4 ms·

Couldn't the union have some sort of democratic structure for deciding what political goals are popular and enforced? In that case it wouldn't really be any one

by mrobot 7y ago

Couldn't the union have some sort of democratic structure for deciding what political goals are popular and enforced? In that case it wouldn't really be any one person's political goals.

thu2111 7y ago
That's what a political party is. The reason these (ex) Googlers are trying to pressure Google's management to drop certain projects is because they know they can't win the argument to eliminate America's borders at the national or even state level via the normal political process. Their goals are not popular and people do not want them to be enforced, hence the dubious and unethical strategies these activists-cum-workers rely on.
- mrobot 7y ago
  Maybe the case for many political matters but there are indeed many things which DO have broad political support that are not currently practiced by large corporations. A union might help for those cases.
  - thu2111 7y ago
    Which ones do you have in mind?
    - mrobot 7y ago
      Any abusive practices with broad aversion in population. I would have to think of all the examples. I know there are things many don't want Facebook to be doing. Someone below said this: `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.`
      - thu2111 7y ago
        I don't know who Instacart are but Facebook don't listen in on your conversations, do they? WhatsApp has end to end encryption and FB Messenger is getting it. I asked for examples because this sort of wafer thin anti-corporate virtue signalling is insufficient to convince me to pick a fight with my own employer in 'solidarity'. Like most of the population I don't worry about Facebook or Google invading my privacy, instead I enjoy their free services. If they did something I really hated I'd just stop using them: there are other search engines and Facebook isn't especially critical. I already use it much less than I used to. Nothing they're doing justifies being labelled as abusive, let alone taking explicit action.
      - Kalium 7y ago
        This sounds like a list of disputes I would like my union to stay out of. A union representing me has one job: to look after the working conditions and compensation of myself and my colleagues. All this other stuff is a series of distractions. I could have sworn I pointed to this exact behavior as an anti-pattern just a few comments ago, and was told not to worry because democracy. Given how readily this particular goal cropped up again, I suddenly find myself less than completely reassured. I suddenly find myself wondering, once again, if the people who want me to join a union actually care what I want or just want power.
        deleted 7y ago
        [deleted]
        zbyte64 7y ago
        If you have colleagues that have children, would advancing paternity leave also represent the interests of the group? If you have colleagues that are diabetic, would advancing policies for cheaper insulin not represent the interests of the group? Maybe the answer is no, but for those colleagues who are have more complicated needs the answer might be yes. Lastly, if a union doesn't at least represent a re-balance of power then it is ineffectual.
        Kalium 7y ago
Kalium 7y ago
In theory, yes! You're absolutely, completely right. In practice, democratic processes have a tendency to be less than fully detail-oriented and allow a reasonable amount of latitude in leadership. I'm maybe the smallest bit reluctant to sign up for a system where the people doing the organizing are explicitly dreaming about abusing leadership positions.
- zbyte64 7y ago
  When someone tries to describe unions but defines capitalism instead.
  - Kalium 7y ago
    Unions are businesses. They provide labor in exchange for compensation in a mutually negotiated contract. Thus unions are unquestionably a capitalist constuct. Perhaps I've missed something? Can you help me if there's anything I've overlooked?
Frondo 7y ago
A union is a democratic structure itself, so it could indeed organize around workplace-specific concerns and its members could vote to abstain from larger political actions.
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
SpicyLemonZest 7y ago
I suppose it could, but I've never heard of a union that does. Generally the union leadership has the power to decide on their own what the union's goals are, and the democratic structure is only there to elect leadership and approve things like strikes and new contracts. (To some degree that has to be true - collective bargaining doesn't work if the union representatives don't have the power to make commitments on the union's behalf.)
stale2002 7y ago
"Democracy" doesn't solve everything. What if I don't like what people voted on? Then I'm screwed. Instead, I would much rather bargain for myself, instead of collectively bargaining with others who might not agree with what I want.

by mrobot 7y ago

Couldn't the union have some sort of democratic structure for deciding what political goals are popular and enforced? In that case it wouldn't really be any one person's political goals.

thu2111 7y ago

That's what a political party is. The reason these (ex) Googlers are trying to pressure Google's management to drop certain projects is because they know they can't win the argument to eliminate America's borders at the national or even state level via the normal political process. Their goals are not popular and people do not want them to be enforced, hence the dubious and unethical strategies these activists-cum-workers rely on.

mrobot 7y ago
Maybe the case for many political matters but there are indeed many things which DO have broad political support that are not currently practiced by large corporations. A union might help for those cases.
- thu2111 7y ago
  Which ones do you have in mind?
  - mrobot 7y ago
    Any abusive practices with broad aversion in population. I would have to think of all the examples. I know there are things many don't want Facebook to be doing. Someone below said this: `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.`
    - thu2111 7y ago
      I don't know who Instacart are but Facebook don't listen in on your conversations, do they? WhatsApp has end to end encryption and FB Messenger is getting it. I asked for examples because this sort of wafer thin anti-corporate virtue signalling is insufficient to convince me to pick a fight with my own employer in 'solidarity'. Like most of the population I don't worry about Facebook or Google invading my privacy, instead I enjoy their free services. If they did something I really hated I'd just stop using them: there are other search engines and Facebook isn't especially critical. I already use it much less than I used to. Nothing they're doing justifies being labelled as abusive, let alone taking explicit action.
    - Kalium 7y ago
      This sounds like a list of disputes I would like my union to stay out of. A union representing me has one job: to look after the working conditions and compensation of myself and my colleagues. All this other stuff is a series of distractions. I could have sworn I pointed to this exact behavior as an anti-pattern just a few comments ago, and was told not to worry because democracy. Given how readily this particular goal cropped up again, I suddenly find myself less than completely reassured. I suddenly find myself wondering, once again, if the people who want me to join a union actually care what I want or just want power.
      - deleted 7y ago
        [deleted]
      - zbyte64 7y ago
        If you have colleagues that have children, would advancing paternity leave also represent the interests of the group? If you have colleagues that are diabetic, would advancing policies for cheaper insulin not represent the interests of the group? Maybe the answer is no, but for those colleagues who are have more complicated needs the answer might be yes. Lastly, if a union doesn't at least represent a re-balance of power then it is ineffectual.
        Kalium 7y ago

Kalium 7y ago

In theory, yes! You're absolutely, completely right. In practice, democratic processes have a tendency to be less than fully detail-oriented and allow a reasonable amount of latitude in leadership. I'm maybe the smallest bit reluctant to sign up for a system where the people doing the organizing are explicitly dreaming about abusing leadership positions.

zbyte64 7y ago
When someone tries to describe unions but defines capitalism instead.
- Kalium 7y ago
  Unions are businesses. They provide labor in exchange for compensation in a mutually negotiated contract. Thus unions are unquestionably a capitalist constuct. Perhaps I've missed something? Can you help me if there's anything I've overlooked?

Frondo 7y ago

A union is a democratic structure itself, so it could indeed organize around workplace-specific concerns and its members could vote to abstain from larger political actions.

deleted 7y ago

[deleted]

SpicyLemonZest 7y ago

I suppose it could, but I've never heard of a union that does. Generally the union leadership has the power to decide on their own what the union's goals are, and the democratic structure is only there to elect leadership and approve things like strikes and new contracts. (To some degree that has to be true - collective bargaining doesn't work if the union representatives don't have the power to make commitments on the union's behalf.)

stale2002 7y ago

"Democracy" doesn't solve everything. What if I don't like what people voted on? Then I'm screwed. Instead, I would much rather bargain for myself, instead of collectively bargaining with others who might not agree with what I want.