11 ms·
> collective employee action can be used to force an employer to stop exploitative behaviors? I'm all for balancing the employer<->employee interaction, but is
by ergothus 8y ago
> collective employee action can be used to force an employer to stop exploitative behaviors?
I'm all for balancing the employer<->employee interaction, but is this truly something that works for most industries? Google cares about it's reputation among potential tech employees. Other areas (say, Amazon warehouses) probably have a lot less trouble finding people desperate for work and willing to put up with crap because they need the jobs.
As good as this news is, is this really a template that we can expect much to build from? (as opposed to organized unions with legally protected ability to strike, for example)
- anth_anm 8y agoUnions and their actions are collective employee action, I'm not sure what you're saying won't work?
- ergothus 8y agoI'm not saying unions won't work...I'm saying they weren't involved in this case. This case doesn't look particularly repeatable WITHOUT unions.
- perfmode 8y agoWhy doesn't it look repeatable?
- ergothus 8y agoRephrasing from my original comment: Because Google worried about a very supply-limited audience (tech workers, including related non-programmers). Most fields, the ones paying their employees far less and with far fewer perks, don't share that restraint. If these other fields had their current crop of (non-unionized) workers get disgusted, the companies would just get different employees. There's no shortage of companies with various abusive practices that remain in business. Arbitration agreements, micro-management, strict controls over things as simple as bathroom breaks, even riding the line on wage-theft. I'm very glad to see this particular change, but to say "Google's programmers demanded change and got it, why don't you get with it, un-unionized cashiers at S-Mart!" overestimates the influence of those workers.
- kodablah 8y agoSo, would you say it is particularly repeatable in this industry? I.e. that while those other industries need unions due to lack of leverage, this one may be different? (of course one instance is too small of a sample size to support either direction on its own)
- ergothus 8y agoI'm hardly qualified to have anything but the most grossly informed of opinions, but yeah, I'd expect that in the current environment most tech-area (i.e. Seattle, SF, etc) devs can and should demand improvements and be able to get them without requiring unions (which is not the same as saying unions aren't needed. Look to games dev for examples).
- kelnos 8y agoI think that was the point. The original parent was making a tongue-in-cheek reference to how tech workers seem to resist the idea of forming a union, but occasionally band together to do union-like things informally, in an ad-hoc, not-particularly-reliable fashion.
- kodablah 8y agoI read it as "see, didn't require forming a union to get something done in the tech industry"
- sudhirj 8y agoDo unions allow competition among union members? It’s always seemed to me that they work in jobs where the people are replaceable. In Google one could work to make 2x to 3x more than the next person - is that will possible with a union? Seems like in jobs where individual talent / skills matter, a union is by definition harmful (unless you’re in the lower 50%). Collective action / protest works fine, though, for establishing baselines. If giving employees what they want is cheaper than firing all of them and hiring a fresh batch, it should always work fine.
- PierceJoy 8y ago> Seems like in jobs where individual talent / skills matter, a union is by definition harmful (unless you’re in the lower 50%). Professional athlete unions would be a counterexample, I believe. It really depends on how the union is structured. I doubt a union for high paid tech workers would be structured the same way as one for blue collar labourers.
- lugg 8y agoThat is a pretty naive view of our industry. Personally I find us far more alike other industries than unlike. We're a new industry but we're still full of people of all types sizes and emotional colours.
- 8y ago
- SolaceQuantum 8y agoFrom what I recall unions were involved in this case. Organizers of the mass protests explicitly cited receiving the advisement of union activists.
- my_username_is_ 8y agoFrom what I understand, Amazon actually has trouble recruiting and retaining enough warehouse workers (especially during peak seasons). This is evident by them having a starting wage ($15/hr) that is more than double the minimum wage in many parts of the country
- wil421 8y agoGlassdoor says the average was only $12 but in October they raised it to $15 minimum. Walmart’s low end is about $13 but the average is $17 an hour. Walmart has 1.5 million workers in the US, over 2 million worldwide. The goods news is Amazon’s pay raise has made Walmart and Target increase their minimum wages as well.
- JohnFen 8y agoAverage pay is a meaningless statistic unless combined with a number of other statistics. What would be interesting is knowing the mean pay.
- smolsky 8y agoUmmm... you probably meant "median". Note, "average" is just "arithmetic mean".
- toomuchtodo 8y agoReminder that the Amazon pay raise occurred because Bernie Sanders shamed them into it. Disney as well.
- brianwawok 8y agoAnd they lowered stock benefits a few weeks later
- BurningFrog 8y agoI guess we mean different things with "trouble".
- Retric 8y agoReputation has a lot of hidden costs. Simply having a smaller pool of applicants means they need to either pay more or accept what they consider worse employees. Similarly, high turnover means the loss of skills and the inability to underpay highly valued workers. Both of these directly impact the bottom line and in competitive markets can and has killed companies.