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

A group of Google workers have announced plans to unionize

theverge.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

461–470 of 1001 posts

Re: A group of Google workers have announced plans to unionize

#461

Post by capableweb »

seneca wrote: post #418
sz4kerto wrote: post #173

One difficulty I see with the mission statement ( https://alphabetworkersunion.org/principles/mission-statemen... ) is that it is very broad, and contains a lot of progressive values that are likely not as widely shared as the authors might expect. One might or might not agree with these values, but it is going to be significantly harder to start steering the company's product direction and social responsibility effo…

This is exactly why I would never join a tech union. Just read their mission statement: this is about enforcing political goals via any power source they can get their hands on. Much like a lot of recent codes of conduct in open source projects.

I think you might misunderstand the goal of a union. It's inherently political, that's the whole point of it. And the values from the mission statement does sound like something every company should aim for, but sometimes they forget we're all humans here, so we need something to keep companies in check.

I'm not sure comparing unions to code of conducts are suitable. Unions are a historically old and proven way for workers to enact change in workplaces, industries and even entire countries. Code of conducts in open source is a fairly new invention (officially, written down ones at least) with no such track record.

Re: A group of Google workers have announced plans to unionize

#462

Post by lucideer »

jollofricepeas wrote: post #347
objclxt wrote: post #38

When I talk to colleagues in tech about unions I hear a lot of misconceptions, seemingly based in stereotypes about what unions are for and who they serve. People often seem to think of unions as being purely blue-collar operations, and this just isn't true. For example, I've had people tell me that they don't support unions in tech because they'll be "paid less", or less competent engineers will be promoted faster.…

Great point. The funny thing about unions is that the HN community believes that every other organization and industry can be disrupted...EXCEPT unions. It’s hilarious. The comments are usually all anecdotal with some story about an uncle or father who was “screwed over” by his union back in the 80s or 90s. We are capable of creating a new type of union and making collective bargaining better than what previous gener…

> the HN community believes that every other organization and industry can be disrupted...EXCEPT unions.

The thing about this is, when other organizations and industry are "disrupted", according to the usual west-coast definition of "disrupt" this typically means exploiting a market to the benefit of shareholders by eroding labor standards. What does one erode while disrupting a union, when those same standards are that org's goal?

The only thing I can think of that the modern form of "disruption" would do to unions is to allow them to "screw over" their members more efficiently.

Re: A group of Google workers have announced plans to unionize

#464

Post by whimsicalism »

finnthehuman wrote: post #286
cool_dude85 wrote: post #272

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So you want someone who can tell you what the yet-to-be-negotiated contract with your employer will look like? Maybe you should be looking to join up with the Mage's Guild, I understand that their magic can see the future very clearly.

>So you want someone who can tell you what the yet-to-be-negotiated contract with your employer will look like? In broad strokes, yes. Here's an analogy: I know it's not implemented yet, but I want the design doc and market research, not just the elevator pitch.

This is usually communicated in the course of organizing - you don't win union elections by not communicating what you stand for/what would be pushed for in a new contract.

Re: A group of Google workers have announced plans to unionize

#465

Post by ruph123 »

xyzelement wrote: post #433

I made this point on HN before but I think it applies here. The world breaks out into two types of employers: those who try to hire outstanding people and go above and beyond for them, with the expectation that one of the attributes of these outstanding employees is that they likewise go above and beyond for the company. The alternative is employees who treat their employees like cattle and the employees treat the em…

What a naive world view is this to think that a large enough company goes “above and beyond” for their employees... As a German these American work ethics are so weird to me. You are being put on a stick and held over a bon fire and all you do is scream “turn me quicker“!

What life is this to work your ass off for a company that demands crazy work hours, that can fire you for any reason with laughable notice period, gives you almost no vacation, no maternity leave and when you get sick, you lose your health insurance and end up on the streets. While the other survivors are celebrating their own luck.

Such a depressing dystopia.

Re: A group of Google workers have announced plans to unionize

#466

Post by apta_ »

eplanit wrote: post #375

I wish Google well on whatever it (legally) pursues to fight this. I see them as a company that has gone from great to now becoming mediocre, and whose employees are destroying it from within. Maybe those clever interview quizzes should be updated to identify and filter out political zealots.

I know at least one person who left Google because it became too political, and this was several years ago. It's sad to see what's become of the company.

Re: A group of Google workers have announced plans to unionize

#467

Post by yanderekko »

capableweb wrote: post #451
marcinzm wrote: post #258

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Seems to me that the organizers are using a union to push their own personal agendas (which they otherwise don't have the power to push) which seems like the perfect way to form a corrupt union that harms workers.

What in the mission statement seems to be "personal agendas" to you? Here they are listed: - All Alphabet workers deserve a voice - Social and economic justice are paramount to achieving just outcomes - Everyone deserves a welcoming environment - All aspects of our work should be transparent - Our decisions are made democratically - We prioritize society and the environment - We stand in solidarity with workers and a…

If I were a Google employee with an active social media account that promoted conservative politics, this would be pretty alarming to me. It's similar to the CoC debates - the visionary goals foreshadow the darker enforcement strategies.

Re: A group of Google workers have announced plans to unionize

#468

Post by dionidium »

appleflaxen wrote: post #172

The recurring theme in the comments against unions can be captured by a simple truth: Unions don't protect your interests; they protect their interests. Which is fundamentally true, and cannot be changed. So if your employment situation is so bad that you need a second, massively powerful, self-interested entity to negotiate with the massively powerful, self-interested entity in the hopes that your interests may happ…

One obvious way this manifests is in seniority-based provisions whereby union members demonstrate a preference for their own interests over the interests of future new hires.

Re: A group of Google workers have announced plans to unionize

#469

Post by whimsicalism »

lr4444lr wrote: post #179
objclxt wrote: post #38

When I talk to colleagues in tech about unions I hear a lot of misconceptions, seemingly based in stereotypes about what unions are for and who they serve. People often seem to think of unions as being purely blue-collar operations, and this just isn't true. For example, I've had people tell me that they don't support unions in tech because they'll be "paid less", or less competent engineers will be promoted faster.…

There is plenty of evidence that I've seen firsthand in municipal government of unions protecting and promoting incompetent IT talent. It doesn't all fall to @#$& solely because government tech is often very slow to change, so mediocre workers can train on very specific applications and not need much continuing ed. I scarcely ever met one that would get hired at either a FAANG or a tech startup. I will qualify this b…

I agree that government tech is usually pretty not great, but I am not sure if that has to do with unions per se or perhaps the government's antiquated pay scales/lack of civil service exam.
Post reply on HN