A group of Google workers have announced plans to unionize • Hacker News Board

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

#621

Post by delfinom » Mon, Jan 04, 2021, 4:54 PM UTC

jcims wrote: post #166

ericol wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I find really, really baffling the general position in the US regarding unions. It is like there's a general discourse that they are a bad thing, just like with "that other" thing (cough socialism cough). This is even more strange when you find out about police unions - that are widespread -, and what their power is. From my point of view actions of police union are usually borderline "mob-like" (as in, I mostly hear…

Just a few opinions here, focusing on the negatives to try to explain the 'general discourse that they are a bad thing'. It's in part because the US has a storied history of corrupt unions and their affiliation with the mafia and organized crime. There's a related facet in that, to an outside observer, the UAW chased American automakers out of the country through unsustainable demands for wages and benefits. Another…

>It's in part because the US has a storied history of corrupt unions and their affiliation with the mafia and organized crime.

The joke is, that isn't even history. Mafia families do still exist in NY and everyone knows they own both the unions and the companies.

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

#622

Post by Veelox » Mon, Jan 04, 2021, 4:54 PM UTC

capableweb wrote: post #461

seneca wrote: post #418

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 w…

> And the values from the mission statement does sound like something every company should aim for

For the record here is the second listed value

> Social and economic justice are paramount to achieving just outcomes. We will prioritize the needs of the worst off. Neutrality never helps the victim.

Let me speak plainly. This type of phrasing is extremely common for progressives. A Trump voter would read this as politically charged and outside the scope of most unions. If you cannot see why someone would oppose this you need to widen the scope of people you talk to.

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

#623

Post by kortilla » Mon, Jan 04, 2021, 4:54 PM UTC

panarky wrote: post #471

scsilver wrote: post #382

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I full on support their goal to clean up their yard before moving somewhere else. Employees are stakeholders and can use their leverage as they please. You somehow cast a negative moral light on workers for using this leverage when every other stakeholder, managment, stockholders, board members, government agencies, voters all use their leverage to change the ecosystem. Entitlement? You are entitled to what you can g…

This shows how deeply ingrained right-wing ideology has become in America. Outside America it is obvious that billionaires, oligarchs and CEOs wield power in their own self-interest, and that workers benefit from collective action in their own self-interest. But inside America the billionaires, oligarchs and CEOs are mythologized as benevolent actors, and workers should be thankful for the gifts graciously bestowed u…

> But it's a cultural taboo to use those same competitive market forces for the benefit of workers.

Forming a union is not competitive, it’s the opposite. When you gather up all of the suppliers of something (in this case employees are supplying labor) and collectively fix a price that is exactly what anti-trust legislation is trying to prevent.

It’s not a cultural taboo to be pro-union on the left because it’s not free market. It is a cultural taboo on the right precisely because they are seen as discouraging competition and rewarding tenure over competence.

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

#624

Post by capableweb » Mon, Jan 04, 2021, 4:55 PM UTC

pwned1 wrote: post #600

capableweb wrote: post #451

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

> Social and economic justice are paramount to achieving just outcomes Social justice is not justice

Ok, let's hear your definitions of what social justice is, and what justice is?

In a traditional sense, social justice is referring to the balance between the individual and society at large. Distribution of wealth, public services/schools, taxation, regulations of markets and more are part of what social justice is, at least in this part of the world.

That does sound like justice to me. It's not criminal justice, which you might be referring to, but more justice in the sense of "just behavior or treatment".

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

#625

Post by pb7 » Mon, Jan 04, 2021, 4:55 PM UTC

whimsicalism wrote: post #459

bjo590 wrote: post #363

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't need to see a negotiated contract. I need to see a list of grievances the union wants to negotiate for. So far everything I have ever wanted but not had from an employer I was able to find by switching employers. What is something concrete that would make my life better that I can only get by joining a union?

Really spitballing, but one that comes to mind is eliminate forced private arbitration? I haven't been able to avoid that one by switching employers.

Google got rid of forced arbitration recently without unions.

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

#626

Post by sparky_z » Mon, Jan 04, 2021, 4:55 PM UTC

visarga wrote: post #217

tsjq wrote: post #183

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is this the beginning of the end of Google?

What, they run out of money?

I don't think that's the kind of "end" they mean.

IBM and HP haven't run out of money either.

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

#627

Post by Dumblydorr » Mon, Jan 04, 2021, 4:57 PM UTC

x87678r wrote: post #206

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…

Yeah that doesn't look like any union I've ever seen.

This comment is so low effort, can you provide any evidence or backing for your statement?

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

#628

Post by jskell725 » Mon, Jan 04, 2021, 4:58 PM UTC

DonnyV wrote: post #231

I think a lot of the back and forth in this thread is dancing around the edges of a couple questions. Who really owns a company? I know legally who owns it. But a company is nothing without the people that work in it and who generate the ideas who keep it going. Shouldn't the majority of people in that company benefit and have a say how its run? Why should a handful of people who don't run the day to day operation or…

Because we chose to work for them instead of starting our own shops; and so to exchange complete ownership of our labor for a (often very nice) steady compensation.

Note that this also applies to managers; up to and including the CEO. They might get paid more in Stock and less in cash; but they're usually not the Owners in and meaningful sense.

I personally love the idea of workers cooperatives and do try to patronize such businesses as much as I can. But 1) it doesn't scale up and 2) when you're not in that model; you're not.

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

#629

Post by SpicyLemonZest » Mon, Jan 04, 2021, 4:58 PM UTC

my_username_is_ wrote: post #606

SpicyLemonZest wrote: post #444

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We might well be capable of creating a new type of union, but that's not what these organizers are doing. They're seeking to join a branch of the CWA, one of the existing union powerhouses.

Can someone explain why a small union may or may not want to affiliate with a larger union organization? Did Google workers have other options here?

The details of the initial organization aren't public, but it's likely that it went in the other direction, as part of the pre-existing project CODE-CWA trying to convince software developers to unionize with them. There's no reason I can see that they would have had to join the CWA.

The advantage of affiliating with a larger organization is their weight becomes a part of your collective bargaining strength. That is, if Google does something the union doesn't like then the entire CWA might get mad at them. I don't know that there are any clear disadvantages from a union's perspective, which is why basically all organizing efforts do it.

From a bird's eye perspective, the disadvantage is that there's no meaningful competition or innovation, because all new unions see themselves as part of the traditional union movement where solidarity is prized. If someone else formed a competing union with a clever new idea for how to organize Google workers, the CWA-backed union would denounce it and demand that Google refuse to talk to the second union.

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

#630

Post by zaroth » Mon, Jan 04, 2021, 4:59 PM UTC

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…

This reads like a PAC not a Union.

Here’s a statement from United Steelworkers, for comparison;

https://m.usw.org/union/our-founding-principles

Here’s the SAG mission statement;

https://www.sagaftra.org/about/mission-statement

The primary goal of a union is to ensure safe and secure working conditions, the best compensation and benefits, etc.;

> negotiating the best wages, working conditions, and health and pension benefits; preserving and expanding members’ work opportunities; vigorously enforcing our contracts; and protecting members against unauthorized use of their work.

The purpose of a labor union is traditionally not to set corporate direction / input into the creative process, to ensure “right-think” in the workplace, or for social justice campaigns.