4 ms·

I read it as "see, didn't require forming a union to get something done in the tech industry"

sudhirj 8y ago
Do 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 ago
    That 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.
- untog 8y ago
  Unions allow whatever they want to allow, and block whatever they want to block. So if Google employees wanted to form a very light touch union they could do exactly that.
- hrktb 8y ago
  Nothing in the notion of union stops competition or talent/skill expression. A lot of people only associate unions with factory workers kind of jobs, it’s not. Think of journalists or performing actors unions for instance.
  - eternalban 8y ago
    Correct. To the point: https://www.local817.com/about-us https://www.local817.com/about-us https://www.dga.org/resources/additional/guilds-and-unions.aspx https://www.dga.org/resources/additional/guilds-and-unions.a...
- quotemstr 8y ago
  I took a glance at the constitution of the Screen Actors Guild recently as part of a discussion on this topic elsewhere. It's interesting how it features very strong supermajority requirements for going on strike, for imposing a salary cap, and for amending the constitution to remove the supermajority condition. I wouldn't be surprised to see similar clauses in other union constitutions for fields in which, like tech, there's a large and obvious talent dispersion. I think a majority-rule approach would inevitably lead to the anti-meritocratic policies you're imagining. [1] https://www.sagaftra.org/files/2015_1002_sag-aftra_constitution.pdf https://www.sagaftra.org/files/2015_1002_sag-aftra_constitut...
rmc 8y ago
It walks like a union, talks like a union, and quacks like a union. It's the same idea. Workers doing things collectively.

Do 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 ago
  That 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.
untog 8y ago
Unions allow whatever they want to allow, and block whatever they want to block. So if Google employees wanted to form a very light touch union they could do exactly that.
hrktb 8y ago
Nothing in the notion of union stops competition or talent/skill expression. A lot of people only associate unions with factory workers kind of jobs, it’s not. Think of journalists or performing actors unions for instance.
- eternalban 8y ago
  Correct. To the point: https://www.local817.com/about-us https://www.local817.com/about-us https://www.dga.org/resources/additional/guilds-and-unions.aspx https://www.dga.org/resources/additional/guilds-and-unions.a...
quotemstr 8y ago
I took a glance at the constitution of the Screen Actors Guild recently as part of a discussion on this topic elsewhere. It's interesting how it features very strong supermajority requirements for going on strike, for imposing a salary cap, and for amending the constitution to remove the supermajority condition. I wouldn't be surprised to see similar clauses in other union constitutions for fields in which, like tech, there's a large and obvious talent dispersion. I think a majority-rule approach would inevitably lead to the anti-meritocratic policies you're imagining. [1] https://www.sagaftra.org/files/2015_1002_sag-aftra_constitution.pdf https://www.sagaftra.org/files/2015_1002_sag-aftra_constitut...

rmc 8y ago

It walks like a union, talks like a union, and quacks like a union. It's the same idea. Workers doing things collectively.