12 ms·

Coming from a public accounting background, I’ve seen a variety of businesses. Somewhat obviously, I’ve seen some be successful with unions and others be succes

Coming from a public accounting background, I’ve seen a variety of businesses. Somewhat obviously, I’ve seen some be successful with unions and others be successful without, which makes sense, as unions are neither inherently good nor bad. They are a tool which can change the power dynamic and incentive structure of workers and employers throughout an organization, but there is nothing inherent about having a union that guarantees ineffective operations, just as the absence of a union does not indicate that employees are getting shafted. Generally speaking for well run, ethical companies, whose management actively try to do the right thing, unions add unnecessary redundancy and bureaucracy. When there is a sense of trust between employer and employee, communication flows between employees and managers, employee working conditions are safe and healthy, and compensation is reasonably fair. For companies that are shady and treat employees poorly, unions help enforce structured communication and transparency between managers and employees. Usually I look for symptoms of bad management when hearing about employees who want to unionize. In tech, we can generally assume reasonable working conditions and pay, so Kickstarter unionizing screams “toxic management” for me, personally. I haven’t heard management’s defense, but ultimately the burden is on management to convince a majority of its employees that they don’t need a union. Clearly they haven’t, and given how easy it is to appease developers, this is particularly damning.

metalliqaz 7y ago
The (original) article only mentioned one grievance, that Kickstarter removed a "punch nazis" project and the employees revolted. Honestly it sounds like they had it pretty good.
- anarchodev 7y ago
  Having management that's not sympathetic to Nazis is a pretty low bar IMO, but if that was the only grievance I doubt it would have been possible to convince a majority of the workforce to unionize over this.
  - toasterlovin 7y ago
    Being against advocating violence against a group is not the same thing as agreeing with that group. This is basic logic.
    - anarchodev 7y ago
      That's correct. Simply disagreeing with Nazis is ineffectual and is very common among those with sympathies toward them as a shield from criticism. I'd prefer to work with people who are actively opposed to them. Sorry if that wasn't clear somehow.
      - whatshisface 7y ago
        Well, if everybody disagreed with them there wouldn't be any, so maybe that's enough.
        anarchodev 7y ago
        How would people disagreeing with Nazis get rid of them? Does that work with anything else?
        whatshisface 7y ago
        If everyone disagreed with them, they wouldn't get any new recruits and it would die out. Technically, if everybody disagreed with them then they would disagree with themselves and quit. But more realistically, if people disagree with them they will stew forever in political impotence.
        anarchodev 7y ago
        So in your best-case scenario, all we have to do is wait for the current nazis (many of whom are mid-20's or 30's) to pass away? And I guess until then, just deal with the pain and loss they create? I hope you can understand why that doesn't appeal to me. To say nothing of the reality of the situation, which is that they're not dying out -- they're actively recruiting and growing their ranks.
- naiveprogrammer 7y ago
  "play stupid games win stupid prizes"
spa3thyb 7y ago
I'm with you on the theory, up until your last statements - the vote to unionize was 46 to 37; 55% in favor with no breakdown in the roles means we can't be sure the dissenting voice wasn't the development staff. It could be the support and community management roles (or any other 'soft skill' role which is less scalable and no less valuable but perceived as more easily replaced) carried the vote.
- HeroOfAges 7y ago
  "...support and community management roles..." are less scalable? Does this mean companies are finding it more difficult to fill community management roles than developer roles? Also, what do you mean by "no less valuable"? I don't think you can have a company who's product is software without developers. You do not, however need community managers. You make an interesting point: I do wonder if those in "soft skill" roles perceive their roles as equally valuable as software developers. I personally do not.
  - lexs 7y ago
    Kickstarters product is not software though, it's a platform, so support and community management probably does play a fairly substantial role.
    - HeroOfAges 7y ago
      Hmm... If I worked as customer support at Tesla, I would not expect to be compensated, or frankly valued the same as say an electrical engineer at Tesla. And really, isn't community management just another word for customer support?
      - deleted 7y ago
        [deleted]
      - lexs 7y ago
        I never said they should be compensated the same but saying they are not needed or should not be valued seems plain wrong to me.
asdfasgasdgasdg 7y ago
It's also possible that some organizations have a high concentration of folks who have a particular viewpoint on unions, regardless of whether they're being treated poorly or not. For example, Vox's newsroom unionized, even though I would suppose that they are likely treated better than most journalists -- at least to the extent the business' economics allow. I'm not saying this is necessarily the case with Kickstarter, just that this strikes me as possible. I'm also not trying to imply any judgment for or against the move.
- thu2111 7y ago
