6 ms·

Which just underlies the problem with unions: not only they are compulsory institutions that force you into their ranks whether you want it or not, but even tho

by kova12 7y ago

Which just underlies the problem with unions: not only they are compulsory institutions that force you into their ranks whether you want it or not, but even those who join them don't get a fair representation and have to strike on their own.

unethical_ban 7y ago
Define "fair representation" And, tell me how not having any union is better for all than an imperfect union.
- yjftsjthsd-h 7y ago
  > tell me how not having any union is better for all than an imperfect union. Obvious answer: No dues. Not commenting on whether that's a good tradeoff, mind, but it's an answer.
- shitgoose 7y ago
  Is there a union of software developers? Would you like to start an imperfect one? Anyone?
  - int_19h 7y ago
    Starting one is fairly risky. A better question might be, how many people would join an established one.
  - inferiorhuman 7y ago
    Yes. https://www.nytimes.com/2020/02/18/technology/kickstarter-union.html https://www.nytimes.com/2020/02/18/technology/kickstarter-un... https://arstechnica.com/gaming/2020/01/game-dev-union-leader-dream-job-passion-can-open-us-up-to-exploitation/ https://arstechnica.com/gaming/2020/01/game-dev-union-leader...
    - shitgoose 7y ago
      Both articles indicate that unionization has flopped. The broader question is - what is the purpose of unionization in the software industry? You want more money? You want ping pong tables at work?
- kortilla 7y ago
  Higher compensation, no protection for incompetent people, reward for productivity and innovation instead of seniority, etc.
jdm2212 7y ago
Don't make the perfect the enemy of the good. A union-negotiated contract that's better than the one you'd get without the union is, well, better. It might not be "fair" or flawless, but it's still better.
- kortilla 7y ago
  Unless it’s worse. The assumption that forming a union and entering into effectively hostile negotiations with the company will result in a better compensation is unfounded.
  - jdm2212 7y ago
    It varies by country and even in the US it varies by industry. A lot of European countries have a less adversarial relationship between organized labor and management and workers benefit greatly. Public sector unions in the US, and the teamsters, and Culinary in Las Vegas, etc. don't seem to leave their workers worse off either.
  - simonh 7y ago
    It's perfectly founded, because I have seen it happen. Back in the 80s was a Thatcher believer, still am really, but in the 90s I was a member of a moderate public sector union in the UK and saw it working from the inside. It was a real eye opener, the union had huge experience in health and safety (a significant issue in that organisation), the unintended side effects of various policies and procedures, all sorts of things and actually worked very well with management to represent legitimate concerns. It doesn't always work, in some industries I can see the relationship is much more confrontational and damaging, but it doesn't have to be that way.
    - kortilla 7y ago
      It can’t be “perfectly founded“ if it “doesn’t always work”.
  - diffeomorphism 7y ago
    > The assumption ... is unfounded. Considering that many, many countries exist where this is the case (most of the time), this seems to be very well founded.
wutbrodo 7y ago
> even those who join them don't get a fair representation and have to strike on their own. Again without implying anything normative, what makes you claim that the students' representation by the union isn't "fair"? Simply because they want more than stipulated by the contract the union was able to negotiate? Is my (non-union) salary "unfair" because I'd much rather get paid 3x as much (or 30x, for that matter)?
wahern 7y ago
Compulsory union membership has been illegal since the 1947 Taft-Hartey Act. Compulsory legal representation fees for public sector unions have been illegal since Janus v. AFSCME (2018). Just like in a democracy, not everybody's interests can be fully satisfied in a union. So what? That doesn't necessarily mean we'd all be better off with autocracy or without any government whatsoever, not even the people getting the short end of the stick. The fundamental problem in Santa Cruz, like many other universities in the state, is the cost of housing. UC Santa Cruz didn't build enough housing. Part of the problem is that most of UCSC's land is wildlife refuge, and part of the problem (like everywhere else in California) is the political and regulatory difficulty of building new housing. The cost of housing has been increasing far faster than UCSC's budget.
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
- SpicyLemonZest 7y ago
  Unions still have many monopolistic legal rights. For example, one obvious question is why UCSC students can’t form their own union and get their own contract; the answer is that it would be illegal, because if there’s a duly authorized union employers can’t collectively bargain with any other group.
  - deleted 7y ago
    [deleted]
  - TrinaryWorksToo 7y ago
    Why couldn't people call a new vote for the new union?
    - SpicyLemonZest 7y ago
      That would also be illegal right now, since it hasn't been 3 years since the union contract was signed. ref: https://www.nlrb.gov/rights-we-protect/whats-law/employees/i-am-represented-union/decertification-election https://www.nlrb.gov/rights-we-protect/whats-law/employees/i...
Karishma1234fff 7y ago
>not only they are compulsory institutions that force you into their ranks whether you want it or not, but even those who join them don't get a fair representation and have to strike on their own. That is very definition of 'Unions'. As an individual you have limited resources to take on a big adversary (employer) hence few people come together and pool in money. If this process is voluntary it is entirely up-to them to come up with the terms of engagement. Once you agree to those terms going back on those terms must be seen as dishonesty. If the union membership is forces them obviously union leaders have zero incentives to actually offer better terms to members. The only way this can be resolved is by having some kind of "enlightened" union leadership. The superhumans who will instantly know what is the right thing to do and will have 100% freedom to do so. Sadly, such humans are very very rare.
thrwaway69 7y ago
Maybe. Unions like democracy are a compromise. Though, I always wonder why do so many people here (despite not being in a tech union or majorly working in industries without them most likely) push for it so much? Can anyone give me their actual experience being in a union that's not in the tech industry?
- JamesBarney 7y ago
  The AMA has done an amazing job at representing the interests of doctors
  - exhilaration 7y ago
    But that's a lobbying organization - and yes, a very successful one at all levels of government. They're not involved in pay and contract negotiations at your local hospital.
    - dantheman 7y ago
      They've successfully limited the supply of doctors to artificially increase wages.
      - blaser-waffle 7y ago
        True, but as someone with a surgery looming I'd much have someone who had to go through a 6-year training process then a simple 4 year one. Like, medical mistakes are already crazy common -- and that's with the strict barriers of entry.

