65 ms·

A group of Google workers have announced plans to unionize

• Forge36 6y ago
  https://cwa-union.org/news/releases/google-workers-demanding-change-work-are-launching-union-communications-workers-of https://cwa-union.org/news/releases/google-workers-demanding... Union's official announcement
• mondoshawan 6y ago
  Googler here, these articles are literally the first I've heard of it. No internal emails, rabblerousing, or any kind of comms about it, and it seems as though the union discussed doesn't actually exist yet. Seems a bit odd (and bad reporting), but we'll see where it goes. After watching how a mechanics union did absolutely nothing while CEOs ripped apart my Dad's pension and put him through hell, I have a bit of a dim view on this sort of thing to begin with.
  • ahelwer 6y ago
    Not to put too fine a point on it, but usually the people who know about the union before it's announced are those who are understood to support the idea & are unlikely to go to management about it :)
    • mondoshawan 6y ago
      This is the first I've ever suggested an opinion on it publicly, and I'm a line engineer, not management. Internally, I don't usually talk about things like this, either.
      • ahelwer 6y ago
        Ah, then it's likely that by chance someone just never got around to talking to you about it. It's a big company! Hopefully you'll soon get to talk to an organizer about your specific doubts.
        • deleted 6y ago
          [deleted]
        • giantg2 6y ago
          It might also be that the organizers where only talking to people that they expected to be pro-union (as opposed to selecting people who only had not expressed negative views of unions). This is the safer approach at union-hostile companies like Google.
      • wccrawford 6y ago
        Right, that's why the GP said that only those who were understood to already support the idea would have been approached about it. You're an unknown, and they didn't risk telling you and have it leak early. At least, that's the idea. Who knows how true any of this is yet.
        • mondoshawan 6y ago
          The parent comment originally was written in such a way as to imply I was management.
          • ahelwer 6y ago
            Not sure where you read that from my comment. Corps are filled with non-management workers who will tell management about unionization efforts, either naively or intentionally.
  • giantg2 6y ago
    That pension thing probably isn't the union's fault. Pretty much anyone that had a non-government backed pension lost it or had it severely reduced. They simply were not financially sustainable. But I do agree they sometimes the union can be their own worst enemy. For example, I knew a sterl plant manager and he was telling me that they had a hard time competing with imported steel and that the union was constantly asking for more and more money and time off. Eventually management was forced to give them everything they wanted dispite explaining that it would bankrupt the company. Overall, I think unions can be good. I would like an actual contract and no forced arbitration.
  • _qulr 6y ago
    > After watching how a mechanics union did absolutely nothing while CEOs ripped apart my Dad's pension and put him through hell, I have a bit of a dim view on this sort of thing to begin with. I would say that unions aren't magical entities. They're a necessary but not a sufficient condition for protecting the interests of workers. A union is only as good as its membership. If union members think they can just pay their union dues and expect the benefits to magically accrue, that's not going to happen. Union members have to take a very active part in governance of their union, and immediately remove any union leaders who start to show signs of corruption. Complacency is the enemy. As soon as unions become "hierarchical", it's game over, and the union is no better than the management it was designed to fight against.
    • Karunamon 6y ago
      Necessary in some cases. Workers who are happy with the general conditions of their company won't unionize. >As soon as unions become "hierarchical", Which is a probability that approaches 1 over time. All human endeavors tend toward hierarchies, it's just a matter of how formalized the hierarchy is and how many levels it has - but one always exists.
  • ocdtrekkie 6y ago
    Part of the reason for this may be because Google in fact pushed the NLRB to disallow organizing activity on internal emails! https://www.theverge.com/2019/12/18/21028033/google-labor-board-employee-email-block-organizing https://www.theverge.com/2019/12/18/21028033/google-labor-bo...
    • mondoshawan 6y ago
      Aha! Wasn't aware of this rule change. Wonder how they'll garner the votes they need to fully form the union without internal rabblerousing digitally, and with offices being closed. Is it legal for a union to use employee info directories to contact employees outside of corp comms?
      • ocdtrekkie 6y ago
        I've rarely found an employee directory that would contain people's personal email addresses. They might be stuck with calling people on the phone or something. Which might be for the best: Google controls probably nearly every employee's personal email address too!
        • deleted 6y ago
          [deleted]
        • londons_explore 6y ago
          A good chunk of Google employees don't have a 'personal' phone. They use test android devices, or work-provided phones and plans. Google even has an internal program to migrate your personal phone number onto a corporate device. Calls between employees will be video conferences over google servers anyway - nobody goes typing old fashioned phone numbers anymore...
          • ocdtrekkie 6y ago
            And with the lack of this union's formal status, Google probably could get away with behaviors which interfere with the use of Gmail, Fi, Voice, and Meet services used to organize this union without significant penalty.
  • coldtortuga 6y ago
    Here's their website: https://alphabetworkersunion.org/ https://alphabetworkersunion.org/ It's hard to find in Google searches buried under all the news articles. Does the Google Walkout count as rabblerousing? It's all been word-of-mouth until now, which is kinda slow since everyone left the office and went online.
  • Rebelgecko 6y ago
    Also Googler. When I previously worked at a unionized company the union actually helped a lot when our corporate overlords cut retirement benefits. For that sort of collective bargaining I think unions can be useful. It looks like this isn't that type of union however. This one seems much more like a political advocacy group (I realize all unions are political, but the idealized union is political as a side effect of improving the welfare of their constituency, not as their primary purpose).
• sneak 6y ago
  I don't disagree with this effort, but I'm a little surprised it wasn't one of the slightly more abusive/hardline of the FAANGM (that is, specifically Apple or Amazon, or perhaps Microsoft) staff first.
  • ceejayoz 6y ago
    Part of that abusiveness likely extends to union busting efforts.
    • booleandilemma 6y ago
      Amazon anti-union video: https://youtu.be/AQeGBHxIyHw https://youtu.be/AQeGBHxIyHw
      • geraltofrivia 6y ago
        Wow, what the fuck! “We’re not anti union, but we are not neutral either”
        • virgilp 6y ago
          It's almost as if they claim to be pro-union :D
        • sethammons 6y ago
          Obviously biased, but I tend to agree. My experience with unions is not with them as a partner to the company and advocate of shared success. My experience is them as parasites that hurt the business and the customer, and may (may!) help employees. Out of the dozen or so cases I’m familiar with, only my brother in law loves the union and he does not work like most devs I know; he goes job site to job site for short to medium engagements.
  • pydry 6y ago
    Their hands are somewhat tied in terms of how much they can retaliate legally. They likely won't take this sitting down, though.
• docdeek 6y ago
  > If the union effort at Google is successful, members say they will commit one percent of their annual compensation to the union. Is that a standard rate for union dues? I’ve never joined a union myself in the past and have no reference point for a 1% figure.
  • filmgirlcw 6y ago
    Yeah, I think 1% is standard. I think our dues were 1.5%, but I can’t find my old contract right this second. We got a guaranteed 3% annual raise as part of the contract (in addition to any other raises or promotions), so for us, even in a pure cost perspective, the union was a net win, irrespective of all the other benefits. Unfortunately, and I say this as a big fan and supporter of unions, I don’t see this drive being successful. Compensation and job security are some of the mains reasons people unionize. Companies like Google already offer cost-of-living raises annually, in addition to stock and bonus compensation. The challenge for most tech companies attempting to unionize — and by this, I mean staff including engineers, not simply the employees who don’t reap spoils, like janitors, bus drivers, receptionists, cafeteria staff, etc. — is that the reason to unionize is largely not going to be about pay. Because realistically, I have doubts in a CBA (which this is not, but let’s assume there was a scenario with one) being more effective at negotiating salary levels than the current system that exists. This isn’t true for all tech companies; most employees at a game studio, for example, could almost certainly benefit from a CBA. Still, the challenge for an all-encompassing union like this is that for most employees, a union won’t effect compensation (and when it will, it’ll impact the bottom wrung — which is important, but makes it harder to get mass buy-in from the rank and file), it won’t effect perks, it won't effect medical care, parental leave, insurance. All of these things tend to be best-in-class, at least in the United States. So instead, you’re talking about fighting for a union for equally important, but much more difficult to quantify, areas like a voice in what types of contract bids or programs the company takes, hiring policies, sexual harassment policies, etc. And it’s specifically that difficulty that has led the CWA to organize this as a minority union. And that’s exactly why although I applaud the efforts to do this, I doubt very much it will be effective at all. To me, a better approach would have been to have a more organized approach focused on specific types of employees, especially vendors/contractors. This “anyone can join but we don't have a CBA and aren’t recognized by the NLRB” thing strikes me as much more akin to trying to form an employee-focused internal lobbying group, rather than an actual union.