  If it helps, I'll say it for you. From the article: But in 2018, a heated disagreement broke out between employees and management about whether to leave a project called “Always Punch Nazis” on the platform, according to reporting in Slate. When Breitbart said the project violated Kickstarter’s terms of service by inciting violence, management initially planned to remove the project, but then reversed its decision after protest from employees. Following the controversy, employees announced their intentions to unionize with OPEIU Local 153 in March 2019. If this story is accurate Kickstarter employees aren't unionising because of bad treatment by management but because management wanted to stop them badly treating other people. If this story isn't accurate then Kickstarter and this new union need to loudly sue Vox right now because this story makes them look like hateful extremists. This is especially true because Kickstarter management gave in to their employees demands. Now they're unionising anyway. For what? To protect the right for the hard left to encourage violent extremism against their political opponents? What kind of union is this? In case anyone is in any doubt what "punching Nazis" means the project is here: https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/282505033/always-punch-nazis https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/282505033/always-punch-... It says very explicitly their definition of "Nazi" includes anyone with "anti-immigrant ideologies" or really anyone who isn't woke. Kickstarter's management look like utter fools. How did they not crush this right at the start? They have every right to fire every single one of their employees who objected to the original decision.
  - webXL 7y ago
    Took a while to find it all the way down in that image of the inside cover, but I can't see how that isn't promoting violence against anyone considered to be alt-right or far-right. Do they have to accept "Always Punch Antifa" projects now?
pathseeker 7y ago
>Somewhat obviously, I’ve seen some be successful with unions and others be successful without From the company perspective maybe, but I've not seen a union in the US that successfully rewards high performing employees over mediocre lifers. Overachievers end up leaving and you're left with no innovation. Do you have any examples of unions that have solved this problem?
- tikhonj 7y ago
  Aren't a lot of professional sports leagues unionized? I know that NBA players have a union, and top players definitely get rewarded well.
  - bluGill 7y ago
    When most sports unions started professional players were not well paid. In the 1950s many of the best baseball players didn't play for professional teams because a local hardware store in some small town offered them better wages if they would work during the day and play on the town team on weekends!
  - ticmasta 7y ago
    >> I know that NBA players have a union, and top players definitely get rewarded well. relative to what? the top players have always gotten big paydays, and the economics suggest without a union they would get paid even more. They are effectively subsidizing mid and lower tier players.
- lexs 7y ago
  NBA players association, actors guild, writers guild etc are famous examples of "rewarding high performing employees"
  - evunveot 7y ago
    I'd argue those are more like cartels than unions.
  - thefreeman 7y ago
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
Ididntdothis 7y ago
I would think that in well run ethical companies the relationship with unions would also be harmonious. That’s at least how it works in Germany with unions like IG Metall. Seems to me that problems mostly arise when management becomes unreasonable.
- toasterlovin 7y ago
  Or when the union leadership becomes unreasonable.
  - Ididntdothis 7y ago
    From what I have seen it’s mostly management that gets greedy first.
    - bluGill 7y ago
      Who was first doesn't change the fact that unions are sometimes unreasonable. Though I have to say most companies I've seen with evil unions have management that deserves the worst a union can do. I've seen cases of good management with bad unions harming everybody (except the union leaders), but they are generally rare.
      - K0SM0S 7y ago
        You guys should come see how it's done in France, where it's appaling to witness all the bad faith and disingenuosity from both sides — because the regulation is so tight that both sides feel righteous and untouchable, so to speak. The truth is that ~7% of French workers were unionized last I checked — a dysmal failure for these associations, an all-time low that's been true for decades. And yet they take the right to block the whole country on issue X or Y because, well, they're official unions protected by the law. They are systemically funded by regulation, like social security or any other de facto 'tax'. I would generally claim that in very different ways, the French and Americans are just as bad at unions — totally fails the point and disturbs (destroys, even) much more than it creates. I've heard great things about the German approach, but I can't substantiate first-hand. It's portrayed as a great synergy between management and unions to increase the value of the company as a whole while redistributing wealth (whether money, time, privileges...) in a fair manner. It's no rocket science either to treat everyone well, which tells you how uncooperative human beings can become when circle-jerking too hard (we are biologically, socially very protective of "our own" and very hostile to "others", the question being where each of us puts the limit).
zpallin 7y ago
> Generally speaking for well run, ethical companies, whose management actively try to do the right thing, unions add unnecessary redundancy and bureaucracy. The only type of "well run, ethical companies" where unions are redundant are worker-owned cooperatives. Otherwise, an employer, regardless of how ethical they are, can never replicate the most critical aspect of unions: collective bargaining rights. Sure, an employer can essentially just implement the kind of benefits that would be negotiated by a union, but it does not replace the fact that until a union exists employees have essentially no means to collectively demand changes to compensation and working conditions unless they unionize.
