10 ms·

We need a tech worker's union. And technology around communication and setting up strikes etc.

by mrobot 7y ago

murph-almighty 7y ago
I've thought about this a bit. I don't think we'd get much public sympathy from a working conditions standpoint- generally if you're working for the right place you can arguably make more money than most of your non-engineer peers (look at a percentile breakdown of your annual income if you don't believe me). I think the way a union like this could succeed is by fighting Big Brother-esque projects and refusing to work on initiatives such as Project Butterfly. Sell it as "we refuse to work on technology that will objectively make you (the layman's) life worse". Once we hit a critical mass we'd have a much bigger say over what projects do and don't get built, and anyone who scabs is arguably on the wrong side of the moral coin or "enabling Big Brother/technocratic billionaires". This isn't to say that tech workers should be the ultimate moral arbiter, but having a non-financially driven check would at least help.
- kevingadd 7y ago
  I think I agree on the public sympathy point, but if anything I think tech workers should assume they will never have public support. Bargaining collectively is the only way that the average tech worker will be able to take steps that might make the public feel as if they can trust us to be on their side. Given what many of our employers do (collectively, as a company) it's hard to expect the average member of the public to look at that and assume tech workers are fighting the good fight.
  - Frondo 7y ago
    I think it's entirely plausible for a tech worker's union to build public support around any number of popular causes, e.g. "want facebook to stop listening in on your conversations? FB Local 404 did that for you" or "Sick of Instacart stealing your shoppers' tips? So is the Instacart Developers' Guild" and so on.
- macinjosh 7y ago
  > "we refuse to work on technology that will objectively make you (the layman's) life worse". I could get behind this reason for unionizing.
- _-o-_ 7y ago
  I don't think that I'll ever have any sympathy for workers telling business what projects they are willing to work on. If you don't like the kind of work you're supposed to be doing - seek employment at different place.
  - zbyte64 7y ago
    Agreed, preferably one with a union to match your preference.
- mindfulgeek 7y ago
  This. Developers are a very powerful party, but completely unorganized. Everything relies on software and not everyone can build it. We make things that make the world better, but we also make things that make the world a lot worse. If we could group together and have some kind of “do no harm” oath and protections around that, the world would be a better place.
- dub 7y ago
  As far as I can tell there's no legal protection for people who attempt to organize or strike for reasons other than working conditions. Is there any precedent to suggest that workers in the US would be able to refuse the carry out a lawful business strategy set by shareholders without risk of being fired?
johngoaway 7y ago
i dont get it there is seemingly a big coordinated push around this idea but i dont really understand it is this about "soft skill" tech jobs in particular or programming jobs too? if it's for programmers then i'm completely confused as to why?... programming is a skilled field. my skills/skill level is unique to me as yours are to you. i dont want my earning potential to be bogged down by some collective bargaining agreement
- Miner49er 7y ago
  > earning potential to be bogged down by some collective bargaining agreement A union doesn't have to touch wages in tech, they aren't a problem. But it would be there if wages started to get bad. It could instead focus on things like work/life balance, privacy issues, etc.
  - Pfhreak 7y ago
    In fact, some unions set minimums but don't discourage negotiating a higher wage. And could cover stuff like overtime pay for being on call.
    - elicash 7y ago
      Yep. See the players unions in any sport. Hard to argue those players aren't skilled.
      - shantly 7y ago
        Lots of parallels with SAG, too, IMO. You don't have to bog down the top earners very much to keep a whole lot of people down the ladder from getting shit on too badly, and providing a ton of support to people earning their way to the top who might not make it there without that help.
- ncallaway 7y ago
  Yea, that makes sense. For the same reason, I don’t think movie actors could ever unionize. They’re skills and talents are obviously very unique to them (I’d argue far more so than developers). Certainly the pay scales between actors of different talents seems to agree with that. Or, professional football players. Each is pretty unique in their talents. Again, their pay scales differ vastly based on those talents. They could never successfully unionize. Except both of those fields have strong unions, and collective bargaining, while still allowing individuals with different talents to get paid individually.
lawnchair_larry 7y ago
No we don’t. We are probably the most privileged workers in the world. If we are mistreated, we can quit and get another job down the street, likely with a raise. It’s not worth trading for all the bullshit that comes along with unions.