• psaintlaurent 6y ago
  I have an ugly truth for Google employees, unions don't mean anything, in NYC if you are in a union or married to a union employee you will eventually become a victim of targeted harassment campaigns by people with connections to government when they want you out of your job or spending money. Almost all unions or stable jobs have people who believe they "control" the jobs. They will attempt to destroy you and your family any way possible. I've personally been the victim of targeted harassment campaigns. I was punched in the face in broad daylight on the way to work. Someone vandalized my home, stole every valuable item I own and threatened my daughters life. My car was damaged and the mechanics wouldn't fix it properly because they were afraid of retaliation. My wife's car was repeatedly vandalized to get her spending money on a mechanic and then eventually force her to buy another car. Someone even hit me with an electronic weapon while I was sleeping and burned me, I still don't know how the fuck someone got hold of an electronic weapon. The entire point of these harassment campaigns is to force you to spend money on luxury garbage, mechanics, car dealers, house cleaning services. etc. If you contact the authorities for help, no one is going to help you out of fear of retaliation. They give you lip service even if you have video evidence (I have actual audio, video and image evidence all of this happened) I had an actual conversation with someone last night who drove past my house asking why the police were at my home: Me: "Someone left a threatening letter on my door." Person: "If you just purchase enough from us we can call up our friends and get you help otherwise there is always cancer."
  • howlgarnish 6y ago
    I mean this in the kindest possible way: have you consulted a psychiatrist? Feeling like you are being persecuted by shadowy, all-powerful enemies is a common symptom of schizophrenia.
    • mountainb 6y ago
      The assumption that they would have to be hallucinating to be recounting a standard tale of union intimidation is very funny. That's what a union is for: thugging on people. You have to have soft hands to believe anything else.
• avolcano 6y ago
  Wapo has more details about the structure of the union, which is apparently nontraditional and won't go through NLRB ratification: https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2021/01/04/google-union-cwa/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2021/01/04/google-... However, while that article says they will not be able to be a collective bargaining unit under US law with that structure, the announcement oped in the NY Times (https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/04/opinion/google-union.html https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/04/opinion/google-union.html) implies they will be pursuing becoming one, so not sure if that nontraditional structure is temporary or if the Post got some details wrong.
  • gcr 6y ago
    You don't necessarily need an NLRB contract to get wins for employees, though the legal protection certainly helps. I understand AWU is currently following the CWA "Solidarity Union" model: not currently seeking recognition but may choose to do so in the future. (Disclosure: I am a member of AWU)
    • Ericson2314 6y ago
      There is a great line of research that part of labor's downfall in the postwar era was due to becoming to legalized/instituionalized, creating a hysteresis trap were the unions official power (laws and norms) lagged behind the underlying conditions that give it real power (labor scarcity + worker radicalization). Workers got complacent and depoliticized starting with the red scare, and edges along by shitty union leadership, and the whole Regan era turnabout was less a right-wing conspiracy and more the hysteresis delay coming to an an end. Members-only unions and whatnot that forgo the NRLB are "riskier" in some sense, but that vary precarity / forgoing of intertia can avoid the lag and help keep the union vigilant. See a popular exposition in https://www.jacobinmag.com/2016/06/uaw-academic-workers-colleges-union-walter-reuther-treaty-detroit https://www.jacobinmag.com/2016/06/uaw-academic-workers-coll..., which is a better piece than much Jacobin stuff I might add.
• bregma 6y ago
  Shouldn't the headline read "former Google workers" by now?
• falcor84 6y ago
  Nitpick: I was surprised to see them say "Earlier this year" regarding the union in Kickstarter - that was of course in 2020 which is now last year :)
• mkohlmyr 6y ago
  230 Google workers announce plans to unionize, ftfy
  • qrbLPHiKpiux 6y ago
    230 ex google employees tried to form a union
    • horsemans 6y ago
      Where do you see in the article that they aren't current Google employees?
      • deleted 6y ago
        [deleted]
      • foxhop 6y ago
        The assumption is that the employees will be terminated, fired, let go, or quit because creating unions is really hard in the USA, especially in industry which has no precedent.
      • Forge36 6y ago
        The negative implication is suggesting they'll be fired
      • huhtenberg 6y ago
        The GP was making a joke.
  • throwawaysea 6y ago
    This seems like a common tactic with many of these employee activist campaigns. They partner with a sympathetic news media outlet that will amplify their story (examples: Vox, Geekwire, etc.) but leave out details and perspectives that undermine their push - like how few employees are behind it. If you look at past activist campaigns (for example people trying to stop AWS from working with the US government), it's the same story of trying to paint a picture of widespread support where there isn't any.
• amelius 6y ago
  Perhaps App store publishers can unionize too. For example, instead of having small companies publishing apps themselves, they can have an organization do it for them, so it's big organization versus BigCorp, instead of little guy versus BigCorp. Also, it could provide some more transparency of the App Store sales.
  • mensetmanusman 6y ago
    Is there precedent for a group of unrelated individuals who happen to be in the same industry ‘unionizing’ ? Edit: answer of course is guilds, thanks commenters :) The word union threw me off. One could totally imagine an ‘app developers guild’ to help defend against the big guys. Go start one!
    • Marazan 6y ago
      Screen Actors Guild
    • MachineBurning 6y ago
      Guilds?
    • wasmitnetzen 6y ago
      In Germany, there are "Genossenschaften"[1], which are cooperatives organized by small members to further a common commercial interest. For example, winemakers, which are often family businesses (at least in the area I'm from), often form them to sell wine, to have better leverage against the buyers, which are usually big companies like Aldi. [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eingetragene_Genossenschaft https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eingetragene_Genossenschaft
      • humanrebar 6y ago
        They have these in the U.S. Chambers of Commerce and industry organizations, especially lobbying groups, are numerous.
      • londons_explore 6y ago
• cft 6y ago
  This could be the beginning of tech stock market crash. If that effort succeeds that is
  • objclxt 6y ago
    Why? Many successful companies are fully unionised. How many people creating content at Disney do you think are card carrying members of a union (the answer: nearly all of them).
    • throwoutttt 6y ago
      That must be why Disney needs to buy Star Wars and Marvel, because they're so great at innovating their own content
  • spodek 6y ago
    Less profits would go to shareholders, which could lower its stock price, but that doesn't mean the company would produce less. More share of profits going to employees could increase productivity and social good to the world. I'm not calling that result inevitable, but possible and up to the company leadership.
• foxhop 6y ago
  Could the Google workers help build a Union for all of tech?
  • gcr 6y ago
    At AWU, we've been working with CWA to do just that; see https://www.code-cwa.org https://www.code-cwa.org
• apexalpha 6y ago
  Good for them. I work for a large company and am a member of the union. While they're not perfect they're very constructive and provide a lot of benefits to all employees, and also to the company itself. Compensation has become very complex over the years. While most people understand their pay the rest is usually where employers cheap out, things like insurance, sick pay, long-term provider care, pension contribution, tend to be worse for my friends who also work in IT but in non-unionized workforce. I understand that in the US unions are often seen as a burden, rather than a constructive partner, so I hope this one will help to improve the image of all unions as well as improve live of Googlers.
  • viraptor 6y ago
    > I understand that in the US unions are often seen as a burden Some are, some the opposite. Often people discuss unions like something very homogenous. They're like companies - there will be both loan sharks and non-profit activists (and lots in between). I hope it all turns out well for googlers.
    • deleted 6y ago
      [deleted]
    • ATsch 6y ago
      Of course, there is a difference, in that there's a strong financial interest in painting all unions as the loan shark type.
    • koheripbal 6y ago
      Unions have also been centers of corruption and organized crime. This is what gave them such a bad name in the 1980s and is why it's so easy to "tie" anyone in construction to the mob, such as one famous person in charge these days.
      • meragrin_ 6y ago
        The insinuation seems to be Trump. Sure, he has had buildings built/remodeled, but I don't see how you can say he is in construction.
• klaudius 6y ago
  I don't understand unions. If they don't like certain behaviors that are legal like selling to government or paying high salaries, why are they working there in the first place? Just quit. Different people like different things, so go work somewhere that suits you.
  • WitCanStain 6y ago
    The point of unions is that individual workers can be easily screwed over with no repercussions for the company because of the power differential between companies and their workers. Unions seek to level the field a little bit by giving the workers collective bargaining power which allows them to secure better pay/benefits/influence the direction the company is going. When they work it is a very rational arrangement for the workers, so companies tend to not like them as it decreases their power over their workers.
    • mrweasel 6y ago
      Precisely, you can end up having people working for a company under terms that are technically legal, but still exploiting the weakest. The strongest people easily move on to better positions, but some, single parents, less skilled, psychologically weaker individuals and so on are more easily pressed into working conditions they may not like, because they fear losing the job they do have. In the US the minimum wage haven't moved in decades, at least not significantly. Denmark doesn't even have a minimum wage, yet people are better paid, that's due the Danish unions. Interestingly the Danish unions are actually oppose a minimum wage, because they believe it makes it easier to legally pay people less.
  • andai 6y ago
    The way I see it, if unions did nothing, Google and Amazon wouldn't be working so hard to prevent them from forming.
    • zthrowaway 6y ago
      Oh they do something, they help destroy a company’s ability to compete. Take a look at unionization of the auto industry in Detroit back in the 70s and 80s which basically killed our lead in the industry and gave it to Japan and Korean companies on a platter.
• timvisee 6y ago
  What a shitshow at al these large companies these days.
