4 ms·

Banking does have some strong regulations around it (with good reason, IMHO) but I can corroborate the author's intuition about established company's disdain fo

Banking does have some strong regulations around it (with good reason, IMHO) but I can corroborate the author's intuition about established company's disdain for self-service customer interactions. I worked on a product a few years ago that would have turned our sales-led product into a turn-key hosted solution - just supply your credit-card and go. It was nearing deployment with 7 figures spent on development when the sales team got wind of it and immediately killed it. Although I believe that the product would have been successful and brought in more money to the company as a whole, it would have gutted the performance bonuses for the sales team by bypassing a whole department. This could not be allowed to go live. That is why real innovation tends to come from newer, smaller companies.

swagasaurus-rex 7y ago
This sort of behavior is why people hate the man.
- shawnz 7y ago
  By "the man", do you mean any human with an established life and career that they are willing to defend in spite of what's best for their employer?
  - wayoutthere 7y ago
    Which is why collective bargaining and unions make life better for everyone in the long run.
    - barry-cotter 7y ago
      Those are two different things, with different effects. Unions don’t make things better for everyone except their members in the long run, or the short run. They make things better for their members. Unions are economically labour cartels. Like any other cartel they don’t make the economic pie bigger they make sure their members get more pie. Pie either goes to consumers in the form of lower prices, owners in higher profits or workers on higher wages. There’s no free lunch. Collective bargaining can actually make things better by reducing labor unrest and allowing for industry wide coordination such as greater investment in training or German style Kurzarbeit during periods of low demand, where more people keep their jobs but their hours are cut.
      - pbhjpbhj 7y ago
        I'm going to guess union action has no effect on price relative to same-country business operations. Market affects price. Unions often are negotiating to not get lower wages: owner has bumper year, offers below inflation pay deal ... unions can say that is not good enough. Without unions workers have no leverage, owners and politicians have all the power. Or, could someone give examples of price increases due to unionisation [where no-one was taking a profit]? Or can you give examples
      - BlueTemplar 7y ago
        You realize that we have the unions to thank for most of the employee-protecting laws, right ? Who do you think is doing the collective bargaining in question, hmm ?
      - wayoutthere 7y ago
        > Like any other cartel they don’t make the economic pie bigger they make sure their members get more pie. Pie either goes to consumers in the form of lower prices, owners in higher profits or workers on higher wages. I agree with you completely, except owners currently take a disproportionate slice of the pie. That is the cause of wealth inequality -- the power of unions to demand a bigger slice of the pie ultimately impacts the entire economy. Somewhat paradoxically, unions have much more of an interest in the long-term survival of the company than shareholders, who often take a short-term view of profitability. This ultimately leads to better decision-making.
    - Dylan16807 7y ago
      Depends on what the union is doing. A healthy severance package is good for employment stability. Preventing jobs from ever going away hurts everyone.
    - ByzantineO6 7y ago
      "Which is why collective bargaining and unions make life better for everyone in the long run." When a labor cartel extorts above-market wages [that they ARE above-market is proved by the ferocious denunciation and violence against "scabs"(people willing to work for less than the cartel is demanding)], the money is not "liberated" from the "capitalist oppressor" existing only between the pages of "Das Kapital", but ultimately from the consumer, who responds. "In the long run" "everyone" stopped buying overpriced low quality UAW crap. And THAT,Comrades, is why we must liquidate the Kulaks! How DARE they?!
  - pjc50 7y ago
    In this case it's not just their employer but other employees and customers. It's a negative-sum kind of action to retain yourself as a middleman.
WrtCdEvrydy 7y ago
This would have probably succeeded it if you had named it a sales suite that 'allowed sales people to allow customers to interactively choose the correct products'
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]

swagasaurus-rex 7y ago

This sort of behavior is why people hate the man.

shawnz 7y ago
By "the man", do you mean any human with an established life and career that they are willing to defend in spite of what's best for their employer?
- wayoutthere 7y ago
  Which is why collective bargaining and unions make life better for everyone in the long run.
  - barry-cotter 7y ago
    Those are two different things, with different effects. Unions don’t make things better for everyone except their members in the long run, or the short run. They make things better for their members. Unions are economically labour cartels. Like any other cartel they don’t make the economic pie bigger they make sure their members get more pie. Pie either goes to consumers in the form of lower prices, owners in higher profits or workers on higher wages. There’s no free lunch. Collective bargaining can actually make things better by reducing labor unrest and allowing for industry wide coordination such as greater investment in training or German style Kurzarbeit during periods of low demand, where more people keep their jobs but their hours are cut.
    - pbhjpbhj 7y ago
      I'm going to guess union action has no effect on price relative to same-country business operations. Market affects price. Unions often are negotiating to not get lower wages: owner has bumper year, offers below inflation pay deal ... unions can say that is not good enough. Without unions workers have no leverage, owners and politicians have all the power. Or, could someone give examples of price increases due to unionisation [where no-one was taking a profit]? Or can you give examples
    - BlueTemplar 7y ago
      You realize that we have the unions to thank for most of the employee-protecting laws, right ? Who do you think is doing the collective bargaining in question, hmm ?
    - wayoutthere 7y ago
      > Like any other cartel they don’t make the economic pie bigger they make sure their members get more pie. Pie either goes to consumers in the form of lower prices, owners in higher profits or workers on higher wages. I agree with you completely, except owners currently take a disproportionate slice of the pie. That is the cause of wealth inequality -- the power of unions to demand a bigger slice of the pie ultimately impacts the entire economy. Somewhat paradoxically, unions have much more of an interest in the long-term survival of the company than shareholders, who often take a short-term view of profitability. This ultimately leads to better decision-making.
  - Dylan16807 7y ago
    Depends on what the union is doing. A healthy severance package is good for employment stability. Preventing jobs from ever going away hurts everyone.
  - ByzantineO6 7y ago
    "Which is why collective bargaining and unions make life better for everyone in the long run." When a labor cartel extorts above-market wages [that they ARE above-market is proved by the ferocious denunciation and violence against "scabs"(people willing to work for less than the cartel is demanding)], the money is not "liberated" from the "capitalist oppressor" existing only between the pages of "Das Kapital", but ultimately from the consumer, who responds. "In the long run" "everyone" stopped buying overpriced low quality UAW crap. And THAT,Comrades, is why we must liquidate the Kulaks! How DARE they?!
- pjc50 7y ago
  In this case it's not just their employer but other employees and customers. It's a negative-sum kind of action to retain yourself as a middleman.

WrtCdEvrydy 7y ago

This would have probably succeeded it if you had named it a sales suite that 'allowed sales people to allow customers to interactively choose the correct products'

deleted 7y ago

[deleted]