5 ms·

> Unions, in my experience, exist to help keep mediocre, unmotivated employees employed. One has no incentive to excel, as promotions are based on years "served

> Unions, in my experience, exist to help keep mediocre, unmotivated employees employed. One has no incentive to excel, as promotions are based on years "served", much like prison. There is nothing inherent in unions that make them operate like that.

joncrane 7y ago
It's something inherent in human nature, unfortunately.
- jrochkind1 7y ago
  There are ALL SORTS of inefficiencies and insanity and laziness and treating people like garbage most of us have experienced at non-union workplaces, of course. That union shops may seem to be subject to extra risks of of certain types of nonsense doesn't mean they aren't a win overall. But yeah, to be honest, some people with unions find they need to struggle with union leadership over some things. It's generally a lot better overall than struggling with your boss.
- Mangalor 7y ago
  A union is simply an agreement between workers and management. Agreements can be modified to prevent such faults when both parties enter in good faith.
zip1234 7y ago
I had a uncle that was a bricklayer and moved somewhere that bricklayers were in demand so that he could get paid more. He was not a union member. When the union found out he was doing the same work for slightly less, they sent some people over to threaten his life if he didn't join union or leave. He left.
- WilliamEdward 7y ago
  What's with the anecdotes on this thread? The OP was trying to make substantive statements about unions in general and why anecdotes are ineffective in describing them, and your counter was to provide yet another anecdote?
  - gacklesmom 7y ago
    Anti-union astroturfing is to be expected in a thread like this. Other tech companies are terrified of something similar happening, and are going all-out with misinformation. The best thing you can do is upvote factual information.
    - bluGill 7y ago
      The same can be seen for pro-union astroturfing.
- SkyBelow 7y ago
  There are many businesses that, if I were to try to undercut them, would send tax payer paid police to harm me. They wouldn't even give so much as a warning before I would find myself significantly harmed and likely enslaved for a number of years. Should we do away with businesses because of these bad actors?
- fzeroracer 7y ago
  I had a father that worked as a fisherman for a small company which was not union. He ended up dying because the owners didn't properly inspect the boat and it capsized because of a fatal flaw in the design, killing everyone on board. Using your same argument, we should abolish all corporations, correct? Since a poorly ran corporation can quite literally kill people due to negligence. I find it honestly absurd that people attribute all of these negative qualities to unions and yet are not willing to do the exact same thing to the same corporate behavior which has zero checks or balances.
  - lawnchair_larry 7y ago
    Because your issue is better solved by regulations.
  - ThrowawayR2 7y ago
    Corporations don't pretend to be on the workers' side; unions do.
    - bo0tzz 7y ago
      Corporations absolutely do pretend to be on the workers' side.
- namewasmypw 7y ago
  So your uncle was a scab? Congratulations.
- namesmypw 7y ago
  So your uncle was a scab? Congratulations.
- bobloblaw45 7y ago
  I had a relative that many suspected was murdered way back in the day when my city was having one of its bridges built. Basically there was a strike going on and he was a scab.
- SkyBelow 7y ago
  I guess I should have mentioned the entire process in my previous comment instead of pointing out the conclusion. Businesses use lobbyist to get laws to entrench themselves in their own monopolies. If I attempt to disrupt this business by avoiding their regulatory capture, police are sent to punish me. Depending upon which laws I violate, I can be sent to jail and end up with years in prison. Prison, where you are kept in stylized cages and your ever waking moment is controlled by others. That is a treatment that I do not see any significant difference from treatment that would be labeled as slavery. I know people this has happened to, and I don't see why people treat it as being somehow justified just because the business went through the process of lobbying (and political donations which only seem different than bribery in name only). And this is ignoring the history of business outright murdering people for protesting for workers' rights.
Mirioron 7y ago
There is nothing inherent that makes dictatorships violent. Yet they are. But maybe there is something inherent that makes them violent after all? It's simply not obvious at a glance that they're going to be violent. I'm not sure that there's nothing inherent in unions that makes them promote mediocrity. There could be - the fact that unions add more layers to the bureaucracy and slow things down could very well have the effect of promoting mediocrity. Generally, if you want people to do the best work, then the people need to be motivated and they need to have as little friction as possible. Unions add friction. In a company where things work, unions would probably add friction and cause more mediocrity. Note that I'm not saying that unions necessarily cause this, but I am saying that they might be a cause for it. Claiming otherwise with no supporting arguments isn't convincing.
- linuxftw 7y ago
  > There is nothing inherent that makes dictatorships violent. Yet they are. They are violent in the same way Democracies are violent. If you break some arbitrary rule, we put you in a cage. If you resist, you die.
- erikpukinskis 7y ago
  Violence is inherent in statehood, it’s not specific to dictatorships.
rpiguy 7y ago
Unions operate financially like churches. They depend on the dues (tithes) paid by their membership. The more members you have, the more influence and power you have. This incentivizes unions to never voluntarily reduce their numbers. The more mediocre the employees, the more protection they need from the union, and thus the more power the union has over the employee population. The ideal union employee to a union boss, based on how unions are funded and run in the US, is a minimally competent drone that regularly pays dues. Unions also consistently advocate credentialism over performance. If an employer wants to improve performance the union will fight any outcome based benchmarks, and will instead push for everyone to be educated and certified. In truth it would be best for the business to do both, educate and measure outcomes. What is more important, that every teacher in the US have a masters degree, or that every teacher be good at teaching. The union will always advocate for the former. I like unions, particularly in the private sector. I wish they operated differently and were more pro-active in cultivating skill (like old school guilds) and less about body count.
- Mangalor 7y ago
  We should advocate union reform rather than ditching them entirely then.