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
- debt 7y ago
  You’re saying that now when times are good. Ain’t gonna be this way forever.
- HarryHirsch 7y ago
  If we are mistreated, we can quit and get another job down the street, likely with a raise This isn't the case, the wage-fixing cartel that Google was part of is proof.
  - lawnchair_larry 7y ago
    That’s already illegal without unions, so it’s not something that unionizing would fix.
    - shadowgovt 7y ago
      It's something that a union would notice and blow the whistle on much sooner than individual employees talking to each other.
    - HarryHirsch 7y ago
      When it comes to large corporations the law has no teeth. Organized labour is a different way of power, at least it can't lead to worse outcomes.
      - lawnchair_larry 7y ago
        Both the DOJ antitrust action under the Sherman act as well as the civil class action prevailed in the tech workers wages case, so that seems to indicate ample teeth on that particular issue. And they didn’t even require union dues to fund another giant political bureaucracy, deducted from all of our paychecks in perpetuity, to do it. Also, organized labor only gains it’s power through contract law and state law (especially in non-right-to-work states, where it’s illegal to opt out of a union and cross the picket line), so this argument doesn’t really work.
macinjosh 7y ago
Right, because tech workers at large SV companies have no choice but to work every waking hour doing grueling labor for meager pay with no benefits. /s Do these people even understand how the rest of the country lives? Perhaps some of those well compensated but eager to organize tech workers should focus their organization efforts where it can actually help people. For example, setting up a union for the gig economy workers that deliver their food, drive them around, pack their amazon packages, or run their errands
- elicash 7y ago
  If Uber tech workers organized, they'd have a larger voice to support the drivers if that's what they decided to bargain over. And yes, it's common for unions to fight for expanding the union workforce at their company. These types of victories build on one another. If you truly care about the gig workers, the best thing you can do is organize YOUR OWN workplace.
- CharlesColeman 7y ago
  > Do these people even understand how the rest of the country lives? Perhaps some of those well compensated but eager to organize tech workers should focus their organization efforts where it can actually help people. Unions (or some type of effective worker organization) should be an all-workers thing, not a some-workers thing. > For example, setting up a union for the gig economy workers that deliver their food, drive them around, pack their amazon packages, or run their errands Tech workers can't "set up" a union for gig economy workers, that would be patronizing and ineffective. The gig economy workers need to do that for themselves if their union is to have any teeth. What tech workers can do is have a union that can give support to the gig worker union. Also the tech workers who bask in the gig economy are probably a different group than the tech workers who are trying to organize, and it's misleading to conflate them.
Balgair 7y ago
Mark Twain's Life on the Mississippi has a good bit in it on the perils and triumphs of the Mississippi River Boat Pilots. Their special status on the ante-bellum Mississippi has a lot of parallels to today's tech workers and the challenges you all face. I'll spoil it a bit and say that things did not end up well for the pilots. Techies would be wise to heed their lessons. Chapters 14 and 15 contain the majority of the lessons of the pilots: https://www.gutenberg.org/files/245/245-h/245-h.htm#linkc14 https://www.gutenberg.org/files/245/245-h/245-h.htm#linkc14
Kalium 7y ago
I'm sympathetic to the idea, but I've also yet to encounter a decent pitch. Pitches I've heard so far: * A union could support privacy efforts * A union could support other unions * A union could advance political goals * A union could impose moral rules for projects members are allowed to work on None of these are actually reasons I'd want to sign up for an organization where the core value proposition is surrendering autonomy for collective bargaining to improve my working conditions. These are the pitches of people who want to use the political power and funds of a union for their personal political goals. I want to hear a unionization pitch that's grounded in things relevant to my work. No more overweening unions trying to do everything and sacrificing the workers, thanks. I remember Detroit.
- shantly 7y ago
  A union could ensure better QOL for tech workers by: 1) capturing more of the value the workers create for them, vs. for capital, in direct dollar compensation or in other benefits, by bargaining from a much stronger position than individual workers, and 2) providing easier and more even access to counsel, support, and protection against all sorts of personal and professional abuses, at work, Where #2 is a bucket that holds a whole bunch of really nice stuff, including ensuring management doesn't fail to provide what was won in #1 in lots of small ways that aren't worth fighting for an individual but are for a larger group. Basically the same core things any well-functioning union provides.