- Camas 7y ago
  An employee can at any time choose to work somewhere else.
  - zpallin 7y ago
    Indeed. They can also choose to unionize.
    - Camas 7y ago
      Sure, it's just not the only way like you implied.
      - zpallin 7y ago
        What I "implied" was: 1. union benefits are redundant in worker owned-cooperative, not in typical corporations 2. and that's because corporate employers cannot emulate collective bargaining rights (but co-ops can) Please, I'd really like you to explain to me how how "an employee can at any time choose to work somewhere else" emulates collective bargaining rights.
- wpietri 7y ago
  That's becoming my take as well. I think the tech industry was, at least for a while, an exception here. Developers were so hard to get and retain that the power of individual workers did a lot to keep things sane. But I think that power is, for a variety of reasons, waning. If we want to keep our unusually good working conditions, and especially if we want to make sure our colleagues enjoy them as well, then I think collective action is going to become more and more necessary. (For those wondering why, a key part is the intrinsic size difference. It's much easier to lose one employee than to lose your full-time job. This inherent power imbalance is easily exploited.) For the next thing I start, I've been looking into worker- and member-owned co-op structures. It turns out some of my favorite businesses are run that way, from my local bakery (Arizmendi) to my favorite outdoor goods company, REI. My explorations are early yet, but I'm seeing a lot to be optimistic about. I think it's possible to combine the discipline of a value-for-money business with the mission orientation of a not-for-profit. For example, imagine if WhatsApp had been a worker- or member-owned co-op. If instead of selling to Facebook, they'd just kept making the thing they thought the world needed. If this resonates with people, feel free to contact me on email or Twitter. Maybe we can get a mailing list together for further discussion.
ksr_throwaway 7y ago
> In tech, we can generally assume reasonable working conditions and pay, so Kickstarter unionizing screams “toxic management” for me, personally. I can confirm that "toxic management" is the only way to describe the situation when this union drive began. Source: I work at Kickstarter
- thu2111 7y ago
  Is the article's description of why the union was created accurate?
  - ksr_throwaway 7y ago
    Yes it's accurate, though the "Always Punch Nazis" controversy was just the tip of the iceberg. Employees were being treated like enemies by some in upper management. Edit: I've been rate limited by HN mods (thanks!), so not replying on this account anymore. All the best!
    - thu2111 7y ago
      The article is ambiguous, but I guess those organising the union were taking the side of leaving the project up? Or is the union demanding total freedom of speech in the terms of service? I'm guessing not. Doesn't that bother you, at least a little bit? How can whether or not to leave up "always punch nazis" be the union's signature issue? Unions are meant to fight for the common man against the elites. alwayspunchnazis.com has a cartoon of the US President being punched in the face at the top of it, and every article on that website calls the Republicans Nazis. Given how many ordinary working class Americans voted for Trump, painting them all as Nazis and then insisting that such a fundraise remains live would seem to be the opposite of what unions historically stood for.
      - xkemp 7y ago
        You seem quite obsessed with protecting Nazis from satire. I thought the US right was really into free speech?
cowpig 7y ago
Honestly, I really want tech workers to unionize and push for companies to install ethics committees. Particularly at Facebook and Google -- tech workers should unionize there not because they need better work conditions but because otherwise all business decisions are in the hands of executives for whom unethical or sociopathic behaviour is often an advantage.
marknutter 7y ago
They're unionizing because they're politically likeminded. There's absolutely no other logical reason why they would do it.
tensor 7y ago
> Clearly they haven’t, and given how easy it is to appease developers, this is particularly damning. In my experience, developers are probably among the hardest to appease. It's probably a tie between developers and sales. Both groups are primarily money driven and keen to negotiate, but developers also feel entitled to influence or control other aspects of the business based on their personal idea of morality (e.g. developers are not inclusive of the opinions of other groups of employees).
lawnchair_larry 7y ago
I don’t think there is much that management can do in this case. What you say is true where unions have historically shown up. But these times are different. Like most people pushing an agenda and participating in twitter outrage mobs, I think this is ideologically driven, and the employees have a very limited understanding of how unions work and when they are needed. It’s essentially a meme.
wirrbel 7y ago
You may think you can do without a union if business is good and management OK. When shit hits the fan, that is when you'll learn that you need them. I work in a German unionized company and I think unions can be quite well-aligned with workers and business interest. IIRC certain aspects of US law make unions be the way they are in the US on purpose to lower their acceptance among employees. For example work councils which are commonly established in unionized companies aren't allowed in the US iirc, they can be a nice alternative from going all in into unionizing, a democratic representation of all employees.

