6 ms·

I feel like tech workers are already highly engaged, just very selectively with the causes that matter to the tech world. A good example of this is EFF. EFF has

I feel like tech workers are already highly engaged, just very selectively with the causes that matter to the tech world. A good example of this is EFF. EFF has a huge presence both in the community and at every industry event I've ever been to. Most tech people I know donate to them. There is also the FSF, numerous hacker camps and conferences aimed at women (Grace Hopper Celebration, etc). I'm very skeptical on the need for a broad coalition of tech professionals.

wz1000 9y ago
The power that EFF and FSF are able to wield is miniscule in comparison to what is possible with a broad, industry wide union of tech workers.
tptacek 9y ago
EFF and FSF aren't politically neutral in the broader sense. EFF is broadly libertarian, and FSF is, from what I can tell, generally leftist. Neither of those are bad things in and of themselves, but you should be aware before deciding to collaborate with them.
- Alex3917 9y ago
  Also the EFF is aimed at protecting the rights of people who communicate electronically, and the FSF is aimed at protecting the rights of people who use software. Neither is aimed at protecting tech workers.
- watwut 9y ago
  Also, even many leftists dont share FSF goals and opinions or dont care about them. FSF have few very specific goals they work towards.
- burntsushi 9y ago
  Are you trying to contrast the EFF and FSF with some other politically neutral cause or organization? If so, what or who? Why do you think they are politically neutral?
djrobstep 9y ago
Getting involved in only narrowly technical issues won't do. What if your boss asks you to build a database to help the government track Muslims/illegal immigrants etc and you're uncomfortable with that? If you supported the FSF, that might improve your chances of being able to build the database using free software. Whereas if you unionized, that might improve your chances of being able to refuse to build the database in the first place. And what if you're uncomfortable with much of the revenue you generate for your company going to the idle shareholders rather than your fellow workers? Unionizing can help there too. Imagine if software companies were owned by workers themselves. That could be a reality if more of us unionized.
- Bartweiss 9y ago
  The implication being that the existing organizations don't worry about these things? The EFF's focus is 'technical' only in the sense that it's restricted to topics which involve some kind of electronics. They've been campaigning against digital surveillance and mass profiling since before most politicians have been aware the issue mattered. (The FSF isn't especially relevant here, but neither is the Sierra Club; you simply picked an issue they don't work on.) It's true that the EFF won't save your job if you refuse to build a tracking database, but frankly I'm a bit confused what you think unions would do here. Unionization has a great track record on labor rights, but that looks more like "only spending 40 hours per week building the database". Union status isn't usually relevant to employees outright refusing assignments because of their conscience. And the EFFs focus here makes sense; as long as someone is willing to build the database (say, the sort of people who write malware for the government), opposing the plan overall is more important than opposing some specific contracting deal for it. The move to revenue is a non sequitur which kind of looks like your real reason for focusing on unions, but I'm still not exactly sold. Software companies already distribute stock more than other companies, and have salaries as an unusually high portion of overall costs. Meanwhile, "worker owned" and "unionized" are fundamentally different things, and I see no evidence that one leads to the other. Unionization usually happens as a response to not owning the company, and having no way to become owners. Software companies are vastly more likely to be some form of worker-owned (e.g. startup, co-op, stock-granting employer) than most business, which has historically been one reason they don't unionize.
abandonliberty 9y ago
If you're skeptical, I recommend looking into the earnings and lifestyles of professions with associations. Particularly law. Meanwhile more and more tech workers are crammed into open office sweat shops while labor laws in multiple jurisdictions are getting changes and exceptions to our detriment. I think we're idealistic. Perhaps we think protectionist associations shouldn't need to exist. A few of us do extremely well and we think that somehow if we can play our cards right we can have it too. Unions have lost both their power and respect. We're generally less social. Unfortunately, we don't live in the Star Trek universe. We live in a capitalist environment. We've seen from models like scrum that communication and collaboration create better outcomes, so it shouldn't surprise us that professions that collaborate generally do better for their members. Capitalism drives pressures to find the cheapest way to develop. Outsourcing to 3rd world countries has turned out to be difficult, and now we are trying to see how much real estate expense we can avoid by cramming people together. Luckily, this appears to damage both mental health and productivity. This isn't just about us, but also about children and future tech workers. Will we leave them lawyer's offices or sweat shops? Here's a great open office design https://i.pinimg.com/originals/52/d4/e0/52d4e0dca05a63f42516bc3adb4d5396.jpg https://i.pinimg.com/originals/52/d4/e0/52d4e0dca05a63f42516...
- slavik81 9y ago
  Have you worked with professional engineers? They're probably the profession most similar to software development. Yet, pay is comparable and working environment is similar. The comparison to sweat shops rubs me the wrong way. When I was saving money for university, I worked 40 hour weeks in fast food. It was grueling, it paid minimum wage and I fell asleep exhausted each day. I saw people work 60 hour weeks in that job to try to live off it. But, that job still pales in comparison to a real sweat shop. I'm an EE. I have all the qualifications needed to go into a field with a professional association guarding the entrance. I even worked summers in engineering departments. But, I chose software because it was better. I feel like you're making comparisons to jobs you have no direct experience with.
  - deleted 9y ago
    [deleted]

wz1000 9y ago

The power that EFF and FSF are able to wield is miniscule in comparison to what is possible with a broad, industry wide union of tech workers.

tptacek 9y ago

EFF and FSF aren't politically neutral in the broader sense. EFF is broadly libertarian, and FSF is, from what I can tell, generally leftist. Neither of those are bad things in and of themselves, but you should be aware before deciding to collaborate with them.