by kova12 7y ago

unethical_ban 7y ago

Define "fair representation" And, tell me how not having any union is better for all than an imperfect union.

yjftsjthsd-h 7y ago
> tell me how not having any union is better for all than an imperfect union. Obvious answer: No dues. Not commenting on whether that's a good tradeoff, mind, but it's an answer.
shitgoose 7y ago
Is there a union of software developers? Would you like to start an imperfect one? Anyone?
- int_19h 7y ago
  Starting one is fairly risky. A better question might be, how many people would join an established one.
- inferiorhuman 7y ago
  Yes. https://www.nytimes.com/2020/02/18/technology/kickstarter-union.html https://www.nytimes.com/2020/02/18/technology/kickstarter-un... https://arstechnica.com/gaming/2020/01/game-dev-union-leader-dream-job-passion-can-open-us-up-to-exploitation/ https://arstechnica.com/gaming/2020/01/game-dev-union-leader...
  - shitgoose 7y ago
    Both articles indicate that unionization has flopped. The broader question is - what is the purpose of unionization in the software industry? You want more money? You want ping pong tables at work?
kortilla 7y ago
Higher compensation, no protection for incompetent people, reward for productivity and innovation instead of seniority, etc.

jdm2212 7y ago

Don't make the perfect the enemy of the good. A union-negotiated contract that's better than the one you'd get without the union is, well, better. It might not be "fair" or flawless, but it's still better.