metalliqaz 7y ago

The (original) article only mentioned one grievance, that Kickstarter removed a "punch nazis" project and the employees revolted. Honestly it sounds like they had it pretty good.

anarchodev 7y ago
Having management that's not sympathetic to Nazis is a pretty low bar IMO, but if that was the only grievance I doubt it would have been possible to convince a majority of the workforce to unionize over this.
- toasterlovin 7y ago
  Being against advocating violence against a group is not the same thing as agreeing with that group. This is basic logic.
  - anarchodev 7y ago
    That's correct. Simply disagreeing with Nazis is ineffectual and is very common among those with sympathies toward them as a shield from criticism. I'd prefer to work with people who are actively opposed to them. Sorry if that wasn't clear somehow.
    - whatshisface 7y ago
      Well, if everybody disagreed with them there wouldn't be any, so maybe that's enough.
      - anarchodev 7y ago
        How would people disagreeing with Nazis get rid of them? Does that work with anything else?
        whatshisface 7y ago
        If everyone disagreed with them, they wouldn't get any new recruits and it would die out. Technically, if everybody disagreed with them then they would disagree with themselves and quit. But more realistically, if people disagree with them they will stew forever in political impotence.
        anarchodev 7y ago
        So in your best-case scenario, all we have to do is wait for the current nazis (many of whom are mid-20's or 30's) to pass away? And I guess until then, just deal with the pain and loss they create? I hope you can understand why that doesn't appeal to me. To say nothing of the reality of the situation, which is that they're not dying out -- they're actively recruiting and growing their ranks.
naiveprogrammer 7y ago
"play stupid games win stupid prizes"

spa3thyb 7y ago

I'm with you on the theory, up until your last statements - the vote to unionize was 46 to 37; 55% in favor with no breakdown in the roles means we can't be sure the dissenting voice wasn't the development staff. It could be the support and community management roles (or any other 'soft skill' role which is less scalable and no less valuable but perceived as more easily replaced) carried the vote.

HeroOfAges 7y ago
"...support and community management roles..." are less scalable? Does this mean companies are finding it more difficult to fill community management roles than developer roles? Also, what do you mean by "no less valuable"? I don't think you can have a company who's product is software without developers. You do not, however need community managers. You make an interesting point: I do wonder if those in "soft skill" roles perceive their roles as equally valuable as software developers. I personally do not.
- lexs 7y ago
  Kickstarters product is not software though, it's a platform, so support and community management probably does play a fairly substantial role.
  - HeroOfAges 7y ago
    Hmm... If I worked as customer support at Tesla, I would not expect to be compensated, or frankly valued the same as say an electrical engineer at Tesla. And really, isn't community management just another word for customer support?
    - deleted 7y ago
      [deleted]
    - lexs 7y ago
      I never said they should be compensated the same but saying they are not needed or should not be valued seems plain wrong to me.

asdfasgasdgasdg 7y ago

It's also possible that some organizations have a high concentration of folks who have a particular viewpoint on unions, regardless of whether they're being treated poorly or not. For example, Vox's newsroom unionized, even though I would suppose that they are likely treated better than most journalists -- at least to the extent the business' economics allow. I'm not saying this is necessarily the case with Kickstarter, just that this strikes me as possible. I'm also not trying to imply any judgment for or against the move.