• objclxt 6y ago
  When I talk to colleagues in tech about unions I hear a lot of misconceptions, seemingly based in stereotypes about what unions are for and who they serve. People often seem to think of unions as being purely blue-collar operations, and this just isn't true. For example, I've had people tell me that they don't support unions in tech because they'll be "paid less", or less competent engineers will be promoted faster. And it's strange, because the other major industry in California - the film industry - is heavily unionised, and you just don't see that happening there. You have vocally supportive multi-millionaire card-carrying members of the Screen Actors Guild, the Writers Guild, and the Directors Guild to name a few. None of these unions are limiting the work their members are carrying out. This is because those unions are serving a very different purpose to the stereotypical union some engineers seem to fear. SAG, the DGA, and the WGA aren't guaranteeing hours or limiting pay: they're simply trying to curb abuse in what it a very abusive industry, and putting in place procedures to protect members and resolve grievances. And they don't always get it right, and I don't pretend that Hollywood is a perfect utopia of worker relations, but I think it's pretty undeniable that the industry is a much better place with the unions around.
  • antisoeu 6y ago
    Here in Germany unions (in tech) will for example make sure that older employees can't be fired, so the younger employees will be fired instead. So I don't think you can simply claim they are beneficial for everybody.
    • throwaway2245 6y ago
      Boomers often have a major advantage in democratised situations, simply because there are more of them. As such, it's still in your own interest to join a union and be represented. And, with Boomers retiring, this power imbalance in unions can be lessened or reversed.
      • missedthecue 6y ago
        There are not more boomers than other demographics. Why would you say this?
• RivieraKid 6y ago
  What leverage do unions have over salaries? Google is a very profitable company, redirecting half of the profit from shareholders to employees would result in a very significant salary increase. (Just curious, I'm not stating any opinion on this.)
  • losvedir 6y ago
    What do you mean by profit going to shareholders? Alphabet doesn't have a dividend.
    • RivieraKid 6y ago
      It's either reinvested or saved in the bank so it stays in the ownership of shareholders. In general, reinvestment is preferred over dividends (or stock buybacks which is similar to dividends) when it's expected that the reinvestment will generate a good return in the future and this return would be given to shareholders.
  • gcr 6y ago
    AWU includes temps, vendors, and contractors (TVCs), who are not at all paid the way full-time employees are. I'm sure there's a lot of gains to make to ensure everyone has equitable pay. That said, a lot of work that AWU is doing focuses on values organizing and employee ethics. Structures like this union help balance the power between workers and executives at Alphabet.
    • chasd00 6y ago
      that's ominous, so if you don't tow the union line on the social issue of the day then they can prevent you from being a member which will be required for employment?
      • ATsch 6y ago
        Unlike corporations like Google, who would never fire (sorry, "quit voluntarily") someone for criticizing the stance of the company on social issues.
• knuckleheads 6y ago
  Sending my heartfelt and sincere congratulations to the workers at Google who have unionized. There's power in a union and I'm extremely heartened to see them get together and organize.
• sanxiyn 6y ago
  Good luck! From a fellow unionized digital worker. I work at Kakao, a South Korean firm known for KakaoTalk (the dominant messenger application in South Korea).
  • joeblau 6y ago
    How would you describe your experience being a unionized digital worker?
    • sanxiyn 6y ago
      It's pretty good. For example, initially the company was reluctant to transition to remote work for COVID-19 pandemic, but workers' concern was well represented. My impression is that among South Korean digital companies, unionized companies transitioned to remote work earlier.
      • dudul 6y ago
        1) COVID is a highly atypical situation. Other than during a once in a lifetime global pandemic, which benefits/drawbacks do you experience? 2) Most US companies had no problem going full remote some time during the spring of 2020, doesn't look like "unions" play a big role there.
        • sanxiyn 6y ago
          I just used the recent example that comes to mind. The most prominent benefit is fight over overtime pay. In fact overtime pay is what triggered unionization in South Korean IT sector. Pre-unionization, basically no one in South Korean IT paid overtime. It is legally a gray area. Then Naver (the dominant search engine in South Korea) unionized over overtime pay and won. Other companies, including Kakao, quickly followed and all won. Naver union shared their know-how to other union organizers.
• prodtorok 6y ago
  IMO this entire thread is missing a likely trajectory/implication here. This isn't a union formed in the industrial revolution.
• karl11 6y ago
  Don't think we've ever seen Hollywood in the modern era without unions, so not sure how you can claim it's "undeniable" the industry is better off. We basically have no clue if it's better off or not. Unions are intended for industries where a worker doesn't have a marketplace of options as there is a single or just a few employers (e.g. Hollywood, teachers, coal mining towns, hospital staff, etc.). Unionizing at Google makes no sense, as there are thousands of tech companies hiring engineers in the valley -- engineers can "collectively bargain" with Google by simply leaving and working somewhere "better". The reality is that Google is an easy place to work relative to how much people get paid. People don't want to leave a cushy job for one where they would have to work harder for their money, so instead, they are trying other means to have their cake and eat it too.
  • itake 6y ago
    Just wondering but what companies are comparable to google to work at (with similar pay and culture)? I can only think of a handful that pay as well and even less if you consider corporate mission and culture.
    • karl11 6y ago
      Exactly - people don't want to sacrifice their paycheck for their principles, so instead they are forming a union so they can try and change the company and have it both ways.
      • avianlyric 6y ago
        > so instead they are forming a union so they can try and change the company and have it both ways. Is this a bad thing?
        • ddingus 6y ago
          Nope.
  • avianlyric 6y ago
• runawaybottle 6y ago
  Well if the rest of the tech industry can copy faang Leetcode interviews, at the very least also start copying this union initiative. For once I’d like to see copy-cat culture not completely suck. No more of the silly fridge full of beers and ping pong tables, copy the real stuff please - salary, 20% time, union, and we’ll study for your Leetcode, no problemo.
• RickJWagner 6y ago
  I've never been in a union, but I have 2 strong impressions of them from friends. One friend was an electrician, he enjoyed working for a union because it gave him extra freedoms in his work. The second friends father worked in management for a mine that used union labor. They went through an ugly labor strike where their windows were shot out of their house and their lives felt threatened. I'm of mixed opinion, but the second scenario weighs heavily.
  • Jweb_Guru 6y ago
    Mine workers are very frequently abused by management. Do you happen to have any links to stories covering that situation?
  • wccrawford 6y ago
    That certainly sucks, and I'm absolutely against violence in strikes. Of any kind. But have you considered that perhaps without the union, that strike would have been even worse? Those workers likely decided to do those things on their own, not with union involvement. If they'd been striking without a union to rein them in, things might have been worse. Of course, it's possible there would have been other problems, especially for the non-union workers. I'm fairly anti-union, but there are definitely times when I see them as a necessity. My working conditions are not such that I think a union is necessary or even desirable, but mine workers are one situation where I think that unions do their jobs.
• throway1gjj 6y ago
  LOL good riddance Google
• clickness 6y ago
  The union's official website: https://alphabetworkersunion.org/ https://alphabetworkersunion.org/
• secondcoming 6y ago
  > Google contractors have long complained about their unequal treatment compared to full-time staff. While they make up the majority of Google’s workforce, they often lack the benefits of salaried employees I don't know how it works in the US, but in the UK contractors benefit from tax advantages compared to salaried employees, although HMRC is actively trying to kill the contractor market by tightening IR35 rules. That said, if contractors end up getting the same benefits as salaried employees then their contractor status is on dodgy legal ground. This may be a phyrric victory for them.
• zthrowaway 6y ago
  Some of the most highly paid, privileged and marketable individuals in our industry, easily in the top 5% of income in the economy... what’s the point of this? Google employees are a far cry from the romanticized proletariat fighting against the bourgeoisie.
  • John23832 6y ago
    If you read the article, you would see content about contract workers.
    • giantg2 6y ago
      I saw that it was mostly that the contract workers don't get the same benefits. But how is this different than other places? In some cases, benefits need to restricted or you risk them becoming shadow employees (ie hands are tied by law).
      • John23832 6y ago
        Again more details in the article. The verge article links a NYT article which goes in depth on the “two tier system” within google. That’s not to say that even outsourced contractors couldn’t benefit from unionizing with google employees. Google has the leverage to improve the lives of its subcontractors, but pressuring the contracting company.
        • giantg2 6y ago
          I guess my real question is, how is this different from anywhere in the industry?
          • John23832 6y ago
            Why does it have to be different? If under representation/abuse is prevalent in an industry nothing should be done about it?
• rdgthree 6y ago
  It seems incredibly significant that only 230 people are officially involved with these plans to unionize. As of 2019, Google had nearly 120,000 employees.[0] That seems quite small, relatively speaking. Legally (I think, just learning about this now), to form a union, a majority of workers must show their willingness to form a union. Alternatively, to choose an existing union to join, an election with 30% of the workers support is required.[1] So with that said, am I reading this right? Does this group of 230 people need to find at least ~40,000 more people for this to be a valid effort to form/join a legal union? [0]https://www.cnbc.com/2020/01/02/google-employee-growth-2001-through-2019.html https://www.cnbc.com/2020/01/02/google-employee-growth-2001-... [1]https://www.legalmatch.com/law-library/article/how-to-form-a-labor-union.htm https://www.legalmatch.com/law-library/article/how-to-form-a...
  • avianlyric 6y ago
    Reading the article, it sounds like they do need to find ~40,000 votes. The article mentions that now they've announced the unionisation attempt, they're gonna starting doing lots of public campaigning to collect the votes they need.
    • rdgthree 6y ago
      Yeah, they definitely need to gather support of some sort, I'm just curious about the scale. 40,000 people from within the 120,000+ organization seems huge. If that's really the case, the coverage so far would seem fairly sensationalist - 0.25% of employees signing on to unionize is a drop in the bucket next to a required minimum 30% of the workforce signed on.
