27 ms·
Thousands of Google’s cafeteria workers have unionized
- vjktyu 7y agoGood for them. As for the tech workers, they need something like a guild with membership fees and staff lawyers that would sue the state for allowing binding arbitration and non compete agreements (i.e. do what California did).
- utopian3 7y agoSue the state for allowing it? Honest question— Is that a legal argument? If laws don’t exist, how can you sue the state for not enacting them if it doesn’t violate a constitutional right...
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]
- vjktyu 7y agoThat's why we need lawyers on a payroll that would figure out all the details.
- reaperducer 7y agothey need something like a guild with membership fees and staff lawyers that would sue the state for allowing binding arbitration and non compete agreements Serious question: How is this kind of a guild different from a union in your view?
- jedimastert 7y agoApparently guilds are for independent contractors and unions are for employees. A developer guild would be for freelance devs and the like
- reaperducer 7y agoAh. Thanks for the clarification. All I could piece together in my mind were the medieval guilds of Belgium. But I guess this isn't that far removed.
- Retric 7y agoScreen actors guild is the most famous current example. While less well known they have made a significant difference in actor safety.
- cafard 7y agoThe Newspaper Guild (TNG, now part of the Communications Workers of America) represents a lot of journalists. But indeed most of us have heard the names of far more members of SAG-AFTRA than of TNG.
- pjc50 7y agoProfessional organisations are middle class, while unions are working class. (Per downthread, the dividing line is really "if your organisation comes into conflict with the state, does the fight happen in a courtroom or on the street?")
- ianleeclark 7y ago> Professional organisations are middle class, while unions are working class. I see a lot of hemming and hawing about "the middle class," but I don't think it has any real meaning. What defines the middle class and how is the working class excluded from it? Are you using "the middle class," as a substitute for a professional/managerial class?
- vjktyu 7y agoAfaik, a union can tell you what you can and cannot do, while I only want a team of well funded lawyers to change some laws. And the u word attracts unnecessary attention. Let's call it a club, actually.
- krtong 7y agobut Just remember, the bargaining power of any union is a non compete agreement. Corporations are unions for the modern day mercantile class.
- greatscott404 7y agoThe only reason labor unions are legal is that certain unions have outsized political clout, in a perfect world labor unions would be illegal under antitrust laws as forcing companies to pay workers more than what a free market dictates inevitably increases prices.
- ganzuul 7y agoPrices increase regardless.
- lykr0n 7y agoSure. In a perfect world labor unions wouldn't need to exist because government regulations would make sure employees didn't abuse employees and employees have protections. Unions are the logical outcome of lax labor regulations.
- greatscott404 7y agoAre you suggesting that employee cartels squeezing money from consumers is justified? Want worker protections ask for that, no need to burden businesses any further.
- lykr0n 7y agoI suggested no such thing. The minimum wage is a burden for companies. Walmart having to pay their employees in USD and not Walmart credit is a burden. Workers having a lunch break and bathroom breaks are "burdens" as well. If you're presenting the argument that cheap products of slave labor is a good thing, then... I'll pray for you.
- nkrisc 7y agoWhat's the alternative? An individual employee negotiates one on one with... an entire company? The companies have all the power, unions are an attempt to not be completely trodden upon.
- joshuamorton 7y ago
- dominotw 7y agoppl also talk a lot about union for tech workers. Its not feasible in tech because a sizable majority of tech workers are on various visa's that precludes them from joining a strike, making the union essentially ineffective. This needs to be addressed first. Chicago has teachers union but filipino teachers on J1 cannot participate in a strike, it works for CTU because there are only a tiny fraction on J1 visa.
- baddox 7y agoA majority of tech workers are on visas? I find that hard to believe.
- en4bz 7y agoTCS, Wipro, etc. probably skew this but it seems true to some extent at least in the bay area. [1] [1] https://www.newsweek.com/h-1b-visa-row-foreign-workers-make-more-half-silicon-valleys-tech-industry-784272 https://www.newsweek.com/h-1b-visa-row-foreign-workers-make-...
- dominotw 7y agoSorry I meant 'sizable' not 'sizable majority'.
- jacquesm 7y agoGP has a habit of exaggerating claims that have some basis in fact when looked at through your eyelashes but that fall apart on closer inspection: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21899843 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21899843 I don't think this will be any different.
