3 ms·

Can someone explain a bit more the actual current problem? I like to think that in our field of work, we prove ourselves by our abilities and nothing else. I fe

by meesles 11y ago

Can someone explain a bit more the actual current problem? I like to think that in our field of work, we prove ourselves by our abilities and nothing else. I feel like unions are first a way for the less competent to kind of hang in there and not have to try harder. I can see how it's a bit cut-throat currently, but if I'm protected then what do I have to gain by improving my skills? When I think of the industries that are heavily unionized, I picture demoralized workers with union leaders replacing their actual bosses and forcing the group to go along with things they would never find reasonable individually. Personally, not a fan of the article. Also this line: and nothing will be done about it so long as most software engineers remain apolitical cowards who refuse to fight for themselves.. Thanks...?

RodericDay 11y ago
> I like to think that in our field of work, we prove ourselves by our abilities and nothing else. How certain are you that the best developer you know is also the best paid? Is "being good at interviews/charming management" an ability that you consider important? How about "being well-connected"? Unions would not fix this. Badly run, they would swap charm for seniority. Well run, however, they would tackle the objective economic fact that in a negotiation between one human and an institution, there are information and resource asymmetries, which the larger entity will exploit to their advantage, and it would even the playing field a whole lot. Avoid fixating on silver bullets and try to think of the many ways in which the dynamics would change. I think unions would be a net positive for most developers, including tons of excellent performers without much mind for business who get taken advantage of by both management and slick-talking peers.
- crdoconnor 11y ago
  >Unions would not fix this. Badly run, they would swap charm for seniority. The reason why unions often settle on age/experience as a way to measure seniority is because it's objective so it makes a decent compromise. If you leave it up to management they will usually end up rewarding/promoting those who pledge fealty to them over those who are more skilled, and union sympathizers will be singled out and punished no matter how skilled or productive.
crdoconnor 11y ago
>I like to think that in our field of work, we prove ourselves by our abilities and nothing else. You'll learn soon enough that that isn't true at all, and when you learn the reasons why, you'll probably be wanting a union.
omouse 11y ago
>* I feel like unions are first a way for the less competent to kind of hang in there and not have to try harder* That's a common misconception; not all unions are like that. Some unions do value seniority such as teachers' unions which seem to think that even the shittiest teacher still deserves to keep their job and lately, at least in Canada, they haven't been fighting properly for benefits. Valuing seniority despite incompetence is something we typically see in the corporate world. Where do you think the inspiration for the Pointy-Haired Boss in Dilbert comics comes from? A programmers union would only need to establish a lower limit; if you're a bad programmer you'll eventually be found out and your salary will never go above X but we at least need to establish what X is. I've seen decent junior programmers start at 45k salary or even 40k (gender discrimination was at play there) and no benefits or 401k/group RRSP or anything else. They were basically treated like crap. That's something we can prevent by unionizing. The programmers making 100k can join the union too and won't be capped in their salary or anything else; they'll just get the satisfaction of making sure other programmers aren't exploited. >and nothing will be done about it so long as most software engineers remain apolitical cowards who refuse to fight for themselves.. Thanks...? You will have to admit that it is accurate. I've seen lots of programmers who think that keeping their head down and just coding will magically result in promotions and pay raises and a bigger training or conference budget. It won't. It won't and you'll get screwed. There's a coder at work who didn't even take vacation! And the company doesn't pay out vacation so you're forced to take it. He was screwing himself by not asking for $$$ in exchange for not taking vacation time, and every year he never uses the $500 training budget. Working for 3 years that's $1500, enough for a few good conferences, enough for travel expenses and hotel to be paid for a 2 day conference at least. But will he attempt to go for that? No way; Why? Because it requires politics. It requires actually interacting with people. I've seen other programmers come into the office on weekends and they didn't band together to avoid that unpaid overtime just to avoid politics.
HelloMcFly 11y ago
There's a lot about this comment that makes me sad. I think it as, at best, naive to think that somehow software engineering is the one true meritocracy where there is no tension between labor and management. Nevermind the death marches so many developers and engineers are put to (e.g., game developers), or the insane hours that many developers and engineers are regularly forced or heavily socially pressured into working, with often clear career repercussions for not playing along. > I feel like unions are first a way for the less competent to kind of hang in there and not have to try harder. Perhaps that is true with some of the more entrenched unions. I don't think unions are all perfect by any means. But that is a far cry from many unions, and certainly never (or at least rarely) the reason the unions started. Unions are not about letting you rest on your laurels, though leadership can turn them into that, they are about ensuring fair treatment and due process. I'm not saying unions are right for West Coast tech sector, but I don't think they should be dismissed out of hand. And while I appreciate where your view of unions comes from, I don't think it appreciates the whole picture. And finally, it must be noted that some unions are just very small in scope, but still effective. My wife is in a union, and their main sources of negotiation are 1) parking and 2) the incredibly inequitable distribution of work for those not on a particular "pathway" (this is a healthcare field). That's effectively it, and it has made a huge difference. There is no protectionism for bad performance, or tenure, or scheduling preferences, etc.
josho 11y ago
I used to feel the same as you, but after years of salary negotiations I began to realize how disadvantaged employees are in the negotiations. In part due to information asymmetry, but also negotiation expertise--or lack thereof. Given the demand for top talent we are largely underpaid, at least look at the multipliers that top engineers can generate. So, imagine what you could achieve with collective negotiations. You want a death march to achieve a deadline, great then pay in overtime or stock at 1.5x my salary. You've given me new responsibilities, great I love the new challenge but now contractually we are obliged to open salary discussions to bring my salary inline with those new responsibilities (usually this happens 6 months later). Just a few ideas off the top of my head.
- omouse 11y ago
  Yep, us programmers are usually introverted but more than that we just have never been given lessons on negotiations. Business people have classes on psychology and on how to deal with workers and clients and they have far more social training and skill to use in their negotiations. Us programmers, jesus christ, we can't even negotiate to be able to use a paltry $500 training budget.
  - johnward 11y ago
    I just want the company to buy me a new mouse but I end up buying it myself.
    - omouse 11y ago
      Same. It took 2 months to get a Macbook Pro; it took a month to get a monitor (and the CTO himself walked over to buy it); and I ended up bringing my own keyboard and mouse and mouse pad and headphones. I'll end up bringing in my own monitor to dual monitor and buy my own thunderbolt->dvi cable. It's far easier than trying to negotiate expensing and having to justify it.
      - johnward 11y ago
        I just got my 2009 MBP replaced last month. What a struggle. I finally had to find the right person and explain how it was an embarrassment in front of customers to have a laptop that can't handle our software. I buy my own keyboards, mice, dongles, etc but I'm taking those with me if I leave. We have a program that allows you to purchase things. I ordered a mouse one time and was told the order total amount was too little. So I added a few other things I might need and was denied.
ryandrake 11y ago
As an aside, you can hardly be blamed for this attitude: It's likely the result of decades of anti-union propaganda. You think most people in your company's salaries are simply proportional to their mad skillz? The author lists several current problems directly in the article: Stack ranking, binding mandatory arbitration clauses, non-competes, inclusion of performance reviews in a candidate’s transfer packet for internal mobility, mandatory IP assignment, severance, overtime pay. Basically anything where the information gap and power disparity between the employee and the employer leads to employees having no option besides "accept it or quit".