      • avianlyric 6y ago
        I think the article is pretty accurate, the title looks pretty spot on > Google workers announce plans to unionize I agree that the number involved is quite small at the moment, but given how hostile Google has been to any unisation effort, the fact the 230 people have organised anyway, and now put their jobs on the line, is quite a big thing. I suspect that there are many at Google that would happily join a union, just look at how high the attendance of Google's walk outs have been. This announcement clearly indicates that union organisers believe they have enough support to come out of the woodwork, and start some serious campaigning.
• kepler1 6y ago
  Unions are about locking in a minimum standard of work on something that doesn't change, stifling innovation, covering for underperforming colleagues, rewarding people based on how long they've been around, making things cost more than they should be, and worse. Why would I ever want to support such a system, in an industry that has brought innovative technology and material improvement in living standards and knowledge to billions of people?
  • dukeyukey 6y ago
    Unions are just a way to have some kind of collective voice; what the union does and how it achieves it's goals are up to the members. There are many, many models you can follow, from union-shops to more insurance/mutual aid society models.
  • deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
• fnord77 6y ago
  checks and balances against corporate power.
• piker 6y ago
  Honest question: are there good examples of unionized companies that continue to innovate post unionization? Unionization seems at the surface like the end stage of disruptor where stakeholders begin jockeying for slices of a pie that now grows linearly.
  • giantg2 6y ago
    I would also like to know.
  • tsjq 6y ago
    Is this the beginning of the end of Google?
    • visarga 6y ago
      What, they run out of money?
      • sparky_z 6y ago
        I don't think that's the kind of "end" they mean. IBM and HP haven't run out of money either.
    • SiempreViernes 6y ago
      Haven't we been hearing about the beginning to the end for years now?
      • jjcon 6y ago
        Yeah and they’ve killed off dozens of projects, profits and revenue are down, innovation is long out the window and the quality of their products has gone to hell.
  • sanxiyn 6y ago
    Naver (the dominant search engine in South Korea) seems innovative to me. They successfully launched e-commerce project in 2018, which became #1 in 2019 beating the incumbent (which is owned by eBay). It's as if Google launched Amazon competitor and won within a year.
• maxehmookau 6y ago
  Before US-based workers jump on this and start talking about how unions are a bad thing in general, remember to look to Europe. Trade unions are a huge part of the workforce culture here and are mostly a force for good.
  • ur-whale 6y ago
    >Trade unions are ... a force for good. As witnessed by how much Europe innovates in tech. lol.
    • maxehmookau 6y ago
      I could provide a list of European tech innovations over the last decade, but I sense you're not looking to engage in good faith.
      • will4274 6y ago
        Sure, I'd be interested in your list of European tech companies that have innovated a comparable amount to Google. Whatcha got?
        • Apocryphon 6y ago
          Saw this one the other day: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25605151 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25605151 There's also ASML, which was a focus of that thread's discussion.
        • maxehmookau 6y ago
          I'm not sure a monopoly like Google is something to aspire to. Europe is full of amazing copmanies doing innovative things. If Google is your ultimate measure of success though, you're right, my list won't keep up. Arm Ocado TransferWise Skype Nokia Skyscanner ASOS Klarna Spotify Deliveroo Rovio
  • 1123581321 6y ago
    I’m sure Europe would be happy to see US tech salaries and company growth stagnate a bit so they can catch up and stop losing good workers.
• ahelwer 6y ago
  On a corp-cultural level it's interesting this is originating at Google, as opposed to say Amazon which is generally considered a more burnout-causing/crushing place to work on the engineering side in some teams. The Google employees I've talked to all seemed remarkably uncynical about their jobs, and still took a certain amount of pride in working at their company. I can contrast this with Amazon, Microsoft, and (to a lesser degree) Facebook employees who sort of hold their jobs at arm's length from themselves; not much of their identity is wrapped up in it. For union organization at higher payscales, maybe peoples' desire to better their workplace will only be effective if they care about their workplace to begin with.
  • appleflaxen 6y ago
    This is a great point / comparitor
  • ocdtrekkie 6y ago
    Essentially the different is that Google is so incredibly culty that people refuse to leave even when they're grossly mistreated and the company does incredibly unethical things. Everyone in big tech has job mobility, so for someone to care to unionize, they have to not want to leave. So where in other tech companies, unhappy employees leave, at Google they try to "fix" it, which has led to these unionization type efforts, with wider goals around making the company behave. I absolutely think that the fact that many Googlers' primary social identity is that they're a Googler is why this is starting there and not another FAANG.
    • SamoyedFurFluff 6y ago
      > Everyone in big tech has job mobility, Except for immigrants pending green card/citizenship...
      • ocdtrekkie 6y ago
        That is definitely true, and unfortunately tech companies have been abusing H-1B laws flagrantly in order to hire trapped workers they can underpay. (https://www.cnet.com/news/facebook-accused-by-trump-administration-of-favoring-h-1b-workers/ https://www.cnet.com/news/facebook-accused-by-trump-administ... is particularly blatant.) That being said, without the employees who could leave, but choose not to, Google would not survive. Hiring underpaid immigrants can only get you so far.
• appleflaxen 6y ago
  The recurring theme in the comments against unions can be captured by a simple truth: Unions don't protect your interests; they protect their interests. Which is fundamentally true, and cannot be changed. So if your employment situation is so bad that you need a second, massively powerful, self-interested entity to negotiate with the massively powerful, self-interested entity in the hopes that your interests may happen to align then a union is the right choice. But if not, you are adding an order of magnitude of complexity to your political work environment (yuck) and will come to regret it. And if it comes to pass, it is absolutely critical to structure the union in such a way that the interests are aligned with the employee members.
  • Siira 6y ago
    Unions also fuck non-union members, which in turn creates a lot of economic deadweight and inefficiency.
    • matsemann 6y ago
      No, that's just normal anti-union-FUD. A union doesn't have to imply that it controls everything, or that everyone has to be part of the union to work somewhere. A union could also just be a large entity that collectively bargain on behalf of the workers, and can do so better than they could separately. Often that involves stuff like better safety, pay, getting rid of bad stuff like non-competes etc. And where I'm from those new things are enforced company wide, not just for the union. So every worker profits from the union, even non-union members. If anything, the non-union members are the deadweight where I live. They get the benefits, without paying any membership fee.
      • musingsole 6y ago
        >A union doesn't have to imply As there's no set definition that would capture every union/guild to have ever existed...a "union" doesn't imply a thing other than some collective decision making apparatus. However, turning from Plato to my good friend Aristotle, history shows that unions tend to not notice non-members or - even worse - actively work against them. It's not FUD; it's a pattern.
• sz4kerto 6y ago
  One difficulty I see with the mission statement (https://alphabetworkersunion.org/principles/mission-statement/ https://alphabetworkersunion.org/principles/mission-statemen...) is that it is very broad, and contains a lot of progressive values that are likely not as widely shared as the authors might expect. One might or might not agree with these values, but it is going to be significantly harder to start steering the company's product direction and social responsibility efforts than 'just' representing the employees during e.g. benefits and compensation negotiations.
  • x87678r 6y ago
    Yeah that doesn't look like any union I've ever seen.
    • capableweb 6y ago
      What unions have you seen/participated in? What countries are those located in? Could you imagine a union that does something that is not shared with those unions you've seen? Being unlike other unions doesn't have to bad, could be great thing. Why not improve on top of the idea of unions and try to come up with something even better? Seems like an excellent idea, especially in these times of "disruption" of industries left and right.
      • jskell725 6y ago
        You might get a Google indeed; some new vehicle that helps move society forward. But I suspect a very dangerous Theranos; except the union members will be left holdng the mess after it blows up .
    • Dumblydorr 6y ago
      This comment is so low effort, can you provide any evidence or backing for your statement?
      • x87678r 6y ago
        From the definition of unions there isn't much overlap. Yes they want to protect Google Workers from harassment which is valuable but doesn't sound like they're fighting for improving wages, benefits, or working conditions. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Labor_unions_in_the_United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Labor_unions_in_the_United_Sta...
• ausbah 6y ago
  what do they need to be "successful"? a certain % of employees?
  • tsjq 6y ago
    30%
• ur-whale 6y ago
  I'm hearing that since the COVID, many Google workers are being deprived of their 3 free meals a day and access to the gym. Clearly unacceptable, time to unionize.
• LatteLazy 6y ago
  I've asked before and no one seems to know: what is unionising meant to achieve for these workers? Are they under compensated? Are they getting fired for unfair reasons? I thought big tech had the opposite problem: everyone gets 6 figures, no one gets fired you just get moved to a do nothing team...
  • logicchains 6y ago
    Google hired a toxic political activist, then later fired them for being too toxic. In this case, from reading the union goals it looks like they're aiming to make it harder to fire toxic political activists in future.
    • LatteLazy 6y ago
      I hate the political bs side of these things. A bit turn off for me here in the UK is when unions spend capital (political or cash) on issues that don't help or even hurt their members. Teachers unions here supported more work and less money for them because "think of the children". Asking people to collectively bargain is very different to asking them to collectively sign up and forgo their wages over some weird political point of principle. The a two should be separate.
• notRobot 6y ago
  Many people don't realise this but unions don't just negotiate salaries. They assure rights aren't being violated, promote ethical, safe and healthy workplaces, prevent and fight against discrimination and unfair treatment, fight wrongful dismissal, etc.