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]
- dominotw 7y agoone example = habit? As I said before you wrote this comment, i meant to use sizable here not sizable majority.
- ryanseys 7y agoDisclaimer: FTE at Verily (Google Life Sciences) Sounds like this isn't the first time this has happened and won't be the last. Both Compass (the firm that employs these cafeteria workers) and Google both have experience working with unions and are committed to working through this. Happy that these employees are getting the representation they deserve. I hope this means that these people will get better benefits that Google FTEs enjoy and stronger protections. As a FTE at Verily (an Alphabet subsidiary), the management's priorities are very clearly not focused on challenging the status quo in these areas -- they are focused on running the "core business". I can only guess the sentiment is similar within Google. I look forward to seeing this issue continue to get light and hope that business priorities evolve to incorporate the more humanistic aspects of running a business instead of simply focusing on the bottom line all the time.
- sfink 7y ago> Google [has] experience working with unions and [is] committed to working through this. My impression is that Google's experience is mostly in seemingly illegal union-busting (well, preventing) efforts. Then again, my impression is wholly based on reading HN articles on the topic, generally related only to engineers. But I suppose they'll do what they're legally forced to do, more or less.
- fallingfrog 7y ago“Committed to working through this” “Look forward to seeing the issue continue to get light” “Business priorities evolve” You didn’t say anything particularly disagreeable but I wonder if you realize how this kind of language comes across- this is the way people talk to you right before they fire you or take away your healthcare or something. This kind of business speak just screams, I’m someone who cannot be trusted. It’s the language of power. We all cringe and grimace when the boss talks like this. It’s why you’re getting downvoted, I’d guess.
- freeopinion 7y agoImagine a gigantic apartment building in San Francisco. Let's say some 400-unit monster. Then picture a campus with four of those buildings. Then realize that such a campus could not house all the Google employees in the area. Then realize that such a campus could not house just the Google cafeteria workers in the area.
- avocado4 7y agoIs this an argument against high density construction and tech workers at the same time?
- OnlineGladiator 7y agoWhat is the point of this comment other than to say Google has a lot of employees?
- jjeaff 7y agoI figured they just had the same reaction to the headline as me. "Wow I can't believe they have that many cafeteria workers".
- novok 7y agoWell good thing there is plenty of enough space to build 400 of them in a small area! ;)
- filoleg 7y agoTo make this clear, you are suggesting that having just those 4 buildings won’t solve the issue completely, despite making it better, so it isn’t worth doing?
- freeopinion 7y agoNo. I didn't suggest that. Not even remotely. I am not aware of any such undertaking and did not state any opinion on the worthiness of such an undertaking. I was just a bit stunned by the sheer number of people that work in the cafeteria. I make no judgement here about those people, their abilities, working conditions, living conditions, or anything else except their quantity.
- seemslegit 7y agoI wonder if they can now help people who lost access to their gmail accounts because they wouldn't give google their phone number
- seemslegit 7y agoI'll take it as 'probably not'
- komali2 7y agoSucks but I'm guessing people don't think your comment was relevant to the topic.
- seemslegit 7y agoOh well, maybe when the cleaning staff unionizes
- remote_phone 7y agoI’m glad they were able to unionize but why should they deserve to have similar or same benefits as Google workers? Sorry to be blunt but they are cafeteria workers working for Bon Appetit. If I were Google I would just close all the cafeterias in order to avoid further precedent setting actions. The meals are going to get taxed by IRS anyway so might as well bite the bullet now and get rid of free food entirely.
- shantly 7y ago"Deserve" and "should" hasn't got shit to do with it. Are we going to start policing sales and contracts corporations make to ensure the value they deliver "deserves" the compensation they're receiving? You get what you can get. If they can get more, good for them.
- asdfasgasdgasdg 7y agoGoogle would be pretty unique among high tech companies and large companies in general if it didn't have cafeterias at all. I doubt they would close the cafeterias. If Compass is unable to negotiate a cost effective labor contract, the more likely outcome would be google switching to another provider. But that in itself doesn't seem very likely considering the optics, and the relatively small cost of this labor. But, for the sake of argument, can you imagine what the lunch rush hour would look like in downtown mountain view and Sunnyvale if Google didn't have cafeterias at all? It was already pretty bananas when I left the Bay Area three years ago. Google's headcount on the peninsula was much lower then. And they did have cafeterias. Now it would be totally insane.