  - toasterlovin 7y ago
    Do we live on the same planet? Tech jobs are insanely awesome compared to basically every other job out there. I've consulted for unicorns, the amenities for employees are ridiculous. Employees are incredibly sought after and can (and many do) regularly shop themselves around for better offers.
    - shantly 7y ago
      That doesn't mean there isn't more value to extract for workers—very probably there is—or more that could be done to even out availability of things like parental leave, for example, or that an easy, cheap, acceptable route to professional and legal counsel & insurances outside the direct control of the company one is working for wouldn't be very valuable—and besides, the overwhelming majority of tech jobs aren't the kind you're talking about, even restricting ourselves to the US. [EDIT] more to the point, if your company doesn't say things like "you know, this contract pays really well, no need to negotiate for more even if we think we could get it" there's no reason employees should have that kind of attitude about their pay & work conditions.
thu2111 7y ago
I'm never going to go on strike to protect the rights of bizarre anti-border extremists to harass and stalk their colleagues instead of working. I'm pretty sure that 99% of all developers are just like me. Why would we not side with management here? Google's management has to be the tamest, most worker friendly management in the history of management. It's the very last place where workers need to unionise. I remember Google a long time ago, nearly 15 years ago now. There was an April 1st when someone managed to find a way to send email anonymously to all of engineering, and sent round a call for unionisation as a joke. We found it quite amusing. The idea that Googlers would unionise wasn't just seen as unserious but literally, an idea worthy of being an April Fools.
- StuffedParrot 7y ago
  It seems like a generational thing.
- zbyte64 7y ago
  "Anti-war" after 9/11 = don't support the troops "Anti-ICE" after 2016 = don't support borders
supernova87a 7y ago
I agree! The things that we could strike over: - We will refuse to work when management wants to upgrade servers to make them faster (takes our jobs away) - When they get rid of coconut water in the kitchen (abusive conditions) - We will conduct coding slowdowns and deliberately insert long-lived bugs when we don't get enough free t-shirts, or when our adjustable chairs have only 5 instead of 7 axes of adjustment We'd better stand up for ourselves and form a Slack channel, otherwise we may find ourselves making less than $125k fresh out of college, relegated to having to email each other like animals, and we just can't have that.
- P_I_Staker 7y ago
  Only a tiny fraction of tech workers have the conditions you mentioned. You're talking about the top tier jobs of one specialty. Also, ignoring the many ways that conditions are unbalanced in favor of the employer.
usaar333 7y ago
In many tech companies, there's not much boundary between managers and ICs; people freely move between the roles. Who is in the union and who is on the other side?
- shantly 7y ago
  I've seen places with separate unions for ordinary workers and for lower- to mid-level management. They have different incentives within the company so it's kinda hard to have the shoulder-to-shoulder, but ultimately both are much weaker than upper management and the company as a whole when it comes to negotiating, so it makes sense.
AnIdiotOnTheNet 7y ago
> We need a tech worker's union. This will never happen, and for one very simple reason: it is the nature of tech workers to believe that they are smarter than everyone else, and this attitude is antithetical to organization. Think about it. Do you really think very many tech people you know would be willing to go on strike over things happening to tech people at some other company? Or are they going to just blame the victims for being stupid enough to work for that company in the first place?
- toasterlovin 7y ago
  It won't happen for a much simpler reason: tech workers are not disenfranchised. They enjoy amazing pay and have tons of options. Tech workers, as a class, are generally not suffering under anyone's yoke, much less the yoke of their employer. Companies are falling over themselves trying to attract talent.
einpoklum 7y ago
1. Aren't there already lots of unionized workers in Tech? 2. If you need it, you need to set it up. Unions created from the outside are weak at best and collaborationst/employer-controlled at worst. I suggest considering the IWW as a framework: https://www.iww.org/branches/US/CA https://www.iww.org/branches/US/CA <- story was about workers in California https://www.iww.org/unions/dept500 https://www.iww.org/unions/dept500 <- Relevant industrial branch of the IWW they're much smaller than UAW or CtW - but their organizational tradition is more decentralized-power, grass-roots-based, and not trying to find accommodation and common ground with employers all the time.