  • yvdriess 6y ago
    Indeed. HR has incentives to side with the employer, where a union rep has incentives to side with the employee. In Belgium, every company of a certain size is required to have a union rep. They provide a lot of services you would expect HR to provide: being the point of contact for complains, clarify certain rights and obligations, etc. Even when a national holiday falls on a weekend, the company has to agree with the union rep how that will be recuperated. Unions in Belgium typically do not negotiate salaries, except for cases where there's statutes involved (e.g. gov workers like teachers).
• dubcanada 6y ago
  It seems that Hacker News is rather anti union. I am not sure I fully understand what peoples opposition towards a union is. I've honestly never heard of a negative thing about unions beyond silly unproven things like "unions don't innovate" or other nonsense.
  • matz1 6y ago
    Simply, union interest is not the same as company interest. Its maybe good for the employee but not good for the company. One example of negative things of an union: It makes harder for company to fire people. Look at teachers union right now, they are fighting by all means to refuse to come back teaching in person. Teaching online benefit the teacher but really sucks for the kids and parents.
    • Pfhreak 6y ago
      That's both reductive and false. The employees benefit when the company does well. A union just fights to have the employees share more in that success.
      • matz1 6y ago
        > The employees benefit when the company does well Not really, for example it would be benefit the company to reduce expense by improving automation/efficiency by reducing the number of employee. I wouldn't say it benefited the employee to get sacked.
• zeckalpha 6y ago
  > It was the first time white-collar employees in the tech industry had unionized. What? CWA, mentioned in the article, isn’t a new thing, and that’s just one example.
• eznzt 6y ago
  Google wanted a leftist culture, there you have a cultist culture. May this serve as a word of warning to fangless executives all around the country.
  • thundergolfer 6y ago
    Who is the “Google” that you say wanted the leftist culture? Is it the shareholders? The majority of shareholder ownership in Google is held by wealthy non-employees, who probably didn’t want a leftist culture. Is it the executives? Seeing as unionisation probably reduces their power and their pay, they probably didn’t want it. Is it the rank-and-file engineers? These people tend to be left of centre, and the younger ones are likely quite socially progressive, but anti-capitalist? Not many. Seems wrong to generalise that they want a leftist culture.
    • alacombe 6y ago
      "Leftist culture" is the only way to make any kind of money right now in the US, so of course Google want a "leftist culture" there. Is the rest of the world, it might be different, of course (eg. China).
• throwaway7281 6y ago
  Good for them. I find it strange that we have this org setup at all. A union illustrates the clear divide between capital owners and workers. It sounds so 19th century, but it's just as valid today, unfortunately.
• DonnyV 6y ago
  I think a lot of the back and forth in this thread is dancing around the edges of a couple questions. Who really owns a company? I know legally who owns it. But a company is nothing without the people that work in it and who generate the ideas who keep it going. Shouldn't the majority of people in that company benefit and have a say how its run? Why should a handful of people who don't run the day to day operation or generate the majority of ideas, big and small get to own everyone else's ideas and benefit from them in perpetuity?
  • marcinzm 6y ago
    The workers do benefit, they get paid a salary and get RSUs (whose value increases with stock price). Very large amounts of both depending on the role by both US and world standards. If they want to then they can invest that income into company stock and become shareholders. Then they benefit in perpetuity based on how much they invested. edit: And this union includes part time cleaning staff which while vital to the functioning of a company hardly generate revolutionary ideas except in movies.
  • okprod 6y ago
    This depends on the company, size, whether it's structured to give employees some sort of proportional, equitable ownership stake, etc.. There are scenarios where founders/owners put in 100% of the equity at the start and/or ongoing, and it may not make sense for workers who conduct operations to take on ownership stakes, especially if those workers are all part-time for example.
  • kyrra 6y ago
    A company is nothing without leadership. A company is nothing without the initial investors. A company is nothing without the it's initial idea. It takes a lot of people in different roles and a lot of different resources (be it people, money, opportunity) to make a company work. While there are successful employee-owned companies after, many companies today would not exist if you didn't have the motivation there for certain people. Do you think Tesla and SpaceX would exist if Elon had to give ownership to everyone else? You're not going to see certain kinds of risk-taking by employee-run groups, and that risk-taking tens to require people with top-down responsibility and vision to make them happen.
• ancorevard 6y ago
  The company is slowly dying internally from ideologically possessed people. Not that that is a bad thing, the great people there will leave for better things.
• crisdux 6y ago
  After reading the NYT article and browsing their website - they seem to be mainly concerned with getting the company to bend to various social justice causes and getting the company to adopt politically motivated strategy changes. So I'm a bit confused. This doesn't seem like the purpose of a labor union in the traditional sense. What am I missing here?
  • BitwiseFool 6y ago
    Nothing really, it just looks like a way to create a formal progressive institution within Google using existing legal frameworks.
• known 6y ago
  Sounds rational till GOOGLE treats all its employees as PARTNERS
• rzz3 6y ago
  If I didn’t want to join the union, would I face consequences?
  • madamelic 6y ago
    Yes. You can't be employed by a unionized company if you aren't part of the union.
    • Pfhreak 6y ago
      That's not true? Depends on the union and the company and the location.
• bane 6y ago
  Most of the unions that we have here are public service/trades/transportation related and if I'm honest, the results have been very mixed. We used to have more manufacturing related unions, but with the direction manufacturing jobs have gone in the U.S. they're mostly just gone. The public service unions (e.g. firefighters, police etc.) seem to do a good job to protect their workers on one hand and keep them fairly paid and serviced, but on the other hand provide a powerful force to keep abusive police employed and fight things like police cameras and other actions that protect the population. The public transportation unions are widely seen as abject failures, providing protection for overpaid, highly underperforming, employees. There's been numerous investigations about failures in things like our local municipal rail systems and why they're such an abomination of service, and outside of funding issues, the fingers usually get pointed in the direction of essentially unfireable and frankly lazy employees. The trade unions seem to do a good job. Plumbers, electricians, etc. generally seem to be competent, and paid well, and have good relations between employers, customers, and workers. There's also a large number of public sector unions here. At one end the usual postal workers, teachers etc. and everything seems to run pretty well there. On the other end are the infuriating government maintenance/labor unions who won't let you move a waste bin to the other side of your desk without causing a problem. Despite all this, unions are not a major factor of life for most of the people in my area. I actually only know one or two people who're union members personally. Despite this, I live in one of the highest average income areas in the country. But I also recognize that for many people this environment prices them out of livable housing and food, and unions can help bolster their pay to make living in this area reasonable for them. I'm somewhat at a loss as to what better work conditions Google employees are looking for. They're among the most highly paid employees on the planet with absolutely incredible work conditions. If I had to wager, in exchange for whatever protections these employees are seeking, the tradeoff will be the erosion and removal of most of the perks that make Google a desirable place to work for. On the other hand, with Google leadership's behavior the last few years, they've kind of brought this on themselves so, small violins all around.
  • frongpik 6y ago
    There's a small group of sjw activists there that want to run the show.
• nailer 6y ago
  Direct link: https://alphabetworkersunion.org/press/releases/2021-01-04-code-cwa-google-union/ https://alphabetworkersunion.org/press/releases/2021-01-04-c...
• aaomidi 6y ago
  What is HN doing about serious attempts from the likes of Pinkertons to create FUD in these threads? We know for a fact that tech companies are their customer, and we know they're ruthless in online disinfo. Is HN doing any monitoring to the discourse to make sure the comments are coming from actual individuals rather than a company buying up a bunch of HN accounts with history and creating disfino and FUD?
  • madamelic 6y ago
    It shouldn't be shocking that a site full of tech nerds is going to be rallying for meritocracy when these unions want 1% of salaries. I don't see how a union would make my life better. When I hate my job, I leave my job and find a new one within a week. If I am swapping into a new role or looking for something specific, a month. I just see this as creating an additional bureaucratic layer that steals my money and gives me the same rights I currently do. What more could someone want? Foot massages? Even at a non-FAANG company, life as an SE is very comfortable.
• xibalba 6y ago
  I think we should all pause and consider how it is that at a 120k person company, an announcement by 230 people to unionize makes headline news. Could it be yet another instance of a "journalist" acting as advocate?
  • geodel 6y ago
    Correct. Just another day and another views as news item.
• oriettaxx 6y ago
  > Google workers announce plans to unionise uh, are they still not unionised? weird. what to say: I hope it is not just an announce.
• seibelj 6y ago
  I know some Googlers who make over $500k annual and in truth are fairly unskilled. Not sure they could survive at any other company. Don’t really see why they need a union to “protect” them from being fantastically wealthy?
• zer0faith 6y ago
  The reason for these folks unionizing is not for the traditional reasons (higher wages, better benefits, work life balance, keeping the company from running you over, ect...) This is more along the lines of being able to protest work that is consider unethical (IE the AI noted in the article, working with other gov'ts ect...) and not be penalized or fired for it. Unfortunately, I don't believe that a union is the answer for their problem because so long as there is money to fund a project there will be people lined up to work.
