3 ms·

Bewildering syntax aside, that sounds like every big company, ever. Unions don't change the core nature of large organizations, just the power dynamics.

luckylion 6y ago
The company aggregates the individual contributions and makes them stable to the outside. A union would make workers more stable when interfacing with the company: you pay everyone the same, you get the same amount of hours, you don't negotiate with individuals but with union representatives etc. That's not necessarily desirable for somebody that currently has a compensation package that's far above the average. I've never seen or heard of a union that handles this differently, even if they are "democratic institutions", so I wonder if there are any examples where you bargain collectively, but you don't get the negative side-effects of equal pay for unequal work, promotions based on time spent instead of contributions, essentially tenure for underperformers etc.
- Apocryphon 6y ago
  > That's not necessarily desirable for somebody that currently has a compensation package that's far above the average. That doesn't happen in the SAG. Talent are expected to be paid a floor, but no ceiling is mandated. There's certainly stories in the news all of the time about incredible contracts getting signed by big stars. https://www.wrapbook.com/essential-guide-sag-rates/ https://www.wrapbook.com/essential-guide-sag-rates/ > you don't get the negative side-effects of equal pay for unequal work, promotions based on time spent instead of contributions, essentially tenure for underperformers etc. Given that a hypothetical software engineer union would be a brand new entity with no historical baggage to older, more archaic or corrupted unions, certainly its members can work to design an updated system that addresses some of these issues. Why, if tech is supposed to be about innovation, must a union representing its workers must necessarily be tethered to the same faults as older institutions?
  - luckylion 6y ago
    > Why, if tech is supposed to be about innovation, must a union representing its workers must necessarily be tethered to the same faults as older institutions? I don't really follow that tech is about innovation, but that aside: I'm not saying a union would have be the same as all the other unions, I'm asking why it wouldn't and how to ensure that. The SAG is interesting, but I don't know whether it's very comparable to tech. I'm not anti-union, but I wouldn't join a union, I work too closely with them to believe that it's in my personal best interest. For the average (non-tech) worker, that's different, they'll most likely benefit. But they're also in a very different position than tech people, with very different hiring markets.
    - danaris 6y ago
      > I'm asking why it wouldn't Because a significant percentage of its hypothetical membership feel the same way you do about those problems. > and how to ensure that. Become a member. Vote for the union policies you think are important. Become a union leader. Etc.

luckylion 6y ago

The company aggregates the individual contributions and makes them stable to the outside. A union would make workers more stable when interfacing with the company: you pay everyone the same, you get the same amount of hours, you don't negotiate with individuals but with union representatives etc. That's not necessarily desirable for somebody that currently has a compensation package that's far above the average. I've never seen or heard of a union that handles this differently, even if they are "democratic institutions", so I wonder if there are any examples where you bargain collectively, but you don't get the negative side-effects of equal pay for unequal work, promotions based on time spent instead of contributions, essentially tenure for underperformers etc.

Apocryphon 6y ago
> That's not necessarily desirable for somebody that currently has a compensation package that's far above the average. That doesn't happen in the SAG. Talent are expected to be paid a floor, but no ceiling is mandated. There's certainly stories in the news all of the time about incredible contracts getting signed by big stars. https://www.wrapbook.com/essential-guide-sag-rates/ https://www.wrapbook.com/essential-guide-sag-rates/ > you don't get the negative side-effects of equal pay for unequal work, promotions based on time spent instead of contributions, essentially tenure for underperformers etc. Given that a hypothetical software engineer union would be a brand new entity with no historical baggage to older, more archaic or corrupted unions, certainly its members can work to design an updated system that addresses some of these issues. Why, if tech is supposed to be about innovation, must a union representing its workers must necessarily be tethered to the same faults as older institutions?
- luckylion 6y ago
  > Why, if tech is supposed to be about innovation, must a union representing its workers must necessarily be tethered to the same faults as older institutions? I don't really follow that tech is about innovation, but that aside: I'm not saying a union would have be the same as all the other unions, I'm asking why it wouldn't and how to ensure that. The SAG is interesting, but I don't know whether it's very comparable to tech. I'm not anti-union, but I wouldn't join a union, I work too closely with them to believe that it's in my personal best interest. For the average (non-tech) worker, that's different, they'll most likely benefit. But they're also in a very different position than tech people, with very different hiring markets.
  - danaris 6y ago
    > I'm asking why it wouldn't Because a significant percentage of its hypothetical membership feel the same way you do about those problems. > and how to ensure that. Become a member. Vote for the union policies you think are important. Become a union leader. Etc.