We need a tech worker's union. And technology around communication and setting up strikes etc.

by mrobot 7y ago

We need a tech worker's union. And technology around communication and setting up strikes etc.

I've thought about this a bit. I don't think we'd get much public sympathy from a working conditions standpoint- generally if you're working for the right place you can arguably make more money than most of your non-engineer peers (look at a percentile breakdown of your annual income if you don't believe me). I think the way a union like this could succeed is by fighting Big Brother-esque projects and refusing to work on initiatives such as Project Butterfly. Sell it as "we refuse to work on technology that will objectively make you (the layman's) life worse". Once we hit a critical mass we'd have a much bigger say over what projects do and don't get built, and anyone who scabs is arguably on the wrong side of the moral coin or "enabling Big Brother/technocratic billionaires". This isn't to say that tech workers should be the ultimate moral arbiter, but having a non-financially driven check would at least help.

kevingadd 7y ago
I think I agree on the public sympathy point, but if anything I think tech workers should assume they will never have public support. Bargaining collectively is the only way that the average tech worker will be able to take steps that might make the public feel as if they can trust us to be on their side. Given what many of our employers do (collectively, as a company) it's hard to expect the average member of the public to look at that and assume tech workers are fighting the good fight.
- Frondo 7y ago
  I think it's entirely plausible for a tech worker's union to build public support around any number of popular causes, e.g. "want facebook to stop listening in on your conversations? FB Local 404 did that for you" or "Sick of Instacart stealing your shoppers' tips? So is the Instacart Developers' Guild" and so on.
macinjosh 7y ago
> "we refuse to work on technology that will objectively make you (the layman's) life worse". I could get behind this reason for unionizing.
_-o-_ 7y ago
I don't think that I'll ever have any sympathy for workers telling business what projects they are willing to work on. If you don't like the kind of work you're supposed to be doing - seek employment at different place.
- zbyte64 7y ago
  Agreed, preferably one with a union to match your preference.
mindfulgeek 7y ago
This. Developers are a very powerful party, but completely unorganized. Everything relies on software and not everyone can build it. We make things that make the world better, but we also make things that make the world a lot worse. If we could group together and have some kind of “do no harm” oath and protections around that, the world would be a better place.
dub 7y ago
As far as I can tell there's no legal protection for people who attempt to organize or strike for reasons other than working conditions. Is there any precedent to suggest that workers in the US would be able to refuse the carry out a lawful business strategy set by shareholders without risk of being fired?

johngoaway 7y ago

i dont get it there is seemingly a big coordinated push around this idea but i dont really understand it is this about "soft skill" tech jobs in particular or programming jobs too? if it's for programmers then i'm completely confused as to why?... programming is a skilled field. my skills/skill level is unique to me as yours are to you. i dont want my earning potential to be bogged down by some collective bargaining agreement

Miner49er 7y ago
> earning potential to be bogged down by some collective bargaining agreement A union doesn't have to touch wages in tech, they aren't a problem. But it would be there if wages started to get bad. It could instead focus on things like work/life balance, privacy issues, etc.
- Pfhreak 7y ago
  In fact, some unions set minimums but don't discourage negotiating a higher wage. And could cover stuff like overtime pay for being on call.
  - elicash 7y ago
    Yep. See the players unions in any sport. Hard to argue those players aren't skilled.
    - shantly 7y ago
      Lots of parallels with SAG, too, IMO. You don't have to bog down the top earners very much to keep a whole lot of people down the ladder from getting shit on too badly, and providing a ton of support to people earning their way to the top who might not make it there without that help.
ncallaway 7y ago
Yea, that makes sense. For the same reason, I don’t think movie actors could ever unionize. They’re skills and talents are obviously very unique to them (I’d argue far more so than developers). Certainly the pay scales between actors of different talents seems to agree with that. Or, professional football players. Each is pretty unique in their talents. Again, their pay scales differ vastly based on those talents. They could never successfully unionize. Except both of those fields have strong unions, and collective bargaining, while still allowing individuals with different talents to get paid individually.

lawnchair_larry 7y ago

No we don’t. We are probably the most privileged workers in the world. If we are mistreated, we can quit and get another job down the street, likely with a raise. It’s not worth trading for all the bullshit that comes along with unions.

deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
debt 7y ago
You’re saying that now when times are good. Ain’t gonna be this way forever.
HarryHirsch 7y ago
If we are mistreated, we can quit and get another job down the street, likely with a raise This isn't the case, the wage-fixing cartel that Google was part of is proof.
- lawnchair_larry 7y ago
  That’s already illegal without unions, so it’s not something that unionizing would fix.
  - shadowgovt 7y ago
    It's something that a union would notice and blow the whistle on much sooner than individual employees talking to each other.
  - HarryHirsch 7y ago
    When it comes to large corporations the law has no teeth. Organized labour is a different way of power, at least it can't lead to worse outcomes.
    - lawnchair_larry 7y ago
      Both the DOJ antitrust action under the Sherman act as well as the civil class action prevailed in the tech workers wages case, so that seems to indicate ample teeth on that particular issue. And they didn’t even require union dues to fund another giant political bureaucracy, deducted from all of our paychecks in perpetuity, to do it. Also, organized labor only gains it’s power through contract law and state law (especially in non-right-to-work states, where it’s illegal to opt out of a union and cross the picket line), so this argument doesn’t really work.

macinjosh 7y ago

Right, because tech workers at large SV companies have no choice but to work every waking hour doing grueling labor for meager pay with no benefits. /s Do these people even understand how the rest of the country lives? Perhaps some of those well compensated but eager to organize tech workers should focus their organization efforts where it can actually help people. For example, setting up a union for the gig economy workers that deliver their food, drive them around, pack their amazon packages, or run their errands

elicash 7y ago
If Uber tech workers organized, they'd have a larger voice to support the drivers if that's what they decided to bargain over. And yes, it's common for unions to fight for expanding the union workforce at their company. These types of victories build on one another. If you truly care about the gig workers, the best thing you can do is organize YOUR OWN workplace.
CharlesColeman 7y ago
> Do these people even understand how the rest of the country lives? Perhaps some of those well compensated but eager to organize tech workers should focus their organization efforts where it can actually help people. Unions (or some type of effective worker organization) should be an all-workers thing, not a some-workers thing. > For example, setting up a union for the gig economy workers that deliver their food, drive them around, pack their amazon packages, or run their errands Tech workers can't "set up" a union for gig economy workers, that would be patronizing and ineffective. The gig economy workers need to do that for themselves if their union is to have any teeth. What tech workers can do is have a union that can give support to the gig worker union. Also the tech workers who bask in the gig economy are probably a different group than the tech workers who are trying to organize, and it's misleading to conflate them.

Balgair 7y ago

Mark Twain's Life on the Mississippi has a good bit in it on the perils and triumphs of the Mississippi River Boat Pilots. Their special status on the ante-bellum Mississippi has a lot of parallels to today's tech workers and the challenges you all face. I'll spoil it a bit and say that things did not end up well for the pilots. Techies would be wise to heed their lessons. Chapters 14 and 15 contain the majority of the lessons of the pilots: https://www.gutenberg.org/files/245/245-h/245-h.htm#linkc14 https://www.gutenberg.org/files/245/245-h/245-h.htm#linkc14

Kalium 7y ago

I'm sympathetic to the idea, but I've also yet to encounter a decent pitch. Pitches I've heard so far: * A union could support privacy efforts * A union could support other unions * A union could advance political goals * A union could impose moral rules for projects members are allowed to work on None of these are actually reasons I'd want to sign up for an organization where the core value proposition is surrendering autonomy for collective bargaining to improve my working conditions. These are the pitches of people who want to use the political power and funds of a union for their personal political goals. I want to hear a unionization pitch that's grounded in things relevant to my work. No more overweening unions trying to do everything and sacrificing the workers, thanks. I remember Detroit.

