5 ms·

I think it also depends hugely on the country. I can only talk about Germany, and in general I'd say unions here have limited to moderate power, depending on t

by wink 10y ago

I think it also depends hugely on the country. I can only talk about Germany, and in general I'd say unions here have limited to moderate power, depending on the field they operate in. (e.g. you always hear news about strikes from the metal-related union (IG Metall) or the train drivers, or pilots/air personnel.) Now, the thing is that there's also one very broadly defined one for "services" (ver.di) which used to have mostly shop assistants, hairdressers, people with desk jobs, etc.pp. But recently (let's say since the 90s) also more and more IT people and especially software developers. And I can't give you specific details, but I've heard and read so many stories about what they want is quite contrary to what people in these jobs want. Maybe (probably?) because we're better off anyway? Maybe because hardly any people in software here are paid via the regulated union tariffs (is that the correct word I'm using? The rate of pay that the union agreed to with the bigger companies. Often involves politicians, but sometimes only for mediation when there's no progress on talks) but via direct negotiations with your company. TLDR: can only speak for Germany, but the union seems to be not representative of the people for this field of work

tptacek 10y ago
I think we're all reasonably clear that software developers wouldn't collectively bargain for better salaries. But it's silly to suggest that there aren't issues that would motivate even coddled SFBA developers. For instance: * Work-for-hire and IP assignment rules and how they relate to side projects * Non-solicitation clauses and pacts between big companies not to hire * Transparency about equity valuations in job offers * Exercise periods for options (in fact: an area of current open conflict between VCs and employees!) * Overtime, on-call requirements, and death-march schedules There are probably a dozen more things like this, and that's before we get to the true purpose of organizing, which is to make sure that software talent as a bloc can use market pressure to prevent itself from being subverted by unethical government requests. This is not a crazy weird idea. There are white collar unions, and there are professional organizations (like the AMA) that do many of the things a union does on behalf of their members, without calling themselves that.
- wink 10y ago
  No, I absolutely agree. But I do think developers in Germany have it a lot better (from a safety standpoint, work regulations, IP law, etc.pp.) than people in the US - it's just that we get paid less (comparing 60-70k EUR vs 120-140k USD as very rough estimate) and there's no hire & fire. My point is that I think that's why we'd be able to peruse the advantages of a union a lot less. As long as the market is so that we can find a new job near instantly. Maybe I'm also blind to our disadvantages (because I live here, but I think many EU countries are comparable) - but that's why I think the 'typical union advantages' are even less prevalent in the US. Addendum: I think the job safety thing is bigger, who can predict if this will be a safe job when most of us readers here (assuming age 20-40) are closer to retirement. Then again I'm not sure unions really help against companies not wanting to hire 50+ people for normal (I.e. non-manager) jobs.
  - tptacek 10y ago
    The opposite is true. The stronger the employment market, the more market power labor has. We can easily get new jobs. But we cannot easily find jobs that satisfy all the points I laid out above. Short exercise periods, for instance, are almost universal among tech startups. Companies can get away with doing that because right now, the interest in fixing that is diffuse, and the interest in maintaining the status quo is concentrated. Straightforward fix: form a professional association, and collectively shun companies that screw over early startup employees with post-vesting clawbacks. We'll see how much longer khaki-clad sweater-bevested VC partners mouth off to the press about disloyal employees when the cost of employing developers for their portfolio companies (and theirs alone) goes up by 40%. The more I think about unionization, the more I think 2016-2017 is an immense opportunity. A Chicagoan I'm not entirely fond of once memorably said: never let a crisis go to waste.
    - wink 10y ago
      I'd love to see any numbers on how many "startup employees with stock options" there even are compared to normal salaried employees without any vesting periods. And then compare that to other countries. Maybe that's my point. I don't see myself disagreeing with anything you wrote, yet you seem to take it that way :)

by wink 10y ago

tptacek 10y ago

I think we're all reasonably clear that software developers wouldn't collectively bargain for better salaries. But it's silly to suggest that there aren't issues that would motivate even coddled SFBA developers. For instance: * Work-for-hire and IP assignment rules and how they relate to side projects * Non-solicitation clauses and pacts between big companies not to hire * Transparency about equity valuations in job offers * Exercise periods for options (in fact: an area of current open conflict between VCs and employees!) * Overtime, on-call requirements, and death-march schedules There are probably a dozen more things like this, and that's before we get to the true purpose of organizing, which is to make sure that software talent as a bloc can use market pressure to prevent itself from being subverted by unethical government requests. This is not a crazy weird idea. There are white collar unions, and there are professional organizations (like the AMA) that do many of the things a union does on behalf of their members, without calling themselves that.

wink 10y ago
No, I absolutely agree. But I do think developers in Germany have it a lot better (from a safety standpoint, work regulations, IP law, etc.pp.) than people in the US - it's just that we get paid less (comparing 60-70k EUR vs 120-140k USD as very rough estimate) and there's no hire & fire. My point is that I think that's why we'd be able to peruse the advantages of a union a lot less. As long as the market is so that we can find a new job near instantly. Maybe I'm also blind to our disadvantages (because I live here, but I think many EU countries are comparable) - but that's why I think the 'typical union advantages' are even less prevalent in the US. Addendum: I think the job safety thing is bigger, who can predict if this will be a safe job when most of us readers here (assuming age 20-40) are closer to retirement. Then again I'm not sure unions really help against companies not wanting to hire 50+ people for normal (I.e. non-manager) jobs.
- tptacek 10y ago
  The opposite is true. The stronger the employment market, the more market power labor has. We can easily get new jobs. But we cannot easily find jobs that satisfy all the points I laid out above. Short exercise periods, for instance, are almost universal among tech startups. Companies can get away with doing that because right now, the interest in fixing that is diffuse, and the interest in maintaining the status quo is concentrated. Straightforward fix: form a professional association, and collectively shun companies that screw over early startup employees with post-vesting clawbacks. We'll see how much longer khaki-clad sweater-bevested VC partners mouth off to the press about disloyal employees when the cost of employing developers for their portfolio companies (and theirs alone) goes up by 40%. The more I think about unionization, the more I think 2016-2017 is an immense opportunity. A Chicagoan I'm not entirely fond of once memorably said: never let a crisis go to waste.
  - wink 10y ago
    I'd love to see any numbers on how many "startup employees with stock options" there even are compared to normal salaried employees without any vesting periods. And then compare that to other countries. Maybe that's my point. I don't see myself disagreeing with anything you wrote, yet you seem to take it that way :)