8 ms·

I find it incredibly interesting that a company can make these sort of demands for a change that the determine is better for society. Wonder if people will cons

I find it incredibly interesting that a company can make these sort of demands for a change that the determine is better for society. Wonder if people will consider this a grass roots change for worker good or the unwanted imposing requirement of a a mega-corporation.

tomatotomato37 8y ago
Eh, can't really have the latter if a supplier is also a mega-corporation. You don't need to be a household name in order to be a market leader
bluntfang 8y ago
Just think what could be accomplished if software engineers unionized. If all the SREs at amazon went on strike for 6 hours, the world would descent into chaos. I really don't understand why that group of people don't want to leverage their power to change the world.
- selimthegrim 8y ago
  Did you actually type that with a straight face?
  - baq 8y ago
    Why do you take HR for granted but somehow can't imagine an IT union?
    - selimthegrim 8y ago
      No, I meant the part about the world collapsing.
  - dang 8y ago
    Could you please stop posting unsubstantive comments to Hacker News?
- lovich 8y ago
  The other reply to this comment is why software engineers don't unionize. Many think they're better off without a union, but a large number go even further and are adamantly opposed to the existence of unions
- dominotw 8y ago
  they'd prbly be against h1b first.
- jpttsn 8y ago
  Sinking the world into chaos might not be palatable to enough people. If it were, would they be the kind of people you want changing the world?
  - ionised 8y ago
    This sounds similar to the opinion that protesters should protest out of the way and not cause any disruptions.
    - jpttsn 8y ago
      Then let the record note I subscribe to no such opinion, lest readers over-infer ill will. Just saw a “why” and thought I’d contribute.
- frockington 8y ago
  I already pay enough in taxes, the idea of union fees on top of that is revolting
- BeetleB 8y ago
  >I really don't understand why that group of people don't want to leverage their power to change the world. Have you tried talking to such anti-union programmers/engineers? I've seen both good and bad unions, so I'm fairly neutral on the topic, but some things to ponder over: In a previous job, I would occasionally stay a little late to work on performance improvements (automating the workflow, improving tools, etc). I usually did it without management's permission - just on my own. They'd hear about it once I was ready to tell them. Some of my coworkers were against this, for a variety of reasons, including the fear that my work would raise the bar. I strongly suspect that if they were unionized, they'd find a way to make sure I don't do this type of work. Many SW folks do worry that unionizing will bring their productivity down to the median, and will make it harder for job growth. They don't want to be held back by a union. (I wasn't even doing this to get ahead of them (I was paid about the median, and some who opposed were a full grade level above me). I just got sick of crappy in-house tools.) Beyond that, there are the "usual" reasons: Unions can become quite political, and they can use as many dirty tactics/propaganda/misinformation with their own people as the company they work for can/does. Their conformity tactics can get nasty as well. My wife has a union job and the union is considering a strike. Plenty of attempts to silence/shame anti-strike voices from within the union. The paranoia within the union is quite high. Who amongst us is a spy for the employer? Stuff like that. Unions can really increase the drama at a work place. Again, I'm listing the negative examples. Not all unions are like this. I suspect, though, that unless the union actively guards against these, this will be the normal evolution of a union.
wincy 8y ago
Well right now my wife (who is a stay at home mom) is seven months pregnant and I’m looking for a job. If this was mandated at any of the companies I was applying to I’d be guaranteed to not get hired. I don’t want 12 weeks, and it’s not like this baby is a surprise.
- glhaynes 8y ago
  Other than perhaps through social media (one more reason to consider "going dark" while job hunting, I suppose), how would any potential employer know your wife was expecting?
- bitcurious 8y ago
  >If this was mandated at any of the companies I was applying to I’d be guaranteed to not get hired. Why would you disclose your wife's pregnancy?
- pjc50 8y ago
  All potential employers have illegal hiring practices?
- jacobkg 8y ago
  In case you don’t know, it’s illegal for them to ask and you have no duty to disclose it. You don’t even need to tell them you are married.
- moorhosj 8y ago
  ==I’d be guaranteed to not get hired.== Flat out false. My wife got a new job while 7 months pregnant. When she had the baby, she took 8 weeks off, I start my 4 week paternity leave soon and everyone is happy.
  - pnutjam 8y ago
    I had a coworker do that and it worked out great. I always avoid talking about my kid other then to acknowledge I have kids.
crunchlibrarian 8y ago
The end of shareholder primacy can't come soon enough, it's one of the biggest mistakes of the 20th century.
- geodel 8y ago
  Yeah before shareholders people were doing so much better as working for someone else.
  - moorhosj 8y ago
    Especially if you purposefully ignore the middleground (1930-1980) when shareholders existed but labor also held significant power. Lots of people remember this, it was the post-War boom we continually hear people longing for. I believe the comment was about the idea of enhancing shareholder value which has been the dominant philosophy since about 1980. Notably, wages have stagnated since 1980 [1]. [1] https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Real_GDP,_Real_Wages_and_Trade_Policies_in_the_U.S._(1947%E2%80%93_2014).png https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Real_GDP,_Real_Wages...
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
Fnoord 8y ago
> I find it incredibly interesting that a company can make these sort of demands for a change that the determine is better for society. Wonder if people will consider this a grass roots change for worker good or the unwanted imposing requirement of a a mega-corporation. Not just any company; Microsoft, a huge multinational. If its a positive change, it is warranted. The first year of a child is very important for the connection with his or her parents. [1] Also, the first 3 months are very hectic (our baby is half a year now so I can attest). With paternity leave a father can support both the baby and his/her mother. So it is a win-win for men and women (and, in a way, feminism). [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reactive_attachment_disorder https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reactive_attachment_disorder

tomatotomato37 8y ago

Eh, can't really have the latter if a supplier is also a mega-corporation. You don't need to be a household name in order to be a market leader

bluntfang 8y ago

Just think what could be accomplished if software engineers unionized. If all the SREs at amazon went on strike for 6 hours, the world would descent into chaos. I really don't understand why that group of people don't want to leverage their power to change the world.