kortilla 7y ago
Unless it’s worse. The assumption that forming a union and entering into effectively hostile negotiations with the company will result in a better compensation is unfounded.
- jdm2212 7y ago
  It varies by country and even in the US it varies by industry. A lot of European countries have a less adversarial relationship between organized labor and management and workers benefit greatly. Public sector unions in the US, and the teamsters, and Culinary in Las Vegas, etc. don't seem to leave their workers worse off either.
- simonh 7y ago
  It's perfectly founded, because I have seen it happen. Back in the 80s was a Thatcher believer, still am really, but in the 90s I was a member of a moderate public sector union in the UK and saw it working from the inside. It was a real eye opener, the union had huge experience in health and safety (a significant issue in that organisation), the unintended side effects of various policies and procedures, all sorts of things and actually worked very well with management to represent legitimate concerns. It doesn't always work, in some industries I can see the relationship is much more confrontational and damaging, but it doesn't have to be that way.
  - kortilla 7y ago
    It can’t be “perfectly founded“ if it “doesn’t always work”.
- diffeomorphism 7y ago
  > The assumption ... is unfounded. Considering that many, many countries exist where this is the case (most of the time), this seems to be very well founded.

wutbrodo 7y ago

> even those who join them don't get a fair representation and have to strike on their own. Again without implying anything normative, what makes you claim that the students' representation by the union isn't "fair"? Simply because they want more than stipulated by the contract the union was able to negotiate? Is my (non-union) salary "unfair" because I'd much rather get paid 3x as much (or 30x, for that matter)?

wahern 7y ago

Compulsory union membership has been illegal since the 1947 Taft-Hartey Act. Compulsory legal representation fees for public sector unions have been illegal since Janus v. AFSCME (2018). Just like in a democracy, not everybody's interests can be fully satisfied in a union. So what? That doesn't necessarily mean we'd all be better off with autocracy or without any government whatsoever, not even the people getting the short end of the stick. The fundamental problem in Santa Cruz, like many other universities in the state, is the cost of housing. UC Santa Cruz didn't build enough housing. Part of the problem is that most of UCSC's land is wildlife refuge, and part of the problem (like everywhere else in California) is the political and regulatory difficulty of building new housing. The cost of housing has been increasing far faster than UCSC's budget.

deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
SpicyLemonZest 7y ago
Unions still have many monopolistic legal rights. For example, one obvious question is why UCSC students can’t form their own union and get their own contract; the answer is that it would be illegal, because if there’s a duly authorized union employers can’t collectively bargain with any other group.
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
- TrinaryWorksToo 7y ago
  Why couldn't people call a new vote for the new union?
  - SpicyLemonZest 7y ago
    That would also be illegal right now, since it hasn't been 3 years since the union contract was signed. ref: https://www.nlrb.gov/rights-we-protect/whats-law/employees/i-am-represented-union/decertification-election https://www.nlrb.gov/rights-we-protect/whats-law/employees/i...

Karishma1234fff 7y ago

>not only they are compulsory institutions that force you into their ranks whether you want it or not, but even those who join them don't get a fair representation and have to strike on their own. That is very definition of 'Unions'. As an individual you have limited resources to take on a big adversary (employer) hence few people come together and pool in money. If this process is voluntary it is entirely up-to them to come up with the terms of engagement. Once you agree to those terms going back on those terms must be seen as dishonesty. If the union membership is forces them obviously union leaders have zero incentives to actually offer better terms to members. The only way this can be resolved is by having some kind of "enlightened" union leadership. The superhumans who will instantly know what is the right thing to do and will have 100% freedom to do so. Sadly, such humans are very very rare.

thrwaway69 7y ago

Maybe. Unions like democracy are a compromise. Though, I always wonder why do so many people here (despite not being in a tech union or majorly working in industries without them most likely) push for it so much? Can anyone give me their actual experience being in a union that's not in the tech industry?

JamesBarney 7y ago
The AMA has done an amazing job at representing the interests of doctors
- exhilaration 7y ago
  But that's a lobbying organization - and yes, a very successful one at all levels of government. They're not involved in pay and contract negotiations at your local hospital.
  - dantheman 7y ago
    They've successfully limited the supply of doctors to artificially increase wages.
    - blaser-waffle 7y ago
      True, but as someone with a surgery looming I'd much have someone who had to go through a 6-year training process then a simple 4 year one. Like, medical mistakes are already crazy common -- and that's with the strict barriers of entry.