by meesles 11y ago

RodericDay 11y ago

> I like to think that in our field of work, we prove ourselves by our abilities and nothing else. How certain are you that the best developer you know is also the best paid? Is "being good at interviews/charming management" an ability that you consider important? How about "being well-connected"? Unions would not fix this. Badly run, they would swap charm for seniority. Well run, however, they would tackle the objective economic fact that in a negotiation between one human and an institution, there are information and resource asymmetries, which the larger entity will exploit to their advantage, and it would even the playing field a whole lot. Avoid fixating on silver bullets and try to think of the many ways in which the dynamics would change. I think unions would be a net positive for most developers, including tons of excellent performers without much mind for business who get taken advantage of by both management and slick-talking peers.

crdoconnor 11y ago
>Unions would not fix this. Badly run, they would swap charm for seniority. The reason why unions often settle on age/experience as a way to measure seniority is because it's objective so it makes a decent compromise. If you leave it up to management they will usually end up rewarding/promoting those who pledge fealty to them over those who are more skilled, and union sympathizers will be singled out and punished no matter how skilled or productive.

crdoconnor 11y ago

>I like to think that in our field of work, we prove ourselves by our abilities and nothing else. You'll learn soon enough that that isn't true at all, and when you learn the reasons why, you'll probably be wanting a union.