selimthegrim 8y ago
Did you actually type that with a straight face?
- baq 8y ago
  Why do you take HR for granted but somehow can't imagine an IT union?
  - selimthegrim 8y ago
    No, I meant the part about the world collapsing.
- dang 8y ago
  Could you please stop posting unsubstantive comments to Hacker News?
lovich 8y ago
The other reply to this comment is why software engineers don't unionize. Many think they're better off without a union, but a large number go even further and are adamantly opposed to the existence of unions
dominotw 8y ago
they'd prbly be against h1b first.
jpttsn 8y ago
Sinking the world into chaos might not be palatable to enough people. If it were, would they be the kind of people you want changing the world?
- ionised 8y ago
  This sounds similar to the opinion that protesters should protest out of the way and not cause any disruptions.
  - jpttsn 8y ago
    Then let the record note I subscribe to no such opinion, lest readers over-infer ill will. Just saw a “why” and thought I’d contribute.
frockington 8y ago
I already pay enough in taxes, the idea of union fees on top of that is revolting
BeetleB 8y ago
>I really don't understand why that group of people don't want to leverage their power to change the world. Have you tried talking to such anti-union programmers/engineers? I've seen both good and bad unions, so I'm fairly neutral on the topic, but some things to ponder over: In a previous job, I would occasionally stay a little late to work on performance improvements (automating the workflow, improving tools, etc). I usually did it without management's permission - just on my own. They'd hear about it once I was ready to tell them. Some of my coworkers were against this, for a variety of reasons, including the fear that my work would raise the bar. I strongly suspect that if they were unionized, they'd find a way to make sure I don't do this type of work. Many SW folks do worry that unionizing will bring their productivity down to the median, and will make it harder for job growth. They don't want to be held back by a union. (I wasn't even doing this to get ahead of them (I was paid about the median, and some who opposed were a full grade level above me). I just got sick of crappy in-house tools.) Beyond that, there are the "usual" reasons: Unions can become quite political, and they can use as many dirty tactics/propaganda/misinformation with their own people as the company they work for can/does. Their conformity tactics can get nasty as well. My wife has a union job and the union is considering a strike. Plenty of attempts to silence/shame anti-strike voices from within the union. The paranoia within the union is quite high. Who amongst us is a spy for the employer? Stuff like that. Unions can really increase the drama at a work place. Again, I'm listing the negative examples. Not all unions are like this. I suspect, though, that unless the union actively guards against these, this will be the normal evolution of a union.

wincy 8y ago

Well right now my wife (who is a stay at home mom) is seven months pregnant and I’m looking for a job. If this was mandated at any of the companies I was applying to I’d be guaranteed to not get hired. I don’t want 12 weeks, and it’s not like this baby is a surprise.

glhaynes 8y ago
Other than perhaps through social media (one more reason to consider "going dark" while job hunting, I suppose), how would any potential employer know your wife was expecting?
bitcurious 8y ago
>If this was mandated at any of the companies I was applying to I’d be guaranteed to not get hired. Why would you disclose your wife's pregnancy?
pjc50 8y ago
All potential employers have illegal hiring practices?
jacobkg 8y ago
In case you don’t know, it’s illegal for them to ask and you have no duty to disclose it. You don’t even need to tell them you are married.
moorhosj 8y ago
==I’d be guaranteed to not get hired.== Flat out false. My wife got a new job while 7 months pregnant. When she had the baby, she took 8 weeks off, I start my 4 week paternity leave soon and everyone is happy.
- pnutjam 8y ago
  I had a coworker do that and it worked out great. I always avoid talking about my kid other then to acknowledge I have kids.

crunchlibrarian 8y ago

The end of shareholder primacy can't come soon enough, it's one of the biggest mistakes of the 20th century.

geodel 8y ago
Yeah before shareholders people were doing so much better as working for someone else.
- moorhosj 8y ago
  Especially if you purposefully ignore the middleground (1930-1980) when shareholders existed but labor also held significant power. Lots of people remember this, it was the post-War boom we continually hear people longing for. I believe the comment was about the idea of enhancing shareholder value which has been the dominant philosophy since about 1980. Notably, wages have stagnated since 1980 [1]. [1] https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Real_GDP,_Real_Wages_and_Trade_Policies_in_the_U.S._(1947%E2%80%93_2014).png https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Real_GDP,_Real_Wages...
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]

Fnoord 8y ago

> I find it incredibly interesting that a company can make these sort of demands for a change that the determine is better for society. Wonder if people will consider this a grass roots change for worker good or the unwanted imposing requirement of a a mega-corporation. Not just any company; Microsoft, a huge multinational. If its a positive change, it is warranted. The first year of a child is very important for the connection with his or her parents. [1] Also, the first 3 months are very hectic (our baby is half a year now so I can attest). With paternity leave a father can support both the baby and his/her mother. So it is a win-win for men and women (and, in a way, feminism). [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reactive_attachment_disorder https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reactive_attachment_disorder