Live data from Hacker News

A group of Google workers have announced plans to unionize

theverge.com

961–970 of 1001 posts

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

#961
post #743
post #557

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What do you think the software industry will be like 20 years from now? Do you think the cushy salaries and relative lack of gate keeping will stay around? I sure as hell don't. Unionize now, even if you earn a little less, while you have the most bargaining power, so that later you don't have to fight through pinkerton detectives just to get a seat at the table. There's a reason companies like Google suppress initia…

By what mechanism will salaries fall? And thus by what mechanism will SWE unions keep salaries high, but gates open?

Salaries are already well below what they used to be, and are continuing to fall

Through actions against specific employers and minimum standards. If unions can have some control over wages, then the gate becomes irrelevant

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

#963
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.…

unintended consequences 1. Fat cats. What are the due fees? %1 now?, later then? %5 of gross annually? 200 people * 300k year * %5 of salary = 3 million. They will use this on fancy dinners with Google execs? Or spend it in "wrongful terminations" law suites with google for years? What happens when 50x more join. 2. Who runs it? Will it be a 10 year long president? What is her union salary? A non-google person? Will…

> One thing that wont happen: better working conditions.

Some of these are true, some are not, but workers in unions make more money, have better benefits, and have better working conditions overall

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

#964
post #899

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I still want better working conditions though, for me and for everybody. What do you suggest? Well, a re-brand for one. Don't call it a "union". Call it something else if it is something else. If you make a union patterned after traditional ones, why shouldn't it become a corrupt entity 50 years later just like all the current corrupt unions?

My take on this is the old unions aren't decrepit just because they're unions and they've existed for 100 years. I don't think it's built in to the nature of unions to eventually become decrepit (no more than any other institution anyway). Their problem is not that they're old, it's that they're not powerful enough anymore to be the kind of adversarial force they once were. They're shrinking instead of growing. Their…

This is a really well-formed response with great historical context. I think you should consider posting some form of this to the main article so more people up top can see it.

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

#965

Downvote me if you want, but as a SWE I find my job very highly rewarded both economically and technically. I'm happy where I am and in my team. I'm a minority and I have study all my life to be competitive, I have been treated fairly because of my skills. Free food, gym, coffee, stocks, high salaries, mobility, not sure I can ask for more

If you want to have all of that in the future, as SWE jobs grow in ubiquity and quantity, you should want a union. The reason we have those things now is because we had the leverage in scarcity. In the next decade that scarcity will be gone and you'll be replaceable.

What exactly makes you think that demand for SWE jobs will evaporate in the next decade? It looks to me like demand should be higher than ever with all the various car, IoT, security related tech news we've seen recently.

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

#966
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.…

> 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. I am such a person. For most workers, you're right that a union will probably increase wages. But for me, it will do the opposite. In most jobs I have worked, I ended up paid significantly more than counterparts in the same job. I usually was better at my job and put in…

Do high performers get paid less? Unions are ultimately democratic, besides job hopping not promotions were always the best way to get ahead in tech

Also unions are democratic, and you only even have to pay agency fees

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

#967
post #592

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>tell me what the terms of the contract will be and I'll decide for myself. Nobody can tell you what the contract will be because the contract won't be drawn up until the union exists and has enough members to bargain. What you DO know is the current contract you have. You DO know that you have virtually no say in what is in that contract, "accept it or leave," is not having a say in that contract. You DO know that a…

Sounds like the cart before the horse. Tell me I'm signing up for something that I have no idea how it will turn out, and then present me with a take it or leave it contract months later. And I'm stuck.

> Sounds like the cart before the horse. Tell me I'm signing up for something that I have no idea how it will turn out, and then present me with a take it or leave it contract months later. And I'm stuck.

That's not a reasonable position, since you're basically asking for someone to predict the future for you (accurately, I hope). Not knowing "how it will turn out" is life, for instance have you ever hired someone new with the knowledge of how they'll perform over the next few years? The answer is no, because it's impossible.

You never know what a contract will be before you negotiate it, and you can always quit and work someplace else if you don't like it. Which is exactly what you probably have now, except your employer writes your contract unilaterally without your input or that of anyone like you.

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

#968

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> but when you already work at the company that pays and treats their employees like Google, I'm not sure what more you are entitled to. Google made something like 300,000 in profit per employee in 2019. There are regular complaints about benefits and pay multipliers being cut back. Why shouldn't workers seek to capture as much of their labor as possible? People don't seem to complain when businesses do that.

Employee compensation is tied to profit in the form of RSUs. A decline in profit would substantially decrease the value of those RSUs and thus compensation. You can't just decrease profit in a vacuum and hand that revenue to employees, you have to consider the second-order effects.

It's more complicated than that, but it would in the end be close to 300k salary increase. The correct way to think about it is, what if the company was entirely owned by employees? How would income change, then?

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

#969
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.…

This is a fascinating example. Thanks for the additional perspective! My gut instinct was that I've worked in a union and I wasn't a fan of it. I am in Canada, so it's possible that union vs non-union employment doesn't have as large of a gap as it would in America.

I'm no expert on unions nor am I an expert on labor economics or game theory, however, I had a few thoughts that I would love references to explore.