omouse 11y ago

>* I feel like unions are first a way for the less competent to kind of hang in there and not have to try harder* That's a common misconception; not all unions are like that. Some unions do value seniority such as teachers' unions which seem to think that even the shittiest teacher still deserves to keep their job and lately, at least in Canada, they haven't been fighting properly for benefits. Valuing seniority despite incompetence is something we typically see in the corporate world. Where do you think the inspiration for the Pointy-Haired Boss in Dilbert comics comes from? A programmers union would only need to establish a lower limit; if you're a bad programmer you'll eventually be found out and your salary will never go above X but we at least need to establish what X is. I've seen decent junior programmers start at 45k salary or even 40k (gender discrimination was at play there) and no benefits or 401k/group RRSP or anything else. They were basically treated like crap. That's something we can prevent by unionizing. The programmers making 100k can join the union too and won't be capped in their salary or anything else; they'll just get the satisfaction of making sure other programmers aren't exploited. >and nothing will be done about it so long as most software engineers remain apolitical cowards who refuse to fight for themselves.. Thanks...? You will have to admit that it is accurate. I've seen lots of programmers who think that keeping their head down and just coding will magically result in promotions and pay raises and a bigger training or conference budget. It won't. It won't and you'll get screwed. There's a coder at work who didn't even take vacation! And the company doesn't pay out vacation so you're forced to take it. He was screwing himself by not asking for $$$ in exchange for not taking vacation time, and every year he never uses the $500 training budget. Working for 3 years that's $1500, enough for a few good conferences, enough for travel expenses and hotel to be paid for a 2 day conference at least. But will he attempt to go for that? No way; Why? Because it requires politics. It requires actually interacting with people. I've seen other programmers come into the office on weekends and they didn't band together to avoid that unpaid overtime just to avoid politics.

HelloMcFly 11y ago

There's a lot about this comment that makes me sad. I think it as, at best, naive to think that somehow software engineering is the one true meritocracy where there is no tension between labor and management. Nevermind the death marches so many developers and engineers are put to (e.g., game developers), or the insane hours that many developers and engineers are regularly forced or heavily socially pressured into working, with often clear career repercussions for not playing along. > I feel like unions are first a way for the less competent to kind of hang in there and not have to try harder. Perhaps that is true with some of the more entrenched unions. I don't think unions are all perfect by any means. But that is a far cry from many unions, and certainly never (or at least rarely) the reason the unions started. Unions are not about letting you rest on your laurels, though leadership can turn them into that, they are about ensuring fair treatment and due process. I'm not saying unions are right for West Coast tech sector, but I don't think they should be dismissed out of hand. And while I appreciate where your view of unions comes from, I don't think it appreciates the whole picture. And finally, it must be noted that some unions are just very small in scope, but still effective. My wife is in a union, and their main sources of negotiation are 1) parking and 2) the incredibly inequitable distribution of work for those not on a particular "pathway" (this is a healthcare field). That's effectively it, and it has made a huge difference. There is no protectionism for bad performance, or tenure, or scheduling preferences, etc.

josho 11y ago

I used to feel the same as you, but after years of salary negotiations I began to realize how disadvantaged employees are in the negotiations. In part due to information asymmetry, but also negotiation expertise--or lack thereof. Given the demand for top talent we are largely underpaid, at least look at the multipliers that top engineers can generate. So, imagine what you could achieve with collective negotiations. You want a death march to achieve a deadline, great then pay in overtime or stock at 1.5x my salary. You've given me new responsibilities, great I love the new challenge but now contractually we are obliged to open salary discussions to bring my salary inline with those new responsibilities (usually this happens 6 months later). Just a few ideas off the top of my head.

omouse 11y ago
Yep, us programmers are usually introverted but more than that we just have never been given lessons on negotiations. Business people have classes on psychology and on how to deal with workers and clients and they have far more social training and skill to use in their negotiations. Us programmers, jesus christ, we can't even negotiate to be able to use a paltry $500 training budget.
- johnward 11y ago
  I just want the company to buy me a new mouse but I end up buying it myself.
  - omouse 11y ago
    Same. It took 2 months to get a Macbook Pro; it took a month to get a monitor (and the CTO himself walked over to buy it); and I ended up bringing my own keyboard and mouse and mouse pad and headphones. I'll end up bringing in my own monitor to dual monitor and buy my own thunderbolt->dvi cable. It's far easier than trying to negotiate expensing and having to justify it.
    - johnward 11y ago
      I just got my 2009 MBP replaced last month. What a struggle. I finally had to find the right person and explain how it was an embarrassment in front of customers to have a laptop that can't handle our software. I buy my own keyboards, mice, dongles, etc but I'm taking those with me if I leave. We have a program that allows you to purchase things. I ordered a mouse one time and was told the order total amount was too little. So I added a few other things I might need and was denied.

ryandrake 11y ago

As an aside, you can hardly be blamed for this attitude: It's likely the result of decades of anti-union propaganda. You think most people in your company's salaries are simply proportional to their mad skillz? The author lists several current problems directly in the article: Stack ranking, binding mandatory arbitration clauses, non-competes, inclusion of performance reviews in a candidate’s transfer packet for internal mobility, mandatory IP assignment, severance, overtime pay. Basically anything where the information gap and power disparity between the employee and the employer leads to employees having no option besides "accept it or quit".