Alex3917 9y ago
Also the EFF is aimed at protecting the rights of people who communicate electronically, and the FSF is aimed at protecting the rights of people who use software. Neither is aimed at protecting tech workers.
watwut 9y ago
Also, even many leftists dont share FSF goals and opinions or dont care about them. FSF have few very specific goals they work towards.
burntsushi 9y ago
Are you trying to contrast the EFF and FSF with some other politically neutral cause or organization? If so, what or who? Why do you think they are politically neutral?

djrobstep 9y ago

Getting involved in only narrowly technical issues won't do. What if your boss asks you to build a database to help the government track Muslims/illegal immigrants etc and you're uncomfortable with that? If you supported the FSF, that might improve your chances of being able to build the database using free software. Whereas if you unionized, that might improve your chances of being able to refuse to build the database in the first place. And what if you're uncomfortable with much of the revenue you generate for your company going to the idle shareholders rather than your fellow workers? Unionizing can help there too. Imagine if software companies were owned by workers themselves. That could be a reality if more of us unionized.

Bartweiss 9y ago
The implication being that the existing organizations don't worry about these things? The EFF's focus is 'technical' only in the sense that it's restricted to topics which involve some kind of electronics. They've been campaigning against digital surveillance and mass profiling since before most politicians have been aware the issue mattered. (The FSF isn't especially relevant here, but neither is the Sierra Club; you simply picked an issue they don't work on.) It's true that the EFF won't save your job if you refuse to build a tracking database, but frankly I'm a bit confused what you think unions would do here. Unionization has a great track record on labor rights, but that looks more like "only spending 40 hours per week building the database". Union status isn't usually relevant to employees outright refusing assignments because of their conscience. And the EFFs focus here makes sense; as long as someone is willing to build the database (say, the sort of people who write malware for the government), opposing the plan overall is more important than opposing some specific contracting deal for it. The move to revenue is a non sequitur which kind of looks like your real reason for focusing on unions, but I'm still not exactly sold. Software companies already distribute stock more than other companies, and have salaries as an unusually high portion of overall costs. Meanwhile, "worker owned" and "unionized" are fundamentally different things, and I see no evidence that one leads to the other. Unionization usually happens as a response to not owning the company, and having no way to become owners. Software companies are vastly more likely to be some form of worker-owned (e.g. startup, co-op, stock-granting employer) than most business, which has historically been one reason they don't unionize.

abandonliberty 9y ago

If you're skeptical, I recommend looking into the earnings and lifestyles of professions with associations. Particularly law. Meanwhile more and more tech workers are crammed into open office sweat shops while labor laws in multiple jurisdictions are getting changes and exceptions to our detriment. I think we're idealistic. Perhaps we think protectionist associations shouldn't need to exist. A few of us do extremely well and we think that somehow if we can play our cards right we can have it too. Unions have lost both their power and respect. We're generally less social. Unfortunately, we don't live in the Star Trek universe. We live in a capitalist environment. We've seen from models like scrum that communication and collaboration create better outcomes, so it shouldn't surprise us that professions that collaborate generally do better for their members. Capitalism drives pressures to find the cheapest way to develop. Outsourcing to 3rd world countries has turned out to be difficult, and now we are trying to see how much real estate expense we can avoid by cramming people together. Luckily, this appears to damage both mental health and productivity. This isn't just about us, but also about children and future tech workers. Will we leave them lawyer's offices or sweat shops? Here's a great open office design https://i.pinimg.com/originals/52/d4/e0/52d4e0dca05a63f42516bc3adb4d5396.jpg https://i.pinimg.com/originals/52/d4/e0/52d4e0dca05a63f42516...

slavik81 9y ago
Have you worked with professional engineers? They're probably the profession most similar to software development. Yet, pay is comparable and working environment is similar. The comparison to sweat shops rubs me the wrong way. When I was saving money for university, I worked 40 hour weeks in fast food. It was grueling, it paid minimum wage and I fell asleep exhausted each day. I saw people work 60 hour weeks in that job to try to live off it. But, that job still pales in comparison to a real sweat shop. I'm an EE. I have all the qualifications needed to go into a field with a professional association guarding the entrance. I even worked summers in engineering departments. But, I chose software because it was better. I feel like you're making comparisons to jobs you have no direct experience with.
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]