3 ms·

Unions will not improve everyone's earnings. They will compress the differential, and as someone who likes getting paid more than the average programmer I absol

Unions will not improve everyone's earnings. They will compress the differential, and as someone who likes getting paid more than the average programmer I absolutely would oppose that. Doctors, dentists, and lawyers don't have unions. They have professional associations (which might be a good idea for programmers) but they still negotiate individually.

ageofwant 11y ago
It is perfectly permissible to be a member of a union and negotiate as a individual, the one does not automatically preclude the other.
imtringued 11y ago
>likes getting paid more than the average programmer In what way would a union prevent that?
- sokoloff 11y ago
  Anything that raises average programming wages significantly is likely to reduce peak programming wages. (Companies are unlikely to just take the increase in wages as a hit to profitability. They're going to shave the peak and put everyone into tighter "bands" than is currently the case and probably dismiss some of the lowest performers [which might be healthy, of course].)
  - ageofwant 11y ago
    As I'm a "average programmer" I'll probably benefit from a significant raise is average programmer renumeration. As will, by definition, the vast majority of programmers. As a self confessed "peak" programmer you believe you have little need of a union to further your cause and you may very well be right. This does not change the fact that the majority of the fraternity will. The fact that you may be adversely effected does not concern me. I'm sure you are more than capable of holding your own. As a "peak performer" I'd fully expect you to raise to the challenge and do even greater things.
    - sokoloff 11y ago
      Ages ago, I probably was. I no longer am, but that's largely irrelevant and I'm more than happy to hold my own union or not. Where do you think the "significant raise" will come from? What tactics will a union employ to cause that happen and if successful, what will the side effects be? Programming is already an incredibly high leverage and highly lucrative field. If you don't have leverage now, will you really have more with a union? (To be clear, I don't believe that unionizing would significantly raise programming wages.)
      - ageofwant 11y ago
        Balance of power. Employers have it, employees do not. If companies and employers treated their workers with dignity and respect no unions would be necessary. * I'm sure you are familiar with how collective bargaining power works and how it can be used for good or ill. It is because of the actions of worker unions that people today enjoy many rights that they take for granted. You, personally, have benefited greatly from union movements through the ages. In fact, the creation of the so called "middle-class" worldwide can be directly attributed to worker union agitation. In many ways unions have created the world we live in. As the middle class produced the consumers corporates depend on. To me, these are all excellent and worthwhile side-effects. Today you can witness the slow destruction of the middle class again, as capitalism looses its way and degenerates into corporate fascism. Programming is a "incredibly high leverage and highly lucrative field" ? Compared to what ? Investment banker ? Oil rig worker ? Corporate management ? Chartered Accountant ? I do believe unionizing will significantly raise wages, historically they have. * (apologies for the little rant, I'm leaving it in as it amuses me)
        sokoloff 11y ago
        I don't really see a rant, so no worries there. > Programming is a "incredibly high leverage and highly lucrative field" ? Compared to what ? High leverage compared to: 1. Any job where labor is roughly proportional to output. Want twice as many cars in the same period? You're going to employ roughly twice as many people. Want twice as many Starbucks? Roughly twice as many baristas. Want to sell twice as much software or have twice as many subscribers to your SaaS company's offerings? You might need 0-10% more programmers to support 100% growth. Highly lucrative field compared to (all figures 2014): 1. Median household wages in the US of $53,567. 2. Median household wages in CA of $60487, in MA of $63,151, in NY of $54,310. I don't know any full-time industry programmers who are working for less than the median household income; that's before any income from other sources or other household members. We're paying fresh college grads around the 70-75th percentile of US household income (again, as individuals). Those signs don't point me towards the idea that programmers are an oppressed class desperately in need of unionization. > I do believe unionizing will significantly raise wages, historically they have. Are there examples of such highly paid professions unionizing? Did wages rise afterwards? (It's a genuine question; I can't think of any highly paid professions that are overwhelmingly [or even typically] union.)
te_chris 11y ago
Doctors absolutely do have unions, Google the British medical association, or many others across the world

ageofwant 11y ago

It is perfectly permissible to be a member of a union and negotiate as a individual, the one does not automatically preclude the other.

imtringued 11y ago

>likes getting paid more than the average programmer In what way would a union prevent that?

sokoloff 11y ago
Anything that raises average programming wages significantly is likely to reduce peak programming wages. (Companies are unlikely to just take the increase in wages as a hit to profitability. They're going to shave the peak and put everyone into tighter "bands" than is currently the case and probably dismiss some of the lowest performers [which might be healthy, of course].)
- ageofwant 11y ago
  As I'm a "average programmer" I'll probably benefit from a significant raise is average programmer renumeration. As will, by definition, the vast majority of programmers. As a self confessed "peak" programmer you believe you have little need of a union to further your cause and you may very well be right. This does not change the fact that the majority of the fraternity will. The fact that you may be adversely effected does not concern me. I'm sure you are more than capable of holding your own. As a "peak performer" I'd fully expect you to raise to the challenge and do even greater things.
  - sokoloff 11y ago
    Ages ago, I probably was. I no longer am, but that's largely irrelevant and I'm more than happy to hold my own union or not. Where do you think the "significant raise" will come from? What tactics will a union employ to cause that happen and if successful, what will the side effects be? Programming is already an incredibly high leverage and highly lucrative field. If you don't have leverage now, will you really have more with a union? (To be clear, I don't believe that unionizing would significantly raise programming wages.)
    - ageofwant 11y ago
      Balance of power. Employers have it, employees do not. If companies and employers treated their workers with dignity and respect no unions would be necessary. * I'm sure you are familiar with how collective bargaining power works and how it can be used for good or ill. It is because of the actions of worker unions that people today enjoy many rights that they take for granted. You, personally, have benefited greatly from union movements through the ages. In fact, the creation of the so called "middle-class" worldwide can be directly attributed to worker union agitation. In many ways unions have created the world we live in. As the middle class produced the consumers corporates depend on. To me, these are all excellent and worthwhile side-effects. Today you can witness the slow destruction of the middle class again, as capitalism looses its way and degenerates into corporate fascism. Programming is a "incredibly high leverage and highly lucrative field" ? Compared to what ? Investment banker ? Oil rig worker ? Corporate management ? Chartered Accountant ? I do believe unionizing will significantly raise wages, historically they have. * (apologies for the little rant, I'm leaving it in as it amuses me)
      - sokoloff 11y ago
        I don't really see a rant, so no worries there. > Programming is a "incredibly high leverage and highly lucrative field" ? Compared to what ? High leverage compared to: 1. Any job where labor is roughly proportional to output. Want twice as many cars in the same period? You're going to employ roughly twice as many people. Want twice as many Starbucks? Roughly twice as many baristas. Want to sell twice as much software or have twice as many subscribers to your SaaS company's offerings? You might need 0-10% more programmers to support 100% growth. Highly lucrative field compared to (all figures 2014): 1. Median household wages in the US of $53,567. 2. Median household wages in CA of $60487, in MA of $63,151, in NY of $54,310. I don't know any full-time industry programmers who are working for less than the median household income; that's before any income from other sources or other household members. We're paying fresh college grads around the 70-75th percentile of US household income (again, as individuals). Those signs don't point me towards the idea that programmers are an oppressed class desperately in need of unionization. > I do believe unionizing will significantly raise wages, historically they have. Are there examples of such highly paid professions unionizing? Did wages rise afterwards? (It's a genuine question; I can't think of any highly paid professions that are overwhelmingly [or even typically] union.)

te_chris 11y ago

Doctors absolutely do have unions, Google the British medical association, or many others across the world