Live data from Hacker News

As unions decline, inequality rises

epi.org

421–430 of 479 posts

Re: As unions decline, inequality rises

#421

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I didn't work for the money others were paid, I was paid the fruits of my labour, others was paid theirs, thinking that I would be worth more than I was paid is just hubris. Then after having worked a few years, getting 25% pay raises every year, I quit and can now easily work on my own projects because I made ridiculous amounts of money.

You might not feel exploited, and maybe you personally weren’t. But collectively you and your coworkers were, or at the very least, you and your coworkers were used to enable exploitation of other workers—within Google, or through Google’s third parties. The only way a shareholder of Google can make money off of Google without contributing any work is by exploiting people that do the work. In the context of distribut…

The Google founders did a lot of work initially. And then, my job was enabled thanks to that work and the investments.

Your point only works if the company is stable and the work is keeping that company running, but Google has expanded exponentially every year, it hasn't reached the stable rent seeking stage yet. All those profits were reinvested in the form of salaries and jobs, if those went to the early workers then I'd never have gotten a job there and I'd have to live with a much much smaller salary. Stable rent seeking businesses are a problem, yes, that is the bad kind, but modern tech is too young for companies to have reached that stage.

So with your model I'd have made less money, that isn't good for me. Your model only works momentarily, when you stop growing the company and suddenly start to pay everything to current workers. But all the future workers whose jobs were enabled by those reinvestments would then be worse off, and I'd be one of those workers since I joined close to two decades after Google was founded. By the time I left there were twice as many people working there, their salaries were paid by the labour done by the previous workers, and Google barely pays profits so far so most of this actually went back to the workers, just future workers and not current ones, that is why I can't say that I deserve more than I got, I paid it forward as thanks for those who made my job possible.

Edit: And about unions, did you know that Google also operates in countries with strong unions? I joined the company in one of those. And you know, Google started paying me much more when I moved from that country to a country where unions weren't strong? How is this possible if those strong unions would make me get more? So apparently unions don't make these jobs pay more, in my experience it is the opposite, they didn't even manage to get my salary up to par with my non union co-workers. Unions mostly cares about the median, they don't care about high end workers that already makes a lot, unions aren't for me.

Re: As unions decline, inequality rises

#422

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I didn't work for the money others were paid, I was paid the fruits of my labour, others was paid theirs, thinking that I would be worth more than I was paid is just hubris. Then after having worked a few years, getting 25% pay raises every year, I quit and can now easily work on my own projects because I made ridiculous amounts of money.

You might not feel exploited, and maybe you personally weren’t. But collectively you and your coworkers were, or at the very least, you and your coworkers were used to enable exploitation of other workers—within Google, or through Google’s third parties. The only way a shareholder of Google can make money off of Google without contributing any work is by exploiting people that do the work. In the context of distribut…

With this kind of logic, you could then just as easily say the workers of google are exploiting the shareholder's capital to profit as they didn't bring any of their own with them. Just as soon as things will go bad for google, all the developers will find another jobs and shareholders will be left suffering the losses.

Re: As unions decline, inequality rises

#423
post #173
post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Mr Always-grumbles-about-correlation-studies reporting in here. Maybe it's a nice causal study, but the jump from "moderates compensation of top executives" to "reduces equality across the whole income spectrum" is a big stretch. Update: also, I went and scanned the linked article (because I'm that type). They're credible authors, but they themselves explicitly say: "In reporting correlations between unionization and…

"In reporting correlations between unionization and managerial pay, we are not necessarily able to establish whether unions cause differences" Yes, but that's a different correlation vs causation issue. The point is, the phenomenon of unions equalizing pay, on the company (micro) level (which has been reproduced in other countries and time periods), can be considered to be a causal explanation for the phenomenon of r…

Right, the paper cites a lot of other papers which looked more relevant on the broader topic of what unions do to pay.

Re: As unions decline, inequality rises

#424
post #311

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I thought implying there was some sort of cosmic injustice when a software developers"deserves" more than a nurse, was some sort of sarcasm. We would never understand anything about the world if we talked like that about for example why does this rock deserves a higher potential energy than that acorn.

I'm not following you. Rocks and acorns are not outcomes of human political will, but our economy, society, and systems, among others, are. Maybe I'm missing something, I'm eager to understand your perspective further.

I hope you agree that human political will is bounded by some natural laws, the same way rocks and acorns are bound by physics. And if you want to do something useful with that political will, you better understand those laws.

Re: As unions decline, inequality rises

#425

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Preserving inefficiencies for the sake of extracting money is called rent seeking.

Rent seeking is collecting money while adding no economic value. Like landlords.

If an AI can do your job then you add no economic value, you are just collecting rent by preventing an AI from replacing you.

Re: As unions decline, inequality rises

#426
post #400
post #390

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would be absolutely fine, because I was on 3x the national average income . I would not go onto national television and act like earning way more than anyone else made me a modern suffragette.

Nobody said "not fine". You mentioned "economically disadvantaged". Such a person person literally is disadvantaged in some economic ways. Not all. Not most. But some.

You asked how I would feel. That's the answer to that: I'd be fine.

And as I'd be on 3x average pay, the only way a tax break could possibly be large enough to make me not better off economically was if average people get so many their tax rate is negative.

Re: As unions decline, inequality rises

#427

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"deserve" doesn't exist. What does exist is "what price makes the market clear". Assigned moral worth or whatever "deserve" is trying to get at has nothing to do with economics.

Why shouldn't we have ethical opinions about the economy?

I’d go further to ask why ethics shouldn’t play a more active and significant role in the governing of an economy?

Re: As unions decline, inequality rises

#428

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…

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…

Yes

Re: As unions decline, inequality rises

#429

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 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"

Would the world be a better place if supply and demand weren’t the only factors in the compensation equation?

Re: As unions decline, inequality rises

#430

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> without the union, you have almost no bargaining power. You absolutely do. The most powerful bargaining power of all: the power of the alternative. It's also called "pay me, or I leave" (most often accompanied by "I have an outside offer"). I exercised this power a few times in my career. I did not need any union to bargain for me.

You're describing a bargaining power that unions have, except instead of "pay me or I leave" it's "pay me or we leave". Why would you want a less powerful version of the same thing? Even if you don't involve your union, you can still do what you're describing . You've gained nothing unique by avoiding the union.

> you can still do what you're describing.

I doubt you can. Your boss will tell you he can't pay you more than what's on the grid negotiated with the union. My wife works in a place with a union (and is a member of it), and there is such a grid. Nobody even thinks individual bargaining is a possibility.

Post reply on HN