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

Apple’s anti-union tactics in Atlanta were illegal, US officials say

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 150 posts

Re: Apple’s anti-union tactics in Atlanta were illegal, US officials say

#51

Post by sfteus »

purple_ferret wrote: post #39
wccrawford wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As much as I don't want to be part of one, I absolutely agree that they're necessary as a check on corporations.

Why wouldn't you want to be part of a union? I am a recent member of the UAW (a more white collar local), and it's been insightful. I think unions are much weaker than people perceive. Their strengths are mostly superficial. Striking is something members don't want to resort to. Other than that all you can really do is rally and file NLRB complaints. The NLRB is a slow moving bureaucracy that any competent employer c…

From a union supporter who's spent some time reading about anti-union sentiment here, I've found it generally boils down to a few things:

1) A large portion of users on this site are entrepreneurs or in higher-level tech. For the former, unions can be seen as getting in the way of the startup lifecycle; for the latter, many believe that the value they provide makes them untouchable, or believe that the supply of high-level tech workers will never meet demand so they will simply be able to move to another company if needed without much friction.

2) Many people believe that unions spend too much time protecting "low-performers," and that a union enacting barriers to protect employees from quick firing for performance will hurt the overall team/company.

3) Many people also believe that both paying union dues, and a union negotiating for the "average" worker will lead to them making significantly less money. IE, say your company was split 75% junior/25% senior devs, and paid junior devs $75k and senior devs $300k. If the union put pressure on the employer to raise the minimum salary to $100k, then they believe that money will come out of the senior devs salaries (reducing it to ~$225k).

I can say in my experience, the first point is at least somewhat true right now (I had no issues moving to a more senior and better paid job after my last company sold out). I personally think the sentiment of point #2 is interesting; I generally don't view this as "protecting" those who should be fired, and more view it as a public defender ensuring everyone receives legal representation, even if they are clearly guilty.

I'd also just note that even I'm not blanket pro-union; Police unions are a prime example of what happens when unions consolidate too much power because they went decades without any pushback. I'd consider that an extreme outlier though.

Re: Apple’s anti-union tactics in Atlanta were illegal, US officials say

#52

Post by taeric »

sfteus wrote: post #51
purple_ferret wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why wouldn't you want to be part of a union? I am a recent member of the UAW (a more white collar local), and it's been insightful. I think unions are much weaker than people perceive. Their strengths are mostly superficial. Striking is something members don't want to resort to. Other than that all you can really do is rally and file NLRB complaints. The NLRB is a slow moving bureaucracy that any competent employer c…

From a union supporter who's spent some time reading about anti-union sentiment here, I've found it generally boils down to a few things: 1) A large portion of users on this site are entrepreneurs or in higher-level tech. For the former, unions can be seen as getting in the way of the startup lifecycle; for the latter, many believe that the value they provide makes them untouchable, or believe that the supply of high…

There are at least a few of us that view unions as just a smaller extra government entity, and would prefer we rather had stronger governments. To wit, I don't want folks dependent on their job. Period. And unions often do give workers better conditions, but only so long as they are workers.

That said, I typically fall on the pro-union side of most debates. Often is a better alternative than where we are.

Re: Apple’s anti-union tactics in Atlanta were illegal, US officials say

#53

Post by kelseyfrog »

wahnfrieden wrote: post #14
winReInstall wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or, hear me out, they could ditch the lipservice to democracy entirely and push some ursurper on a throne. After all strong hierarchys controlled by a godking are closer to a company anyway. What has democracy ever done for us?

That's a paradox of the left - is the fight to keep people laboring, or to do away with it (through automation etc.)

I've never heard of this before. Are there other political paradoxes you're aware of, say for example, a paradox of the right?

Re: Apple’s anti-union tactics in Atlanta were illegal, US officials say

#54

Post by xhkkffbf »

frippertronics wrote: post #21
ajsnigrutin wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Many unions soon get corrupted and get in bed with the government (or atleast one side of it). Here in slovenia, many worker unions were against the lowering the taxes on paychecks (higher net with same gross pay), because their political parties were against those, even if the workers themselves would benefit from those. We also have some areas (eg. a government rail company), where you cannot even get a job, if you…

I don't think it's valid to write off all unions based on anecdotal evidence. For every example of bad unionisation one can probably provide one or more counter-examples of good unionisation (e.g. the Scandinavian countries).

Well, yes, but if there's a one-to-one correspondence between good unions and bad unions,that pretty much implies that the expected value of a union vote is zero. It's just the same as not unionizing.

In my personal anecdotal experience, the unions at the places I've worked have been mired in factions. They supported some workers but not others because they picked sides. They weren't just neutral, they undermined some workers to benefit others. It really soured me on them.

Re: Apple’s anti-union tactics in Atlanta were illegal, US officials say

#55

Post by Ancapistani »

sfteus wrote: post #51
purple_ferret wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why wouldn't you want to be part of a union? I am a recent member of the UAW (a more white collar local), and it's been insightful. I think unions are much weaker than people perceive. Their strengths are mostly superficial. Striking is something members don't want to resort to. Other than that all you can really do is rally and file NLRB complaints. The NLRB is a slow moving bureaucracy that any competent employer c…

From a union supporter who's spent some time reading about anti-union sentiment here, I've found it generally boils down to a few things: 1) A large portion of users on this site are entrepreneurs or in higher-level tech. For the former, unions can be seen as getting in the way of the startup lifecycle; for the latter, many believe that the value they provide makes them untouchable, or believe that the supply of high…

I'm very much anti-unionization, but don't really fall into any of those buckets. To be fair, I didn't take it to be an exhaustive list.