- hindsightbias 7y agoOr it would be a renaissance for urban restaurateurs and workers, who could afford the city again. Some of these tech areas are surrounded by dead zones.
- asdfasgasdgasdg 7y agoIn an alternate reality where there was a bunch of unused land and commercial real estate for lease in MTV and Sunnyvale, and/or where their city councils were open to building more, I agree. However, that's not the world we live in, so the situation you describe would be an unlikely result.
- gbronner 7y agoExpect google to start "optimizing" the cafeteria soon enough.
- jedimastert 7y agoEmployees will go apeshit. Food is such a huge deal for the culture.
- novok 7y agoIf you work in a tech company, you'll quickly realize that the food is something everyone focuses on to a disproportionate degree. This guy knows what he is talking about.
- komali2 7y agoI know a QA ex Google engineer that refused to ever work for a company with a cafeteria again solely because he got tired of people complaining about food that was free. It annoyed him that much.
- shantly 7y agoI see the general principle guiding this and agree with it, but "free" food from an employer is just another form of comp and complaining about it's no more ungrateful than complaining about health benefits or salary. It's not like complaining about a Christmas gift or something.
- reaperducer 7y agoI have mixed feelings about unions, but I'm OK with this move. Cafeteria workers need unions. The maids who muck out hotel room toilets need unions. Coal miners who work in horrific conditions for little pay need unions. You know who doesn't need unions? Millionaire TV anchors. Millionaire movie studio execs and actors. Anyone who makes six figures, which includes a hell of a lot of union members. In those cases the unions need the members, not the other way 'round, and it leads to greed and corruption because all both sides can see is dollar signs. So, again. I think it's good that the caf workers got some protection. I'm still on the fence about computer programmers, though.
- chomp 7y agoAll workers can be abused regardless of their salary. Examples for programmers that come to mind: - Companies that require workers to enter arbitration and give up their right to sue. - Companies that force workers to give up IP generated in their free time (not using company resources) - Companies that require programmers to work 12 hour days, "crunch times", minimal paid leave (game dev industry, VFX industry comes to mind.) Unions collectively negotiate with employers to reduce or eliminate these abuses. Some unions have poor leadership, which is to be expected. Some companies have poor leadership. Not everyone is good at negotiating, which can create power imbalances on either end of the table. But on the whole, unions are a Good Thing, even for IT folk.
- notJim 7y agoA lot of people on HN are interested in a 30-hour work week. A strong union movement could get that done, as they have been working on in Germany: https://www.businessinsider.com/german-workers-can-now-work-a-28-hour-week-2018-2 https://www.businessinsider.com/german-workers-can-now-work-...
- vjktyu 7y agoWe need a stronger law: any employee should be able to choose how many hours or days per week to work AND work for any other company at the same time (NDA applies, but non compete bs doesn't). Execs do this all the time: they can be on boards in multiple companies, run other companies, while possessing material information about them all. The way I see it's working is the total comp negotiation goes as usual, but the employer isn't allowed to ask how much time the employee indends to work and whether one works for other companies. The salary and other comp is paid bi weekly as usual, but is pro rated to the number of hours or days worked. All the machinery is already in place: big corps have very detailed per minutes compensation for vacations, various on call duties and so on. This will be strictly better for the IRS, because more competition means more taxes, but much worse for the dividend seeking investors. Obviously, this will be a decade long legal battle with tens of millions in expenses, and it can't be done without a full time team of motivated and very expensive lawyers. However if 100k engineers spend 1k/year as membership fees, this organization will have a 100m/year budget and can keep courts busy forever.
- whatitdobooboo 7y agoDoes anyone have any good/neutral book recommendations on unionization?
- haecceity 7y agoCommunist manifesto?
- tehjoker 7y agoPeople will think you're joking but this is essentially what that world historic text is about and it makes its argumentation clearly: https://msuweb.montclair.edu/~lebelp/MarxEngelsTheCommunistManifesto1848.pdf https://msuweb.montclair.edu/~lebelp/MarxEngelsTheCommunistM... Start on page 14.
- whatitdobooboo 7y agololll I did think that they were joking
- tehjoker 7y agoUnions are a hot-fix to problems with capitalism, but they are also something greater: the seed of a more democratic society that should be nourished and grown.
