4 ms·

> However, once employees start organising to influence management on business decisions they really need to pony up the capital and become shareholders. Decidi

> However, once employees start organising to influence management on business decisions they really need to pony up the capital and become shareholders. Deciding what management does is the privilege of shareholders, not employees. Isn't this precisely describing why unions were originally generated, so that employees can also leverage power equal to the shareholders, and therefore have a say in their own working conditions?

roenxi 7y ago
There is a big difference between that and what is being discussed in this article though. Unions are dealing with pay and conditions - important, but ultimately just aggregating topics that employers and employees were going to negotiate around anyway. This article is talking about: * Amazon workers are demanding more action from the company on battling climate change * Microsoft, employees say they don’t want to build technology for warfare * Salesforce, a group has lobbied management to end its work with the U.S. Customs and Border Protection agency * Google, [employees] want a say in and control over the products they build Those are issues going way beyond what an employee can reasonably expect to influence. Being employed by a tech company is an achievement, but the end of the day tech workers aren't that special. They don't formally get to decide how the world works. They absolutely can't take to social media to complain about these issues and expect to hold a job with the company they are complaining about. This type of activity isn't acceptable; they can't draw a wage and overrule strategic directions from people with capital at stake. The options are work or walk.
- kazagistar 7y ago
  You make a bunch of statements about what can and cannot be done, and back up none of them. What can be done is what you have power to do, and collectively, workers have power greater than capital. What should be done is what is moral, since the people with capital are institutionally unable to. It's really that simple.
- detaro 7y ago
  They clearly can at least temporarily, you can currently observe them doing so. Their employers now can decide if they want to call their "bluff" or not, and deal with the consequences of either choice.

roenxi 7y ago

There is a big difference between that and what is being discussed in this article though. Unions are dealing with pay and conditions - important, but ultimately just aggregating topics that employers and employees were going to negotiate around anyway. This article is talking about: * Amazon workers are demanding more action from the company on battling climate change * Microsoft, employees say they don’t want to build technology for warfare * Salesforce, a group has lobbied management to end its work with the U.S. Customs and Border Protection agency * Google, [employees] want a say in and control over the products they build Those are issues going way beyond what an employee can reasonably expect to influence. Being employed by a tech company is an achievement, but the end of the day tech workers aren't that special. They don't formally get to decide how the world works. They absolutely can't take to social media to complain about these issues and expect to hold a job with the company they are complaining about. This type of activity isn't acceptable; they can't draw a wage and overrule strategic directions from people with capital at stake. The options are work or walk.

kazagistar 7y ago
You make a bunch of statements about what can and cannot be done, and back up none of them. What can be done is what you have power to do, and collectively, workers have power greater than capital. What should be done is what is moral, since the people with capital are institutionally unable to. It's really that simple.
detaro 7y ago
They clearly can at least temporarily, you can currently observe them doing so. Their employers now can decide if they want to call their "bluff" or not, and deal with the consequences of either choice.