Basically, I'm opposed to unions as they exist in the US because of the government being involved and "artificially" granting them power.

Re: Apple’s anti-union tactics in Atlanta were illegal, US officials say

#56

Post by wccrawford »

purple_ferret wrote: post #39
wccrawford wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As much as I don't want to be part of one, I absolutely agree that they're necessary as a check on corporations.

Why wouldn't you want to be part of a union? I am a recent member of the UAW (a more white collar local), and it's been insightful. I think unions are much weaker than people perceive. Their strengths are mostly superficial. Striking is something members don't want to resort to. Other than that all you can really do is rally and file NLRB complaints. The NLRB is a slow moving bureaucracy that any competent employer c…

I think you made my point for me, at least partially.

The real teeth in a union is the ability to strike. In joining a union, you signify that you're willing to strike if enough other people aren't getting what they want.

I'm happy with what I have. My team seems pretty happy, too.

If things were bad, I'd consider joining a union. But until they are bad, union dues are just wasted money, and the obligation to strike if enough others want to.

Re: Apple’s anti-union tactics in Atlanta were illegal, US officials say

#57

Post by dsfyu404ed »

sfteus wrote: post #51
purple_ferret wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why wouldn't you want to be part of a union? I am a recent member of the UAW (a more white collar local), and it's been insightful. I think unions are much weaker than people perceive. Their strengths are mostly superficial. Striking is something members don't want to resort to. Other than that all you can really do is rally and file NLRB complaints. The NLRB is a slow moving bureaucracy that any competent employer c…

From a union supporter who's spent some time reading about anti-union sentiment here, I've found it generally boils down to a few things: 1) A large portion of users on this site are entrepreneurs or in higher-level tech. For the former, unions can be seen as getting in the way of the startup lifecycle; for the latter, many believe that the value they provide makes them untouchable, or believe that the supply of high…

>2) Many people believe that unions spend too much time protecting "low-performers," and that a union enacting barriers to protect employees from quick firing for performance will hurt the overall team/company.

This is not a "some people think" issue. This is a reality of running an organization like a union.

Literally every low barrier to entry organization from unions to political parties to organized religion to organized crime has to invest a significant amount of resources in giving a good chunk of its "dolts" a better deal than they could get anywhere else (even sometimes going to an extent that is not sustainable in order to advertise to other members how far the organization can/will go for you) because that ensures that those people will 100% go to bat for the organization. It is a necessary part of operations at scale.

Re: Apple’s anti-union tactics in Atlanta were illegal, US officials say

#58

Post by catiopatio »

purple_ferret wrote: post #39
wccrawford wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As much as I don't want to be part of one, I absolutely agree that they're necessary as a check on corporations.

Why wouldn't you want to be part of a union? I am a recent member of the UAW (a more white collar local), and it's been insightful. I think unions are much weaker than people perceive. Their strengths are mostly superficial. Striking is something members don't want to resort to. Other than that all you can really do is rally and file NLRB complaints. The NLRB is a slow moving bureaucracy that any competent employer c…

> Why wouldn't you want to be part of a union?

There’s no upside for me, and severe downsides.

My reasoning, in particular:

1) My skills are unique and in high demand. I can best maximize my own compensation through direct negotiation.

2) Compensation is effectively zero-sum, and I don’t want to subsidize low performers.

3) I don’t want to subsidize a parallel, mostly useless (and probably entirely useless) shadow management hierarchy in the form of union officials.

Re: Apple’s anti-union tactics in Atlanta were illegal, US officials say

#59

Post by kodah »

sfteus wrote: post #51
purple_ferret wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why wouldn't you want to be part of a union? I am a recent member of the UAW (a more white collar local), and it's been insightful. I think unions are much weaker than people perceive. Their strengths are mostly superficial. Striking is something members don't want to resort to. Other than that all you can really do is rally and file NLRB complaints. The NLRB is a slow moving bureaucracy that any competent employer c…

From a union supporter who's spent some time reading about anti-union sentiment here, I've found it generally boils down to a few things: 1) A large portion of users on this site are entrepreneurs or in higher-level tech. For the former, unions can be seen as getting in the way of the startup lifecycle; for the latter, many believe that the value they provide makes them untouchable, or believe that the supply of high…

I can be kind of mixed from a union standpoint. It really just depends on the goals and outcomes of a particular union. Airline unions tend to be particularly bad when it comes to controlling internal dissent against the union, and regulating peoples pay and flying hours (especially around furloughs). Things may have changed since I heard this criticism, but I'd hate to have this happen in software.

That said, we could use standardization in pay, better and more standardized promotions, and someone to tear down the existing LeetCode interview process. I have not seen any software unions that aim to do this though.

Re: Apple’s anti-union tactics in Atlanta were illegal, US officials say

#60

Post by catiopatio »

dccoolgai wrote: post #37
ajsnigrutin wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Many unions soon get corrupted and get in bed with the government (or atleast one side of it). Here in slovenia, many worker unions were against the lowering the taxes on paychecks (higher net with same gross pay), because their political parties were against those, even if the workers themselves would benefit from those. We also have some areas (eg. a government rail company), where you cannot even get a job, if you…

Many companies also do things that are a lot worse, like taking massive profits and then laying off the people that gave up time with their families and other opportunities to create those profits. I heard they also do things like give executives that don't do a great job millions while stiffing the individual contributors. Unions can help companies run better by forcing them to take a "longer than 2 year" view on de…

Unions can also (and quite often do) capture as much value as they can, while producing none.
Post reply on HN