shantly 7y ago
A union could ensure better QOL for tech workers by: 1) capturing more of the value the workers create for them, vs. for capital, in direct dollar compensation or in other benefits, by bargaining from a much stronger position than individual workers, and 2) providing easier and more even access to counsel, support, and protection against all sorts of personal and professional abuses, at work, Where #2 is a bucket that holds a whole bunch of really nice stuff, including ensuring management doesn't fail to provide what was won in #1 in lots of small ways that aren't worth fighting for an individual but are for a larger group. Basically the same core things any well-functioning union provides.
- toasterlovin 7y ago
  Do we live on the same planet? Tech jobs are insanely awesome compared to basically every other job out there. I've consulted for unicorns, the amenities for employees are ridiculous. Employees are incredibly sought after and can (and many do) regularly shop themselves around for better offers.
  - shantly 7y ago
    That doesn't mean there isn't more value to extract for workers—very probably there is—or more that could be done to even out availability of things like parental leave, for example, or that an easy, cheap, acceptable route to professional and legal counsel & insurances outside the direct control of the company one is working for wouldn't be very valuable—and besides, the overwhelming majority of tech jobs aren't the kind you're talking about, even restricting ourselves to the US. [EDIT] more to the point, if your company doesn't say things like "you know, this contract pays really well, no need to negotiate for more even if we think we could get it" there's no reason employees should have that kind of attitude about their pay & work conditions.

thu2111 7y ago

I'm never going to go on strike to protect the rights of bizarre anti-border extremists to harass and stalk their colleagues instead of working. I'm pretty sure that 99% of all developers are just like me. Why would we not side with management here? Google's management has to be the tamest, most worker friendly management in the history of management. It's the very last place where workers need to unionise. I remember Google a long time ago, nearly 15 years ago now. There was an April 1st when someone managed to find a way to send email anonymously to all of engineering, and sent round a call for unionisation as a joke. We found it quite amusing. The idea that Googlers would unionise wasn't just seen as unserious but literally, an idea worthy of being an April Fools.

StuffedParrot 7y ago
It seems like a generational thing.
zbyte64 7y ago
"Anti-war" after 9/11 = don't support the troops "Anti-ICE" after 2016 = don't support borders

supernova87a 7y ago

I agree! The things that we could strike over: - We will refuse to work when management wants to upgrade servers to make them faster (takes our jobs away) - When they get rid of coconut water in the kitchen (abusive conditions) - We will conduct coding slowdowns and deliberately insert long-lived bugs when we don't get enough free t-shirts, or when our adjustable chairs have only 5 instead of 7 axes of adjustment We'd better stand up for ourselves and form a Slack channel, otherwise we may find ourselves making less than $125k fresh out of college, relegated to having to email each other like animals, and we just can't have that.

P_I_Staker 7y ago
Only a tiny fraction of tech workers have the conditions you mentioned. You're talking about the top tier jobs of one specialty. Also, ignoring the many ways that conditions are unbalanced in favor of the employer.

usaar333 7y ago

In many tech companies, there's not much boundary between managers and ICs; people freely move between the roles. Who is in the union and who is on the other side?

shantly 7y ago
I've seen places with separate unions for ordinary workers and for lower- to mid-level management. They have different incentives within the company so it's kinda hard to have the shoulder-to-shoulder, but ultimately both are much weaker than upper management and the company as a whole when it comes to negotiating, so it makes sense.

AnIdiotOnTheNet 7y ago

> We need a tech worker's union. This will never happen, and for one very simple reason: it is the nature of tech workers to believe that they are smarter than everyone else, and this attitude is antithetical to organization. Think about it. Do you really think very many tech people you know would be willing to go on strike over things happening to tech people at some other company? Or are they going to just blame the victims for being stupid enough to work for that company in the first place?

toasterlovin 7y ago
It won't happen for a much simpler reason: tech workers are not disenfranchised. They enjoy amazing pay and have tons of options. Tech workers, as a class, are generally not suffering under anyone's yoke, much less the yoke of their employer. Companies are falling over themselves trying to attract talent.

einpoklum 7y ago

1. Aren't there already lots of unionized workers in Tech? 2. If you need it, you need to set it up. Unions created from the outside are weak at best and collaborationst/employer-controlled at worst. I suggest considering the IWW as a framework: https://www.iww.org/branches/US/CA https://www.iww.org/branches/US/CA <- story was about workers in California https://www.iww.org/unions/dept500 https://www.iww.org/unions/dept500 <- Relevant industrial branch of the IWW they're much smaller than UAW or CtW - but their organizational tradition is more decentralized-power, grass-roots-based, and not trying to find accommodation and common ground with employers all the time.