1. the union is for employees in Canada and the US. Google employs economists. Is there some game theory solution that would show google should end up transitioning all labor overseas over time? With remote work caused by the pandemic is there really a barrier to eliminating US and Canadian jobs?

2. what's the distribution of google's labor force? As best as I can tell, google has 223,000 total workers. About 45% (102k/223k) are full-time, the rest are temps and contractors. Where are these jobs? What percent are in the US?

3. I have seen employers in the US close up entire businesses and relocate to Canada when the US business unionized. I've seen Canadian businesses close up and move to new provinces when the employees unionized. When the profit loss caused by unions exceeds the transition costs, transitions happen.

4. how many employees are truly irreplaceable? I know a lot of people like to think they can never be replaced, but companies move on. is it like for like? not always.

5. how much of this extra profit employees think they deserve is enabled by google and google scale? i.e., if you're saving google 1 million per year and you think you deserve a large chunk of that, what happens when you try to go to a company that has 1/1000th the scale of google? Note: these union doesn't seem to be aimed at capturing value for them (full-time), but instead seems to seek to distribute the full-time benefits to the part-timers and temps. That's commendable.

6. I'm sure there are more unions than the oversimplification that follows. The google union doesn't seem to be a collective bargaining agreement type union for salaries. Salaries are still up to individuals. Let's roughly define CBA (collective bargaining agreement) unions vs "superstar" unions.

Superstar unions: - Hollywood and professional sports have unions where they have minimum salaries and working conditions, but the stars can end up negotiating a huge salary (some sports have salary caps across a team). Will tech workers start taking on agents to negotiate tech contracts on their behalf?

- Sports has drafts and minor leagues, will the hoops to get hired at google become even more outrageous? Look at the meat market that is the NFL combine [2].

CBA unions: - contractors and temps still exist in these situations. Now full-time jobs are split into permanent part-time (PPT) and full-time (FT). Permanent part-time meaning you can get 40 hours a week, but you have no benefits. This can take years to move from PPT to FT.

- Teaching and nursing unions enforce a minimum level of credentials. Trade unions do too, in the form of apprenticeships, which still require formal education.

- in the negative extreme, the Vancouver longshoreman union jobs are nearly impossible to get. you need to have a family member (yes, these are passed from grandpa to father to son) endorse you to join the union. union call for new members happen every 1-3 or more years. if you're endorsed, you end up in a raffle. if you're lucky enough to be drawn, you still have to wait your turn before you can work and then become full-time. it's a many year long process. or, supposedly, you can buy endorsements for tens of thousands of dollars.

- jobs get opened up internally before being opened up to external candidates

- companies have to provide training to get internal employees who are more or less qualified up to a level suitable to accept the next jobs.

7. There has been mention of other fields such as accounting, law, and medicine. I don't think these are the same types of unions. In Canada anyway, you have to go through certain education, professional exams, and professional development in engineering and accounting. At a first level, you need to get professional licensing. That doesn't seem to be the same type of union presented here. If anything, moving tech towards accounting, engineering, law, medicine, etc. will add more gate keeping, and I've seen lots of arguments against gate keeping on HN.

8. Canadian engineering has three levels. Technician (1-2 years of post-secondary education), technologist (2-3 years of post-secondary education), and engineer (4+ years of post-secondary education). Typically these roles are not interchangeable. It's very difficult to transition from one to the other without going back to school. The education (there may be exceptions) levels are not stepping stones. Technician can ladder into technologist, but technologist to engineer often means 4 more years of school. Maybe this will start to break the different SWE roles up.

9. Anyway, this is probably all for the betterment of employees working in tech, so it's commendable that some in such an envious position are leading the charge. If this is the start of "professionalizing" tech, then it'll be interesting to see how this impacts innovation (no more move fast and break things) and educational / meritocratic diversity in the long-run (professionals require licensing and other credentials). Maybe that would be the big kicker to make an impact in the outrageous costs of US higher education.

10. I hope I'm wrong, but this could be the start of tech salaries in SV (a couple of other American cities and some Canadian cities) regressing to the mean of professional engineers. They are still good salaries, but it's not like you can decide to move to a city and 2-10x your salary / TC like you can with tech and SV. Tech seems to be a good way to have social mobility, but if the salaries regress to the mean, there will be even more inequality and less mobility in America.

[1] https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/28/technology/google-temp-wo... "As of March, Google worked with roughly 121,000 temps and contractors around the world, compared with 102,000 full-time employees, according to an internal document obtained by The New York Times."

[2] https://nflcombineresults.com/nflcombinedata.php

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

#970
post #761
post #60

Don't think we've ever seen Hollywood in the modern era without unions, so not sure how you can claim it's "undeniable" the industry is better off. We basically have no clue if it's better off or not. Unions are intended for industries where a worker doesn't have a marketplace of options as there is a single or just a few employers (e.g. Hollywood, teachers, coal mining towns, hospital staff, etc.). Unionizing at Goo…

This comment is a reply to https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25630456 but I've lifted it to the top level in a feeble effort to reduce the steam coming out of our server.

Thanks for your work keep HN running. I hope that you can find a more sustainable solution soon.
Post reply on HN