thu2111 7y ago
If it helps, I'll say it for you. From the article: But in 2018, a heated disagreement broke out between employees and management about whether to leave a project called “Always Punch Nazis” on the platform, according to reporting in Slate. When Breitbart said the project violated Kickstarter’s terms of service by inciting violence, management initially planned to remove the project, but then reversed its decision after protest from employees. Following the controversy, employees announced their intentions to unionize with OPEIU Local 153 in March 2019. If this story is accurate Kickstarter employees aren't unionising because of bad treatment by management but because management wanted to stop them badly treating other people. If this story isn't accurate then Kickstarter and this new union need to loudly sue Vox right now because this story makes them look like hateful extremists. This is especially true because Kickstarter management gave in to their employees demands. Now they're unionising anyway. For what? To protect the right for the hard left to encourage violent extremism against their political opponents? What kind of union is this? In case anyone is in any doubt what "punching Nazis" means the project is here: https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/282505033/always-punch-nazis https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/282505033/always-punch-... It says very explicitly their definition of "Nazi" includes anyone with "anti-immigrant ideologies" or really anyone who isn't woke. Kickstarter's management look like utter fools. How did they not crush this right at the start? They have every right to fire every single one of their employees who objected to the original decision.
- webXL 7y ago
  Took a while to find it all the way down in that image of the inside cover, but I can't see how that isn't promoting violence against anyone considered to be alt-right or far-right. Do they have to accept "Always Punch Antifa" projects now?

pathseeker 7y ago

>Somewhat obviously, I’ve seen some be successful with unions and others be successful without From the company perspective maybe, but I've not seen a union in the US that successfully rewards high performing employees over mediocre lifers. Overachievers end up leaving and you're left with no innovation. Do you have any examples of unions that have solved this problem?

tikhonj 7y ago
Aren't a lot of professional sports leagues unionized? I know that NBA players have a union, and top players definitely get rewarded well.
- bluGill 7y ago
  When most sports unions started professional players were not well paid. In the 1950s many of the best baseball players didn't play for professional teams because a local hardware store in some small town offered them better wages if they would work during the day and play on the town team on weekends!
- ticmasta 7y ago
  >> I know that NBA players have a union, and top players definitely get rewarded well. relative to what? the top players have always gotten big paydays, and the economics suggest without a union they would get paid even more. They are effectively subsidizing mid and lower tier players.
lexs 7y ago
NBA players association, actors guild, writers guild etc are famous examples of "rewarding high performing employees"
- evunveot 7y ago
  I'd argue those are more like cartels than unions.
- thefreeman 7y ago

deleted 7y ago

[deleted]

Ididntdothis 7y ago

I would think that in well run ethical companies the relationship with unions would also be harmonious. That’s at least how it works in Germany with unions like IG Metall. Seems to me that problems mostly arise when management becomes unreasonable.

toasterlovin 7y ago
Or when the union leadership becomes unreasonable.
- Ididntdothis 7y ago
  From what I have seen it’s mostly management that gets greedy first.
  - bluGill 7y ago
    Who was first doesn't change the fact that unions are sometimes unreasonable. Though I have to say most companies I've seen with evil unions have management that deserves the worst a union can do. I've seen cases of good management with bad unions harming everybody (except the union leaders), but they are generally rare.
    - K0SM0S 7y ago
      You guys should come see how it's done in France, where it's appaling to witness all the bad faith and disingenuosity from both sides — because the regulation is so tight that both sides feel righteous and untouchable, so to speak. The truth is that ~7% of French workers were unionized last I checked — a dysmal failure for these associations, an all-time low that's been true for decades. And yet they take the right to block the whole country on issue X or Y because, well, they're official unions protected by the law. They are systemically funded by regulation, like social security or any other de facto 'tax'. I would generally claim that in very different ways, the French and Americans are just as bad at unions — totally fails the point and disturbs (destroys, even) much more than it creates. I've heard great things about the German approach, but I can't substantiate first-hand. It's portrayed as a great synergy between management and unions to increase the value of the company as a whole while redistributing wealth (whether money, time, privileges...) in a fair manner. It's no rocket science either to treat everyone well, which tells you how uncooperative human beings can become when circle-jerking too hard (we are biologically, socially very protective of "our own" and very hostile to "others", the question being where each of us puts the limit).

zpallin 7y ago

> Generally speaking for well run, ethical companies, whose management actively try to do the right thing, unions add unnecessary redundancy and bureaucracy. The only type of "well run, ethical companies" where unions are redundant are worker-owned cooperatives. Otherwise, an employer, regardless of how ethical they are, can never replicate the most critical aspect of unions: collective bargaining rights. Sure, an employer can essentially just implement the kind of benefits that would be negotiated by a union, but it does not replace the fact that until a union exists employees have essentially no means to collectively demand changes to compensation and working conditions unless they unionize.