• firefoxd 6y ago
  230 out 100k+ want to unionize? It would be nice for sure, but unions are not coming back[1]. The campaign to disrupt unions was successful and they are easily dismantled without breaking the law. Yet the employees still need protection. Unions have been sorta replaced by HR. Employees almost always go to HR to resolve issues but they forget that this entity is for the company, by the company. If we want to make any impact I think HR is where we start. We turn it into a public and legal entity, required by law if the company reaches a certain size. And it reports to the state government. [1]: https://idiallo.com/blog/unions-are-not-coming-back https://idiallo.com/blog/unions-are-not-coming-back
• j45 6y ago
  If unions are about collective and not selective workers rights, what types of workers rights are missing not only at Google, but FAANG? We hear lots about unions... or lack of them stifling access to opportunity or innovation, I’m curious to learn more about: - What a modernized or reimagined practice of a union could look like where it wasn’t anchored in the world changing slowly, instead of quickly? - How might a reimagined union focused on today’s issues with today’s approaches in the 21st century look and start much differently than one incarnated a few hundred years ago? Is there a step change possible or already occurred in some cases? - How can unions overcome the issues that other bureaucracies (enterprise, Govt, education, health, etc) experience, including in some cases inhibiting change at the goal of self preservation?
• mindrunner 6y ago
  I don't think H1Bs will unionize, there's too much too lose if they get fired.
• deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
• xiaq 6y ago
  A tangential point, but I find it weird and somewhat amusing that an article on US Google employees should use a photo of Google's London engineering office. Maybe they don't have a good shot of a lot of people standing in front of some US office?
• maxdo 6y ago
  I called ConEd and union workers were slacking by my house the entire working day. At the end of the day they went out , checked my cord, said nothing wrong and finished the day. I heard many other similar stories like this. If google will face this situation they’ll just move their workforce elsewhere except some numbers of really great talents , and those will be motivated.
• eplanit 6y ago
  I wish Google well on whatever it (legally) pursues to fight this. I see them as a company that has gone from great to now becoming mediocre, and whose employees are destroying it from within. Maybe those clever interview quizzes should be updated to identify and filter out political zealots.
  • apta_ 6y ago
    I know at least one person who left Google because it became too political, and this was several years ago. It's sad to see what's become of the company.
• mancerayder 6y ago
  Two thoughts as I wake up to this: 1) "Arranged as a members-only union, the new organization won’t seek collective bargaining rights to negotiate a new contract with the company" What use will that be, if they don't collectively bargain, as a, em, collective of employees? The next step would be to pressure everyone to join, or the whole thing won't be very effective. 2) If the thing were to work, then I'd expect the very next HN article to read: Alphabet Company Announces Move to __, TX.
  • capableweb 6y ago
    Contract bargaining for the members is not the only thing a union usually does. There are loads more to it, great starting point to learn more about unions would be to read through the Wikipedia page before dismissing the idea, here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trade_union https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trade_union If it wasn't clear to people working at Google before, if the company moves somewhere in order to lessen the power of their employees, I sure hope the employees start waking up to how their company treats them. My guess is that Google doesn't want to actually show that face though, so unlikely to happen.
    • mancerayder 6y ago
      > There are loads more to it, great starting point to learn more about unions A great starting point to sound condescending, as well.
      • capableweb 6y ago
        Sorry, that was not my intention. My intention was to guide you to read more about the subject you're currently discussing, as your points make it pretty clear that the idea of what a union is, is much wider than what you think.
• vitus 6y ago
  The prevailing fixation seems to be on how unionization would help the highly-compensated engineers, when the people who need and would benefit most from unionization are the TVCs, who aren't considered Alphabet employees, don't get benefits, are regularly excluded (from all-hands, mailing lists, even affiliating with Google on LinkedIn). Suppose a barista's phone dies. Employees are not permitted by policy to chip in to buy a new one, per existing guidance, even if there are 100 people at the office all willing to chip in $10 as gratitude for years of expertly-poured coffees. Don't get me wrong -- there's absolutely value in using a staffing agency to scale hiring of support staff to fit the needs of rapidly growing sites. But if you've been employing the same worker for 1, 2, even 5 years, why not convert them to employees?
  • PragmaticPulp 6y ago
    Unions would also add additional hurdles to young engineers looking to join or move up within the company. We like to think of unions as protecting members against the corporation, but traditionally unions also protect members against outsiders looking to take their jobs. In this case, those outsiders are young people breaking into the industry or trying to move up the ranks within Google. Before going all-in on unions, consider if you’re ready to start making it harder for Googlers to get fired or make it more difficult for someone to get promoted based on their work rather than seniority (number of years worked). At this point it’s not even clear what the union is demanding or what they expect to change. Google already has industry leading pay and benefits, as well as a reputation for some of the most reasonable working hours in the industry.
    • ecf 6y ago
      > ... but traditionally unions also protect the members against outsiders looking to take their jobs. Hit the nail on the head. I’ve always heard horror stories about the police union advocating for literal murderers so those murderers can get another job where they can murder again. But then I joined my first startup and had to install another access point by simply running a 15 ft Ethernet cable through the paneled ceiling. A 15-30 minute job, tops. But the building had an exclusive contract with a unionized cabling company and I could get my startup evicted if I attempted the job myself. Instead, we had to pay this cabling company $4k and wait 2 weeks for them to come onsite. I’m sure there are good unions out there. But unions people have encounters with pretty much are all rotten.
• andyjohnson0 6y ago
  A little off topic: as a developer living in the UK and considering joining a union, which one(s) should I consider?
• jinkyu 6y ago
  people need to realize they're paid what they're worth (and come on... google pays VERY well). unionizing so you don't work in environments bad for your health is a thing. unionizing so you can extort money from your employer, however, is a slippery slope that leads to a few people at the top of the heap causing lots of trouble for the company, probably its members (dues... or else!) and those union leaders get nice houses on ski slopes. best of luck google!
• gverrilla 6y ago
  very good news
• xyzelement 6y ago
  I made this point on HN before but I think it applies here. The world breaks out into two types of employers: those who try to hire outstanding people and go above and beyond for them, with the expectation that one of the attributes of these outstanding employees is that they likewise go above and beyond for the company. The alternative is employees who treat their employees like cattle and the employees treat the employer as a slaughterhouse. The first path is much preferable for everyone. The ideal situation (think marriage) is where either partner willingly goes above and beyond for the other. I am not sure the impact of this particular action, but it's movement in the direction of employees asserting they don't want to participate in such a relationship, instead resorting to the more common power struggle rather than a partnership. That's OK but taken to the extreme, there's no reason for them to expect the extraordinary treatment google has given them to continue, either.
  • ruph123 6y ago
    What a naive world view is this to think that a large enough company goes “above and beyond” for their employees... As a German these American work ethics are so weird to me. You are being put on a stick and held over a bon fire and all you do is scream “turn me quicker“! What life is this to work your ass off for a company that demands crazy work hours, that can fire you for any reason with laughable notice period, gives you almost no vacation, no maternity leave and when you get sick, you lose your health insurance and end up on the streets. While the other survivors are celebrating their own luck. Such a depressing dystopia.
    • finiteseries 6y ago
      That doesn’t describe even the most down on their luck FAANG engineer in the slightest, and the previous comment tried to make that obvious by defining two entirely separate sorts of employer relationships to consider. That you didn’t address the second type of relationship, specifically brought your nationality in, and ended by calling their nation a depressing dystopia brings this dangerously close into nationalist flamebait territory.
      • 6y ago
• ineedasername 6y ago
  "to opposing Project Maven, to protesting the egregious, multi-million dollar payouts that have been given to executives who’ve committed sexual harassment I don't see how a union will help these issues. They may demonstrate the power of collective action, but not the utility of a union for these particular types of issues.
• theravengod 6y ago
  WTH? Most people here don't know recent US history anymore ? Just look at what unions did to the people of Detroit ? Sure, on paper it seems like a good idea to fight the rich company to give employees a bigger share of the profit, but do remember: it's not the employee that decides how much profit is enough for the company to have. If the investors/CEO/boss doesn't feel the profit is enough, they/he/she can close the company. Unions always will protect the weaker worker (regardless of the domain) and subtract value form the better workers. If some employees don't like what Google is doing, they can protest (as they did). Also they can leave. Twisting the arm of the boss to give you more, when has that worked in the long run ?
  • dogprez 6y ago
    Bay Area SWE from Flint, MI here. > on paper it seems like a good idea to fight the rich company to give employees a bigger share of the profit That is explicitly a non-goal of this union. > Just look at what unions did to the people of Detroit Let's say for argument's sake that the UAW wasn't formed, the Great Sitdown Strike just lead to policy changes (hard to imagine after how they were treated). Do you think the auto companies would have been as successful without the quality of life the UAW afforded its members? Anecdotally, my uneducated grandfather immigrated to the states for one of those jobs. Do you think that the auto companies still wouldn't have moved production overseas to maximize their profits? Even without the UAW, a job in Mexico still paid a fraction of an American job in the 70s. > Also they can leave If your gripe is that your work is now being used in a context you find ethically wrong (like Project Maven), moving companies doesn't solve the problem. Voting with your feet doesn't make any positive change, it just leaves you at the least problematic workplace. > Twisting the arm of the boss to give you more, when has that worked in the long run ? I don't know. I guess when it resulted in political action like the 40hr 5dy workweek? Honestly, I don't know though.
• underseacables 6y ago
  Unions at Google strike me as rich people complaining about not enough assigned parking. For an industry of free lunch, massages, and unbelievable perks and benefits, talk of unionizing is just tone-deaf.
