9:05 PM UTC

scruple wrote: post #271

nightski wrote: post #266

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nothing is stopping anyone from forming a worker coop in the US. Yet few do. Have you ever considered this?

I have, yes, and I've gone as far as finding friends and former colleagues who would be interested in joining me. Unfortunately health insurance is tied to employment in this country and we all have families. The uncertainty in that regard leaves it a non-starter for people in our situation. At least for the time being.

I'm not sure I follow on how that would stop you from forming a worker co-op. Almost all businesses who have full time employees pay for health insurance. Are you implying a co-op would make less revenue and therefore could not provide its employees insurance?

Re: As unions decline, inequality rises

#353

Post by RickJWagner » Sat, Dec 17, 2022, 9:13 PM UTC

susanasj wrote: post #142

I think this is a good article for tech workers to read to provide perspective on our place in the tech economy (particularly Americans): https://organizing.work/2020/12/there-is-something-missing-f... particularly this part: > Early on in my own career in the industry, I felt guilty about making a “good” salary. Why did I deserve to make more money than a teacher or a nurse? Of course, I don’t — they deserve a lot m…

Why pick on those 'oligarchs'?

How about the Media moguls? A pretty good argument can be made that media oligarchs produce less value, but they dominate financial and political circles.

Re: As unions decline, inequality rises

#354

Post by slowmovintarget » Sat, Dec 17, 2022, 9:17 PM UTC

edent wrote: post #242

8f2ab37a-ed6c wrote: post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One of the memes that you frequently see in the upper middle class left-leaning tech worker circles is that anything less than a worker co-op is ultimately an organizational structure that is inequitable and exploitative to its labor force, leading to negative externalities for society at large. I'm 100% ignorant of the history of labor and of all philosophical dialectic around it, but I would love to form an opinion…

The traditional view is that "The workers control the means of production". Suppose you built a successful small company but, suddenly, every employee quit at once. Could your business carry on the next day? Could it survive until you hired and trained replacements? If the answer is "no" then you have made the case that employees both deserve to share in the business's success and will probably be incentivised by co-…

That's the traditional Marxist view. It is not the traditional view.

Re: As unions decline, inequality rises

#355

Post by mcguire » Sat, Dec 17, 2022, 9:20 PM UTC

whiddershins wrote: post #214

susanasj wrote: post #142

I think this is a good article for tech workers to read to provide perspective on our place in the tech economy (particularly Americans): https://organizing.work/2020/12/there-is-something-missing-f... particularly this part: > Early on in my own career in the industry, I felt guilty about making a “good” salary. Why did I deserve to make more money than a teacher or a nurse? Of course, I don’t — they deserve a lot m…

This is an intrinsically Marxist framing. Even if inequality is rising, so is wealth overall. That’s what Marx misestimated, although it wasn’t his most grievous error. Poor people in the United States are far richer than rich people of 150 years ago. I am personally willing to accept the he existence of some billionaires if that’s the price we pay for all this wonderful ness.

On one hand, as long as your political opinions align with those of the ultra-wealthy then the inequality shouldn't bother you.

On the other, high inequality is socially unstable because that is not generally the case.

Re: As unions decline, inequality rises

#356

Post by slowmovintarget » Sat, Dec 17, 2022, 9:21 PM UTC

edent wrote: post #307

nec4b wrote: post #286

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you build a house without a carpenter? If not, is he entitled to a part of your house even though you paid him to build it?

I would say that, yes, a carpenter is entitled to a share of the profits. They used their labour to build something which appreciates in value. Traditionally, it has been too hard to track fractional ownership of an asset and calculate a share of profits. And most workers prefer cash up front rather than waiting for a payday which might not materialise for decades. I'm not going to go full blockchain/NFT on this idea…

No. The carpenter is entitled to pay for his work.

He's not entitled to additional value the recipient of the work may or may not get from him completing the job, unless he negotiates that up front. It seems likely that no one in their right mind would agree to pay the carpenter profit sharing for every transaction that may occur from that building. They'd find another carpenter.