joncrane 7y ago

It's something inherent in human nature, unfortunately.

jrochkind1 7y ago
There are ALL SORTS of inefficiencies and insanity and laziness and treating people like garbage most of us have experienced at non-union workplaces, of course. That union shops may seem to be subject to extra risks of of certain types of nonsense doesn't mean they aren't a win overall. But yeah, to be honest, some people with unions find they need to struggle with union leadership over some things. It's generally a lot better overall than struggling with your boss.
Mangalor 7y ago
A union is simply an agreement between workers and management. Agreements can be modified to prevent such faults when both parties enter in good faith.

zip1234 7y ago

I had a uncle that was a bricklayer and moved somewhere that bricklayers were in demand so that he could get paid more. He was not a union member. When the union found out he was doing the same work for slightly less, they sent some people over to threaten his life if he didn't join union or leave. He left.

WilliamEdward 7y ago
What's with the anecdotes on this thread? The OP was trying to make substantive statements about unions in general and why anecdotes are ineffective in describing them, and your counter was to provide yet another anecdote?
- gacklesmom 7y ago
  Anti-union astroturfing is to be expected in a thread like this. Other tech companies are terrified of something similar happening, and are going all-out with misinformation. The best thing you can do is upvote factual information.
  - bluGill 7y ago
    The same can be seen for pro-union astroturfing.
SkyBelow 7y ago
There are many businesses that, if I were to try to undercut them, would send tax payer paid police to harm me. They wouldn't even give so much as a warning before I would find myself significantly harmed and likely enslaved for a number of years. Should we do away with businesses because of these bad actors?
fzeroracer 7y ago
I had a father that worked as a fisherman for a small company which was not union. He ended up dying because the owners didn't properly inspect the boat and it capsized because of a fatal flaw in the design, killing everyone on board. Using your same argument, we should abolish all corporations, correct? Since a poorly ran corporation can quite literally kill people due to negligence. I find it honestly absurd that people attribute all of these negative qualities to unions and yet are not willing to do the exact same thing to the same corporate behavior which has zero checks or balances.
- lawnchair_larry 7y ago
  Because your issue is better solved by regulations.
- ThrowawayR2 7y ago
  Corporations don't pretend to be on the workers' side; unions do.
  - bo0tzz 7y ago
    Corporations absolutely do pretend to be on the workers' side.
namewasmypw 7y ago
So your uncle was a scab? Congratulations.
namesmypw 7y ago
So your uncle was a scab? Congratulations.
bobloblaw45 7y ago
I had a relative that many suspected was murdered way back in the day when my city was having one of its bridges built. Basically there was a strike going on and he was a scab.
SkyBelow 7y ago
I guess I should have mentioned the entire process in my previous comment instead of pointing out the conclusion. Businesses use lobbyist to get laws to entrench themselves in their own monopolies. If I attempt to disrupt this business by avoiding their regulatory capture, police are sent to punish me. Depending upon which laws I violate, I can be sent to jail and end up with years in prison. Prison, where you are kept in stylized cages and your ever waking moment is controlled by others. That is a treatment that I do not see any significant difference from treatment that would be labeled as slavery. I know people this has happened to, and I don't see why people treat it as being somehow justified just because the business went through the process of lobbying (and political donations which only seem different than bribery in name only). And this is ignoring the history of business outright murdering people for protesting for workers' rights.

Mirioron 7y ago

There is nothing inherent that makes dictatorships violent. Yet they are. But maybe there is something inherent that makes them violent after all? It's simply not obvious at a glance that they're going to be violent. I'm not sure that there's nothing inherent in unions that makes them promote mediocrity. There could be - the fact that unions add more layers to the bureaucracy and slow things down could very well have the effect of promoting mediocrity. Generally, if you want people to do the best work, then the people need to be motivated and they need to have as little friction as possible. Unions add friction. In a company where things work, unions would probably add friction and cause more mediocrity. Note that I'm not saying that unions necessarily cause this, but I am saying that they might be a cause for it. Claiming otherwise with no supporting arguments isn't convincing.

linuxftw 7y ago
> There is nothing inherent that makes dictatorships violent. Yet they are. They are violent in the same way Democracies are violent. If you break some arbitrary rule, we put you in a cage. If you resist, you die.
erikpukinskis 7y ago
Violence is inherent in statehood, it’s not specific to dictatorships.

rpiguy 7y ago

Unions operate financially like churches. They depend on the dues (tithes) paid by their membership. The more members you have, the more influence and power you have. This incentivizes unions to never voluntarily reduce their numbers. The more mediocre the employees, the more protection they need from the union, and thus the more power the union has over the employee population. The ideal union employee to a union boss, based on how unions are funded and run in the US, is a minimally competent drone that regularly pays dues. Unions also consistently advocate credentialism over performance. If an employer wants to improve performance the union will fight any outcome based benchmarks, and will instead push for everyone to be educated and certified. In truth it would be best for the business to do both, educate and measure outcomes. What is more important, that every teacher in the US have a masters degree, or that every teacher be good at teaching. The union will always advocate for the former. I like unions, particularly in the private sector. I wish they operated differently and were more pro-active in cultivating skill (like old school guilds) and less about body count.

Mangalor 7y ago
We should advocate union reform rather than ditching them entirely then.