• AzzieElbab 6y ago
  the article makes it sound like this union will not be about collective bargaining
• roamerz 6y ago
  This is like buying a house that is built close to an airport and then suing to have it shut down because you don’t like the noise of planes taking off. Google did not have a union when you asked them to hire you - which you happily accepted. Now your plan is to collectively mutiny against your employer to extort additional control or compensation. I’ve always believed that you treat your employer with the respect they garner by supporting you and your family. If you are not satisfied with you income or relationship with your employer go seek other avenues. Just my 2 cents.
• marknutter 6y ago
  > Everyone deserves a welcoming environment, free from harassment, bigotry, discrimination, and retaliation regardless of age, caste, class, country of origin, disability, gender race, religion, or sexual orientation. Until and unless they demonstrate that they intend to protect conservative employees, there's not a chance I would trust them to actually uphold this value.
• glitchc 6y ago
  Sounds like the tech industry needs a union rather than just Google employees.
• tomerbd 6y ago
  Vacation days compensation for being on call
  • seedless-sensat 6y ago
    This already exists at Google
• confidantlake 6y ago
  We just had a thread about the abusive conditions at apple. A union could help address that behavior.
• realshadow 6y ago
  I never liked google and googlers. Google is nothing but a monster which shares private info with goverments and companies. Use their platforms to rev up their products at the expensive of small business. so i do not care what happens to google/googlers.
• raiyu 6y ago
  Any system that aggregates power can be used towards detrimental efforts. Unions aggregate power and as such are heavily dependent on their leadership. When there was no employment law in the US and you had children working, obviously change was necessary and so unions were able to provide worker protections that an individual couldn't establish for themselves since they had no power against the corporation. If you look at police unions in the US you can see how detrimental unions can be as well. They are focused on protecting their workers even when those same workers are the issue which leads to a very challenging environment around firing "poor" performers. Often times what is better is intelligent government regulation. Though that in and of itself is an oxymoron. Things like mandated health insurance, overtime pay, work hours, minimum wage, these are all protections that we need encoded in law, less so in unions. The other challenge with unions, is that while one can succeed it leaves everyone else that is outside of the union at other companies completely unprotected. At the same time, if you think of the largest union, it is all of the workers of a country. What if they joined together, to really lobby the government for massive change. Something that goes into law. Like minimum wage increases, and the like. The reality though is that any economic system is complex where pushing on one area creates an often unexpected result elsewhere. You would also need heavier investment in government agencies that are meant to police the enforcement of such policies and to ensure that they are truly operating separately from the industries they are supposed to be policing. The opposite of that is what happened with the FAA and Boeing recently.
  • dogprez 6y ago
    > The other challenge with unions, is that while one can succeed it leaves everyone else that is outside of the union at other companies completely unprotected. The 5 day 40 hour workweek was championed by the trade unions but everyone got the advantage of that eventually.
    • raiyu 6y ago
      Proves my point.
      • dogprez 6y ago
• jp_sc 6y ago
  The Verge is down, but the post can be read here: https://archive.is/PWbbw https://archive.is/PWbbw
• sl1ck731 6y ago
  I was investigating unions over the holidays and saw that these types of things are specific to companies which didn't make sense to me. I'm not familiar with unions in general, but the ones I hear about most in the trades seem to be exterior to any specific company. Making unions specific to a company rather than a profession seems less useful...or are trade unions specific to their companies as well?
• SoSoRoCoCo 6y ago
  I'm excited about this, but also dismayed at the huge amount of pushback from the tech community. Exploitation in tech is built into the culture: people worship the guy who never spends time with his family and works 100 hrs per week. Screaming managers are tolerated, even revered. Retaliation is commonplace and keeps people in line, and is justified as "s/he was just lazy" or "not a team player". This needs to end. Unions are a great first step.
  • gipp 6y ago
    Neither of those things apply to Google.
  • jskell725 6y ago
    Perspective from one pushing-back tech worker: -Never seen a manager scream. Note that anyone who does so is bad at their job; and won't last long unless if anyone else wants it. -Workers commonly take multi-month parental leave breaks; block off afternoons for a kid's event, etc. -I don't know anyone who works 100 hours a week; and if I did I would think them a fool. And also help them; as this is unsafe and they need some more sleep! I understand that other gigs, especially perhaps in Gaming, are different! And workers of course have the right to freely associate, and so collectively bargain, if they choose to.
• davidfekke 6y ago
  I am not sure what good it will do to join a Union if you can't collectively bargain. You would essentially be paying dues out of your salary, and not getting anything in return. If you don't like Google, than quit.
• davidfekke 6y ago
  I am not sure what good it will do to join a Union if you can't collectively bargain. You would essentially be paying dues out of your salary, and not getting anything in return. If you don't like Google, then quit.
• pnw_hazor 6y ago
  Apparently this is a Members-only union. They are different than classic teamster/boilermaker/machinist unions most people think of. Unless the law or NLRB has recently changed its position, employers do not have to bargain with members-only unions. Though they can if they want. https://prospect.org/justice/labor-crossroads-defense-members-only-unionism/ https://prospect.org/justice/labor-crossroads-defense-member... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Members-only_unionism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Members-only_unionism
• baud147258 6y ago
  Where I live, unions just seem to protect un-productive employees (if they are union members of course) and slow down process by adding another layer of bureaucracy. But maybe it's different in the land of the free?
• borishn 6y ago
  Old tech companies had heavy machinery and workers were relatively easy to train and replace. The high-tech companies are nothing without their workers. I think in the future the high tech employees unions will be able to steer a larger share of profits towards themselves.
• 6gvONxR4sf7o 6y ago
  Everybody here seems to agree that unions have the potential to do good or bad. The next logical step to me is that there needs to be a selection mechanism in place. For companies, it's competition. If someone else does better, the consumer or worker can choose someone else. And we have anti-monopoly laws to make sure that someone else exists, to foster that competition and choice. Is there such a mechanism for unions? My ideal scenario wouldn't be me on my own as it is today. I'd want a handful of unions to pick from to represent me, not too differently from my choice of medical insurer. Five unions to represent 120,000 employees would still average 24,000 members each, so it's a huge step forward in collective bargaining. And then people can change unions if one of them ends up how folks are worried about in this and every other union thread. It seems like it would get at all sides of the issue. We'd get collective representation and a safeguard against the potential pitfalls. How could this scenario come about? Could it be something like medical insurance with an open enrollment season? There would need to be something akin to anti-competitive behavior built in, so you couldn't end up with an agreement saying you can only hire from our union. What else would it take?
• gotoeleven 6y ago
  I can't wait to see how combining unionism with social justice politics improves google's products. Very excited.
• deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
• baggy_trough 6y ago
  Good thing I'm using Google less and less, because unions turn everything they touch to shit.
• Animats 6y ago
  This isn't a real union. It's more a lobbying association, like the IEEE. They're not trying to get a contract with Google.
• sidibe 6y ago
  I think on the whole Google leadership is pretty representative of what Google employees want and the ones who want this union will be disappointed with what the union wants if they get enough people on board.
• Ardur 6y ago
  It is a bad idea to affiliate with CWA. If CWA was the origin, it is a terrible idea. Tech should be wary and look at what the automobile unions amounted to.
• halflings 6y ago
  On this group's homepage [1]: "We are BIPOC workers who fight against totalitarianism." I am not sure what this has to do with unionizing Google workers. Using obscure acronyms to arbitrarily focus on race and ethnicity (something frowned upon here in Europe at least) + the hyperbole of "fighting totalitarianism" doesn't give me great confidence that this is representing workers, as much as it is pushing the ideology of a vocal minority. If they truly believe they represent the majority of Google employees, then they are free to widely share this call internally and see how many people actually agree with them and want to join their group. So far, it's ~0.2K out of ~260K employees. [1] https://alphabetworkersunion.org/ https://alphabetworkersunion.org/
  • Merman_Mike 6y ago
    Sounds more like a political party than a labor union.
    • neartheplain 6y ago
      This is a common criticism of teacher unions in the USA [0]. They donate dues money to left-leaning political causes against the wishes of many of their members. In a union shop, dues-paying employees have no choice in the matter. It is compelled political speech. I expect this will be a big issue in tech unions also. [0] https://www.detroitnews.com/story/opinion/2019/10/16/opinion-teachers-money-being-weaponized-partisan-politics/3976820002/ https://www.detroitnews.com/story/opinion/2019/10/16/opinion...
      • chimeracoder 6y ago
        > In a closed shop, these members have no choice in the matter. Union shop, not closed shop. Closed shops have been illegal for over 70 years.
        • neartheplain 6y ago
          You are correct, I used the wrong term. I have fixed it in my original comment. In the US, outside of states with right-to-work laws, a union shop can still require workers to pay dues even if they aren't members of the union. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Closed_shop#United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Closed_shop#United_States
• rmk 6y ago
  This union appears to have formed primarily as a means for political activism. This is just the worst type of union, because members are implicitly assumed to agree with the union’s political ideals (can you imagine conservatives joining this union in large numbers?) and also because if it grows large enough, it may make moves to become certified. That will put paid to Googles chances of doing business as it sees fit without any regard to the politics of what they do. How would collective bargaining work at Google? What would be the demands of such a bargaining group, aside from purely political items?