Re: As unions decline, inequality rises

#357

Post by Aunche » Sat, Dec 17, 2022, 9:27 PM UTC

Spooky23 wrote: post #327

Aunche wrote: post #170

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Even globalization is an example. There’s nothing etched in stone that says we need to have child labor mining in Africa for rare earth minerals to make iPhones. This is a concern troll. If you really cared about child labor abroad, you would unequivocally support globalization as parents don't want their kids to be slaves and more jobs in these countries gives parents more options. Child labor and slavery is caused…

Tell me how globalization has improved conditions in the Congo?

Companies don't want to invest in a unstable and corrupt country. Even so, the rapid rise in HDI of the DRC aligns with the growth of their exports.

You seem to be implying that colonization is synonymous with globalization, but let me dispel this notion. The problematic part of colonization were the protectionist aspects of it. The Congolese were unable to compete for the same administrative positions of that the Belgians enjoyed.

Now you tell me how unions in the US are supposed to help the DRC.

Re: As unions decline, inequality rises

#358

Post by mcguire » Sat, Dec 17, 2022, 9:29 PM UTC

dehrmann wrote: post #278

winkeltripel wrote: post #186

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think you quite understand how the unions work. -in most cases, the employer is able to fire with cause. The union keeps the employer from using layoffs as a weapon. - pay scales reward loyalty and keeps the workplace stable. - without the union, you have almost no bargaining power. The union usually gets a better rate for everyone than any one person could have negotiated. This is in fact the point of collec…

> pay scales reward loyalty and keeps the workplace stable. The tech industry has arguably developed quickly because people move around a lot, taking best practices with them. Workplace stability might appear locally great, but it hurts the industry as a whole.

The tech industry is flooded with money, but is enormously inefficient. How many projects are you familiar with that got trashed, often after key people moved on?

Re: As unions decline, inequality rises

#359

Post by mcguire » Sat, Dec 17, 2022, 9:33 PM UTC

winkeltripel wrote: post #186

wallawe wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If this is your take, you're not being honest about the downsides of unions. Here is a list of reasons for not wanting a union[1]: - I want my underperforming colleagues to be fired quickly. It's unfair and annoying that laggards are protected and free riding off their colleagues' (my) effort, and it leads to ineffective orgs. - I don't want seniority or rank to be rewarded. It's unfair to young people (me) who are m…

I don't think you quite understand how the unions work. -in most cases, the employer is able to fire with cause. The union keeps the employer from using layoffs as a weapon. - pay scales reward loyalty and keeps the workplace stable. - without the union, you have almost no bargaining power. The union usually gets a better rate for everyone than any one person could have negotiated. This is in fact the point of collec…

You forgot the part where they are all founded on organized crime.

/s

Re: As unions decline, inequality rises

#360

Post by Aunche » Sat, Dec 17, 2022, 9:37 PM UTC

scarmig wrote: post #345

todd8 wrote: post #316

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I grew up in the 1950s and 1960s in Detroit. It was a place where a high school diploma could get you a secure job that would support a middle class family. It’s all changed and Detroit is now half the size it once was while cities like Houston and Austin have grown tremendously. Why did that happen? Did corrupt unions kill the goose that laid the golden eggs? Or was it poor management of the automotive giants that a…

My sense is that German automotive companies dealt with Japanese competition better than American ones did, though I'd love for someone who knows about the history of the industry to chime in. Germany had strong unions and was a market leader then, similar to the US, so it suggests something was wrong with American automakers, labor unions, or the American government that led to the disaster. I wonder if Germany was…

> I wonder if Germany was more aggressive with tariffs to protect automakers from competition.

It's somewhat the opposite actually. Germany taxes imported cars, but at least it still allows them. At the behest of automakers and unions, the US banned imported cars entirely in 1988. This allowed American automakers to profit despite stagnating. It wasn't until foreign subsidiaries started capturing market share from the US that American automakers were forced to innovate again.