4 ms·

I am so glad to see this happening! There are a lot of reasons why game workers need to organize, but it doesn't have to stop there. Tech workers in general ca

by 49531 9y ago

I am so glad to see this happening! There are a lot of reasons why game workers need to organize, but it doesn't have to stop there. Tech workers in general can make the lives of their teammates a lot better by banding together. We can also fight for the rights of others, why couldn't Amazon employees fight for the rights of Amazon's warehouse workers? Also, things like discrimination and abuse are combated by organized workforces faster than they are by HR departments, especially when such abuse comes from managers. No individual worker is going to negotiate with a company on equal footing. It requires an organization of labor to do that.

microcolonel 9y ago
> No individual worker is going to negotiate with a company on equal footing. Equal footing how? If the "worker" and the company could be on truly equal footing, then there would be no point in having companies at all. The whole point of a company is for the company to have more resources than any one person is entitled to or capable of retaining. If you mean equal footing relative other employees, why would they have equal footing if every employee is inherently different from the next?
- door3 9y ago
  Every person under capitalism has to sell their labor in order to survive. This means that the employee and employer are not on equal footing - I cannot reasonably refuse to work and live a comfortable lifestyle, which means I have to make certain sacrifices (ie, working 40 hours a week in order to survive). This is all fine if I feel like I am treated well and compensated fairly, but if I feel like I am not, as an individual I have very little power. I can quit, but if I feel like most workers in my industry are not treated fairly, there's nowhere to go. However, if I organize with other workers, I have the bargaining power to make certain demands: suddenly employers realize if they want to employ people who have my skills, they have to meet certain reasonably requirements with regards to hours, compensation, etc. Things like the 40 hour workweek aren't just a result of market forces. Market forces by themselves literally worked people to death - life expectancy in Liverpool during the industrial revolution was 15. It was through organization and struggle that workers achieved the rights they have today.
  - hueving 9y ago
    This comment seems to ignore the large portion of people that operate as small businesses. They make money by selling products they create or services they provide, not raw labor to customers. You certainly can choose not to work for any given company (or even industry). You just might take a pay cut or might have to take on some personal financial risks to start your own business, which isn't palatable to some people.
    - ryanobjc 9y ago
      And rightfully so - the world can’t all be small businesses of 1-2 persons. There are things worth doing that require a large team working closely. More closely than a bunch of mercurial small businesses.
      - hueving 9y ago
        There are lots of things that don't require dedicated employees that companies insist on. For example, a public school shouldn't need to employ janitors, it should just contract with cleaning companies. Unfortunately, the high school systems in the US give people no education on starting small businesses so people lack the economic and practical knowledge on doing so.
        GFischer 9y ago
        I'm not even sure a cleaning company is needed, why not a cleaning Uber? (well, sounds like Homejoy actually, but for businesses)
    - pjc50 9y ago
      > isn't palatable to some people And doesn't seem to be economically viable for everyone to do, or we'd already be doing it. The main financial risk for people is that cashflow problems can lead pretty rapidly to homelessness or health deterioration.
      - 9y ago
- pjc50 9y ago
  The question of "why are there companies rather than adhoc clouds of independent contractors" is an interesting one - see the work of Ronald Coase.
neves 9y ago
First (and main) step to solve the inequality problem.

by 49531 9y ago

microcolonel 9y ago

> No individual worker is going to negotiate with a company on equal footing. Equal footing how? If the "worker" and the company could be on truly equal footing, then there would be no point in having companies at all. The whole point of a company is for the company to have more resources than any one person is entitled to or capable of retaining. If you mean equal footing relative other employees, why would they have equal footing if every employee is inherently different from the next?

door3 9y ago
Every person under capitalism has to sell their labor in order to survive. This means that the employee and employer are not on equal footing - I cannot reasonably refuse to work and live a comfortable lifestyle, which means I have to make certain sacrifices (ie, working 40 hours a week in order to survive). This is all fine if I feel like I am treated well and compensated fairly, but if I feel like I am not, as an individual I have very little power. I can quit, but if I feel like most workers in my industry are not treated fairly, there's nowhere to go. However, if I organize with other workers, I have the bargaining power to make certain demands: suddenly employers realize if they want to employ people who have my skills, they have to meet certain reasonably requirements with regards to hours, compensation, etc. Things like the 40 hour workweek aren't just a result of market forces. Market forces by themselves literally worked people to death - life expectancy in Liverpool during the industrial revolution was 15. It was through organization and struggle that workers achieved the rights they have today.
- hueving 9y ago
  This comment seems to ignore the large portion of people that operate as small businesses. They make money by selling products they create or services they provide, not raw labor to customers. You certainly can choose not to work for any given company (or even industry). You just might take a pay cut or might have to take on some personal financial risks to start your own business, which isn't palatable to some people.
  - ryanobjc 9y ago
    And rightfully so - the world can’t all be small businesses of 1-2 persons. There are things worth doing that require a large team working closely. More closely than a bunch of mercurial small businesses.
    - hueving 9y ago
      There are lots of things that don't require dedicated employees that companies insist on. For example, a public school shouldn't need to employ janitors, it should just contract with cleaning companies. Unfortunately, the high school systems in the US give people no education on starting small businesses so people lack the economic and practical knowledge on doing so.
      - GFischer 9y ago
        I'm not even sure a cleaning company is needed, why not a cleaning Uber? (well, sounds like Homejoy actually, but for businesses)
  - pjc50 9y ago
    > isn't palatable to some people And doesn't seem to be economically viable for everyone to do, or we'd already be doing it. The main financial risk for people is that cashflow problems can lead pretty rapidly to homelessness or health deterioration.
    - 9y ago
pjc50 9y ago
The question of "why are there companies rather than adhoc clouds of independent contractors" is an interesting one - see the work of Ronald Coase.

neves 9y ago

First (and main) step to solve the inequality problem.