Live data from Hacker News

Employee activism in tech stops short of organizing unions

nytimes.com

41–50 of 256 posts

Re: Employee activism in tech stops short of organizing unions

#41
post #7

The benefit in tech is options. Don't like your job, get another one. Don't like your boss, get another one. For many locations it's just the matter of turning a button on Linkedin or for many people sending some emails. That keeps people idealistic, vocal and demanding of the behavior from their employer/bosses. This is not the norm in other business functions. Unfortunately.

This won't last. The bubble will pop.

A union is forever.

Re: Employee activism in tech stops short of organizing unions

#42
post #28
post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is the average tenure truly due to "employee choice" or simply a result of the system we created?

Its employee choice. People get bored, they get tired of processes, and there are plenty of companies willing to hire them that will allow them to try something new, do something different, and deal with different processes.

Unions could help in each of these case, so you haven't answered the question or provided any evidence.

Re: Employee activism in tech stops short of organizing unions

#43
post #33
post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This current state of affairs gives employees a lot of power, as you observed, but it's important to realize it will not last. The downturn will come. The question is whether we want to use our current ephemeral labor power to protect ourselves when the downturn comes, because organization will be 100x more difficult when things go to shit and people don't think they have the luxury of risking their career to build a…

I will share my thoughts. Happy to be challenged and discuss more. I think instead of looking for a past era solution we should look for a completely new solution set. Why not work on creating open systems. May be instead of getting a leverage over employers, tech people should contribute and create parallel systems. Which instead of creating monopolies help anyone challenge the status quo easily. I think it already…

The idea that unions exist only to get a larger slice of the static profits pie is, itself, a zero-sum view :)

When employees feel represented and empowered, when we have real ownership in the company - not just a few thousand $ in stock grants while billions are spent on dividends/stock buybacks, but an actual seat at the table where decision are made - then we want the company to succeed. We will work harder and become more invested in our product than any corporate morale-raising initiative could ever hope to achieve. This grows the pie.

Re: Employee activism in tech stops short of organizing unions

#44
Tech unions are a way for bureaucrats to take a tax off the backs of hard working tech workers with no benefits.

I am well off, have a flexible work life balance, and I enjoy my job. There is nothing that a union would bring to the table for me.

If there was a union in Silicon Valley in the early 80s, we would be no where close to where we are today. Look at the stark difference between a Silicon Valley worker vs someone working at Boeing or other unionized shops.

Re: Employee activism in tech stops short of organizing unions

#46
post #16

I used to be all around anti-union. Now that I'm older I regret that position. There are bad unions and there are good unions. Sometimes they can be corrupt, but they never really exceed the corruptness of the corporate powers they negotiate with. It's an imperfect solution, but it's the only one that seems to work. The idea that we are all lone super stars that need to negotiate for ourselves is not only selfish, bu…

> but they never really exceed the corruptness of the corporate powers they negotiate with I'm not convinced that is the case, nor is it an either or (union or corporate powers). Your protection by the union depends on what the union negotiates... beyond that their ability to effect change pretty much stops there. Then you are again at the mercy of your employer. I've had first had experience with "oh yeah they can d…

IMO the question is--given the capacity for corruption and mismanagement in a union, is that better or worse than an individual negotiating with a corporation? Does the potential for a bad union outweigh the potential for a bad company?

I'll just say I don't think unions or the concept of a union needs to be perfect to generally have a positive effect. Maybe I'm naive.

I can see your point about premature unionization, but I do think we need to think about the future. I think there's a sense among tech workers that this period of high demand won't last. Maybe not unions now, maybe not unions in a traditional sense, maybe we do need to think of some kind of new paradigm better suited to tech work than say, a carpenter's union, but something.

Re: Employee activism in tech stops short of organizing unions

#47
post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We can form a union when we need to form a union. There's no point in forming one just in case software engineering no longer becomes a sought-after skilled job.

==We can form a union when we need to form a union.== In my 35 years of life, it has become harder to start a union, so it isn't out of the question that it becomes harder and harder to start a union when software engineers "need to". There's no guarantee that what exists today will exist tomorrow.

I agree with that, but I don't agree with the underlying notion of us ever needing to unionize.

Do people actually think that software engineering is going to become a job that isn't skilled, and isn't sought after?

Re: Employee activism in tech stops short of organizing unions

#48
post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This current state of affairs gives employees a lot of power, as you observed, but it's important to realize it will not last. The downturn will come. The question is whether we want to use our current ephemeral labor power to protect ourselves when the downturn comes, because organization will be 100x more difficult when things go to shit and people don't think they have the luxury of risking their career to build a…

If a downturn comes, it will be due to larger economic reasons. If firms aren't profitable and need to cut costs, having a union that makes that more difficult could actually exacerbate the downturn. I'd rather have to lay off under performers and keep the company in business, than go out of business and have everyone lose their jobs.

What you say is true, however these things can be negotiated with a union.

All a union does is give centralized power to the employees. If employees need to be cut for survival or salaries need to be lowered temporarily than these are things that an employer can provide proof of to the union and together with employees as a union work something out.

A union prevents the laying off of employees as a profit boosting measure even when it IS'NT required for survival. That is wrong on every count.

The employees are a greater part of the company than shareholders, board members, owners and C-level executives combined. Employees are not sheep to be herded and they deserve a centralized voice.

Re: Employee activism in tech stops short of organizing unions

#49

In my opinion, unions are very valuable in cases where employees cannot effectively realize market value for their skillset. This can happen for a number of reasons: 1. In cases of specialized skills (like working at a factory where you've trained on a particular machine). 2. In cases of natural or artificial monopolies (like working for a federal government). 3. In cases where companies and workers incentives are mi…

How confident are you that this climate will continue for the rest of your working life? How confident are you that this climate will extend past your working life?

Thx for utilizing fear.

Re: Employee activism in tech stops short of organizing unions

#50
post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Its employee choice. People get bored, they get tired of processes, and there are plenty of companies willing to hire them that will allow them to try something new, do something different, and deal with different processes.

Unions could help in each of these case, so you haven't answered the question or provided any evidence.

Please don't move the goalpost. My comment was responding to your comment about average tenure, not unions specifically. You didn't raise any questions on how unions played into average tenure or provide any example of how they could help.
Post reply on HN