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 t

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.