Camas 7y ago
An employee can at any time choose to work somewhere else.
- zpallin 7y ago
  Indeed. They can also choose to unionize.
  - Camas 7y ago
    Sure, it's just not the only way like you implied.
    - zpallin 7y ago
      What I "implied" was: 1. union benefits are redundant in worker owned-cooperative, not in typical corporations 2. and that's because corporate employers cannot emulate collective bargaining rights (but co-ops can) Please, I'd really like you to explain to me how how "an employee can at any time choose to work somewhere else" emulates collective bargaining rights.
wpietri 7y ago
That's becoming my take as well. I think the tech industry was, at least for a while, an exception here. Developers were so hard to get and retain that the power of individual workers did a lot to keep things sane. But I think that power is, for a variety of reasons, waning. If we want to keep our unusually good working conditions, and especially if we want to make sure our colleagues enjoy them as well, then I think collective action is going to become more and more necessary. (For those wondering why, a key part is the intrinsic size difference. It's much easier to lose one employee than to lose your full-time job. This inherent power imbalance is easily exploited.) For the next thing I start, I've been looking into worker- and member-owned co-op structures. It turns out some of my favorite businesses are run that way, from my local bakery (Arizmendi) to my favorite outdoor goods company, REI. My explorations are early yet, but I'm seeing a lot to be optimistic about. I think it's possible to combine the discipline of a value-for-money business with the mission orientation of a not-for-profit. For example, imagine if WhatsApp had been a worker- or member-owned co-op. If instead of selling to Facebook, they'd just kept making the thing they thought the world needed. If this resonates with people, feel free to contact me on email or Twitter. Maybe we can get a mailing list together for further discussion.

ksr_throwaway 7y ago

> In tech, we can generally assume reasonable working conditions and pay, so Kickstarter unionizing screams “toxic management” for me, personally. I can confirm that "toxic management" is the only way to describe the situation when this union drive began. Source: I work at Kickstarter

thu2111 7y ago
Is the article's description of why the union was created accurate?
- ksr_throwaway 7y ago
  Yes it's accurate, though the "Always Punch Nazis" controversy was just the tip of the iceberg. Employees were being treated like enemies by some in upper management. Edit: I've been rate limited by HN mods (thanks!), so not replying on this account anymore. All the best!
  - thu2111 7y ago
    The article is ambiguous, but I guess those organising the union were taking the side of leaving the project up? Or is the union demanding total freedom of speech in the terms of service? I'm guessing not. Doesn't that bother you, at least a little bit? How can whether or not to leave up "always punch nazis" be the union's signature issue? Unions are meant to fight for the common man against the elites. alwayspunchnazis.com has a cartoon of the US President being punched in the face at the top of it, and every article on that website calls the Republicans Nazis. Given how many ordinary working class Americans voted for Trump, painting them all as Nazis and then insisting that such a fundraise remains live would seem to be the opposite of what unions historically stood for.
    - xkemp 7y ago
      You seem quite obsessed with protecting Nazis from satire. I thought the US right was really into free speech?

cowpig 7y ago

Honestly, I really want tech workers to unionize and push for companies to install ethics committees. Particularly at Facebook and Google -- tech workers should unionize there not because they need better work conditions but because otherwise all business decisions are in the hands of executives for whom unethical or sociopathic behaviour is often an advantage.

marknutter 7y ago

They're unionizing because they're politically likeminded. There's absolutely no other logical reason why they would do it.

tensor 7y ago

> Clearly they haven’t, and given how easy it is to appease developers, this is particularly damning. In my experience, developers are probably among the hardest to appease. It's probably a tie between developers and sales. Both groups are primarily money driven and keen to negotiate, but developers also feel entitled to influence or control other aspects of the business based on their personal idea of morality (e.g. developers are not inclusive of the opinions of other groups of employees).

lawnchair_larry 7y ago

I don’t think there is much that management can do in this case. What you say is true where unions have historically shown up. But these times are different. Like most people pushing an agenda and participating in twitter outrage mobs, I think this is ideologically driven, and the employees have a very limited understanding of how unions work and when they are needed. It’s essentially a meme.

wirrbel 7y ago

You may think you can do without a union if business is good and management OK. When shit hits the fan, that is when you'll learn that you need them. I work in a German unionized company and I think unions can be quite well-aligned with workers and business interest. IIRC certain aspects of US law make unions be the way they are in the US on purpose to lower their acceptance among employees. For example work councils which are commonly established in unionized companies aren't allowed in the US iirc, they can be a nice alternative from going all in into unionizing, a democratic representation of all employees.