- rorykoehler 7y agoI dunno why you are down voted. It seems that many people see the word communist and have an emotional reaction. If you take the time to read this masterpiece you will soon realise that Marx knew more about capitalism than most of us who live it.
- dqv 7y agoThere isn't anything really neutral to recommend. People are pretty adamant about "the right way". Start with ABCs of Socialism[0] and take a look at the texts they recommend. You'll have to come to your own conclusion about what you like and dislike about what it says. The problem with this stuff is that the left is extremely sectarian so I might have someone jumping down my throat for recommending something published by Jacobin. [0]:https://s3.jacobinmag.com/issues/jacobin-abcs.pdf https://s3.jacobinmag.com/issues/jacobin-abcs.pdf
- tehjoker 7y agoThis was a really great Twitter thread about how capitalism isn't really about meritocracy but about bargaining power and by implication how necessary unions are for workers to be treated humanely and paid more than the bare minimum for survival: https://twitter.com/ArashKolahi/status/1210332075787608065 https://twitter.com/ArashKolahi/status/1210332075787608065
- zelon88 7y agoI agree that unions were important, at one time. However technology is at a point where large enough companies can simply engineer around the human resources problem if they want to. So bringing a company like Google's feet to the fire will only make them want to cut you out of their supply chain. Your "bargaining power" is short term. Merely until Google can find another way to subvert you with technology. In the industrial revolution Unions had bargaining power because they offered a valuable service that you couldn't live without. Today there is no problem that technology can't solve with the right amount of funding.
- Apocryphon 7y agoYour last line writes the whole enterprise off, because politics and bureaucracy is a very real challenge. Google can automate away service workers in the same way they can fix their product organization issues, reduce fragmentation of Android, improve their hardware offerings, stop the endless churn of their products ending up in the Google Graveyard, etc. That is, you can say they can do anything with their resources, but it’s a paper tiger because the organization simply does not have the will nor interest to engage in such efforts, not when they have other priorities they’re focused on. So perhaps they’ll simply pay their workers.
- zelon88 7y agoThat's why Google is alphabet now. So they can absorb and develop different liabilities at once. Android isn't broken because Google doesn't care. It's broken because the team is fatigued. They reached their max potential. It will take a new team with new ideas for significant iteration. You can't add a junior dev to the android team and expect massive improvements anymore. That being said, there isn't a lot of low hanging fruit left in android. But the cafeteria, I'm sure, has a long way to go and a lot that could be reduced. IF the costs continue to rise, that is.
- motohagiography 7y agoThe consequence of this means rights for union organizers to be on the job sites and access to other workers. There is a thin edge of the wedge strategy at play here. It's not just the cafeteria workers. The opposition I have to unions at companies like Google is that the companies themselves are too politically powerful to have staff who in effect must to behave criminally to be terminated. When you look at the impact of unions in law enforcement and national security, they are almost universally recognized as the main enabler for the social problems bad individuals in these fields cause. The amount of social harm a malicious Google (twitter, facebook, reddit, pornhub, etc) employee can cause is astronomical and the main thing keeping the worst %10 in check is the likelihood of losing their job. Literally thousands of people who can divert or sabotage the lives of others without accountability. They already have enough privacy and political problems, but I would predict unionization spreading to their tech workforce would trigger divestment and a general market reduction of risk exposure to their businesses. These companies are different, and a political artifact of the industrial revolution will have disproportionate unintended consequences.
- wrsh07 7y agoI'm much more concerned about executive accountability than I am about individual employee accountability at a company with as much political power as, say, Google. Unions are a way of balancing executive power. (I don't think they're a panacea though! All I hope for in this case is that it is able to improve the lives and working conditions of Google's cafeteria workers)
- motohagiography 7y agoThere are at least 10x the number of employees to executives who have access to your email contents and browsing history. Using the worst %3 of individuals as a baseline, the executives are the people you have the very least to worry about.
- jjeaff 7y agoAccess to individual personal data is only one small point of power. Billions of dollars for lobbying and the ability to set policy and make sweeping changes is a much larger power.
- mark_l_watson 7y agoGood for them. I mostly ate at their Mexican cafe and Authentic Asian Cafe (I forget the exact name), but sampled many others. The cafeteria workers would remember me, be friendly and helpful, and certainly deserve to make a good living. I used to be ambivalent about labor unions but in modern times when corporations act as all powerful gods, hell yes, unionize.