• around_here 6y ago
  One of the most common things I see among tech workers is that they think companies are “anti-union”, which is a total lie. They love unions, just not when workers make them. They call them “associations”, “councils”, “chambers of commerce”, etc. They serve on each other’s boards, they form cabals to limit employee pay, and they lobby the government to make it easier to get rid of you whenever they please. Corporations and the rich love socialism. They need it. It’s socialism for them, brutal capitalism and rugged individualism for everyone else. The fools of tech listen to their words and ignore their actions.
• carabiner 6y ago
  Amazing, the first page of these comments only has a single top level comment, with 550 replies. What is the typical distribution of comments on an HN post?
• vgeek 6y ago
  https://www.cnet.com/news/apple-google-offer-415-million-to-settle-poaching-lawsuit/ https://www.cnet.com/news/apple-google-offer-415-million-to-... How soon everyone forgets. Google was caught red handed colluding with other companies to suppress employee wages in the past. This was still during their "Don't be evil." days, too.
• mchusma 6y ago
  I thought the most interesting part of this was the fact that it is not a "traditional union" or "required union", its "members only union". Linked from the article: https://tcf.org/content/report/members-only-unions-can-they-help-revitalize-workplace-democracy/ https://tcf.org/content/report/members-only-unions-can-they-... I think traditional unions have a lot of issues, but these "members only unions" seem like something that avoids those issues. If someone wants to voluntarily pay a group to help represent their interests, great! If the union no longer represents their interests, they can leave.
• biffstallion 6y ago
  Google keeps rabble rousing when it comes to certain political issues of nonsense. Here Google, how does it feel to have have it back onto you now.
• andobando 6y ago
  This is quoted form a different article, but am I the only one who sympathizes with this? >Everyone at Alphabet — from bus drivers to programmers, from salespeople to janitors — plays a critical part in developing our technology. But right now, a few wealthy executives define what the company produces and how its workers are treated. This isn’t the company we want to work for. We care deeply about what we build and what it’s used for. We are responsible for the technology we bring into the world. And we recognize that its implications reach far beyond the walls of Alphabet.
  • fnovd 6y ago
    The "few wealthy executives" are the ones ensuring that the work of the bus drivers, programmers, salespeople, and janitors is rewarded with cold, hard cash instead of empty promises and platitudes. How many $250k+ TC employees can be sustained by a company that refuses to do the "dirty work" of the DoD, that takes an ethical stance against the very anti-privacy technology that drives the profitability behind their inflated salaries? "Having your cake and eating it, too" barely fits here, it's more like showing up to a fancy steakhouse and demanding that their best cut stop coming from poor innocent cows. If you want to be a vegan, you're free to go do that; yelling at the evil chefs, butchers, and farmers to stop hurting cows while they prepare the sirloin you're paying them for is just absurd. If you want to work in a mission-focused environment, you can join the rest of us who took a pay cut to work on projects that let us go to sleep at night with that warm and fuzzy feeling. If you're not willing to give up the blood money, then it goes without saying that There Will Be Blood
• spicyramen 6y ago
  Downvote me if you want, but as a SWE I find my job very highly rewarded both economically and technically. I'm happy where I am and in my team. I'm a minority and I have study all my life to be competitive, I have been treated fairly because of my skills. Free food, gym, coffee, stocks, high salaries, mobility, not sure I can ask for more
  • dogprez 6y ago
    I can't speak the the intent of the union in the article but after all of those things you listed you might want to know that your colleagues are getting treated fairly as well. For example, how would you feel about all your benefits if you learned there were contractors that did your same job that didn't have access to the same benefits that you have and haven't been given an avenue to earn those benefits? (https://www.latimes.com/business/technology/story/2019-11-08/the-secret-and-frustrating-life-of-a-google-contract-worker https://www.latimes.com/business/technology/story/2019-11-08...) Or, how would your feel if the product you worked on was being produced with slave labor? (https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2020/12/29/lens-technology-apple-uighur/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2020/12/29/lens-te...) Would it be enough to just say, "I'm not ok with that, I'll work somewhere else." or do you think you should have some say about how your work is used?
    • Nebasuke 6y ago
      The contractor mentioned in the article is not doing the same job, but is instead a vendor (the vendor term is only mentioned in passing in the article). Google classifies contractors that work via an external agency as vendors. Most vendor workers at Google have roles which don't exist as a full time role at all and vendor contracts often even prevent vendor workers from being permanently hired. Cleaners for example are often vendors.
      • dogprez 6y ago
        Right, it's my understanding that the situation described in the article can exist for SWEs as well. It matches what was described to me from a SWE at a subsidiary of Alphabet. In their words they were doing the same work at a fraction of the pay without an avenue for conversion since they were engaged through a 3rd party.
• throwmamatrain 6y ago
  As the most spoiled class of workers to ever exist, it seems strange to want to unionize. I would think it sounds like inviting the vampire in (legal, HR, etc) without board representation of workers / codetermination similar to the German system. In America's way of doing things, I'm not sure if it's good. Would not look forward to "You have appropriate amount of non-union experience but you are 10th in line so we'll be calling you in 12 months, if we do." A theoretical for tech, not so for film unions which are being excitedly pointed to as good. It can take a very long time to get work under these schemes, which seems incompatible with how tech has worked.
• golemiprague 6y ago
  Union is just another body to govern you, as if the company you work for is not enough. Just from the article I can see they support all kind of political agendas which me or others might not agree with. So no thanks, will rather deal directly with the company only, anyways at the end of the day the market forces dictate the conditions of a worker.
• theodric 6y ago
  Somebody's about to get At-Will-State'd
• gtsop 6y ago
  I see many valid concerns in this thread regarding the structure and purpose of unions. What I can't unsee is the lack of will to make something that work. If "union" was a category of software we would be having a couple leading FOSS projects pioneering good practices and we would argue about which is better and do RFCs. Now all we do is complain how nothing works instead of trying to work this out.
• Dig1t 6y ago
  I’m not at all against unions, I think the idea is good for some industries. I truly hate the idea of being FORCED to join one though. I’ve worked union jobs in the past in California, and the idea that I HAD to join an organization and pay them a portion of my minimum wage hourly pay drove me absolutely bonkers. This was on top of the fact that the union never gave me any benefits, the reps were impossible to get ahold of and didn’t care at all even if you did get ahold of them. To me, it was a giant useless bureaucracy that I was forced to pay into. I hope software unions look and feel different than the experience that I had.
• bborud 6y ago
  As a Norwegian I am often confused by unions in the US. https://www.nho.no/en/english/articles/collective-bargaining/ https://www.nho.no/en/english/articles/collective-bargaining... https://www.worker-participation.eu/National-Industrial-Relations/Countries/Norway/Collective-Bargaining https://www.worker-participation.eu/National-Industrial-Rela...
• snidane 6y ago
  Coincidentally I was just watching these Yale lectures which touch on economical history of unions in the 20th century. Might be of interest to HN readers. https://youtu.be/q53DF6ySOZg https://youtu.be/q53DF6ySOZg - The Resurgent Right in the West https://youtu.be/T3-VlQu3iRM https://youtu.be/T3-VlQu3iRM - Reorienting the Left: New Democrats, New Labour and Europe's Social Democrats
• TedShiller 6y ago
  I know who’s not getting promoted
• deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
• bozhark 6y ago
  Do they need a lobbist? It would be such a wonderful turn of events to be able to lobby for google employees rather than just the entity.
• ProofByAccident 6y ago
  So many in this thread talking about a contract, rigidity, voting, etc. This is not a card-signing campaign, nobody will be voting on a CBA. AWU is running a minority unionism campaign which means that it's closer to a lobbying group or non-profit than eg. your standard public teachers' union.
• etxm 6y ago
  Are there any industries that have unions that don’t require a credential, certification, degree, or license?
• tomohawk 6y ago
  It's sad that they're using card checks instead of secret ballots for the effort. Card checks are a tried and true method organizers use to intimidate people. Source: several family members worked in union shops. In many cases, they were forced to be part of the union to have a job.
  • frongpik 6y ago
    What are the card checks?
• tom-_- 6y ago
  What percentage of Alphabet employees work on profitable products? Since AWU has no contract with Alphabet, their only leverage is work stoppage but if those protesting aren't adding monetary value to the business, then wouldn't work stoppage be net-neutral or positive for Alphabet?
• beholder952 6y ago
  My overall perspective on this whole discourse is that we spend a lot of time attaching a particular union, amongst a particular group of well-paid workers; to titanic struggles amongst Class and Culture. My personal opinion is that yes, inequality is a huge problem! Solutions which come to mind are Medicare for All, UBI, free public college, and an end to Homelessness; all paid for by higher income taxes on the top 10% (we can start with ending the absurd FICA cap, and then raise rates). It's not at all obvious to me how coders at an Ad company putting an intermediary between themselves and an employer changes... anything. I get that Unions were THE answer in the past - The Jungle and all that. But it's a different world and I just... don't get it! (Just to add - some of the "pro capital" comments are just as silly. I don't think Unions will ruin the world, I think they're just sort of 'fine' and super tangential to more important policy topics)
• m3kw9 6y ago
  I wonder how long before the union demand google to change certain practices, company directions or else.
• frongpik 6y ago
  Looks like a continuation of the Gebru show: the SJW leaders are threatening to unionize. If they really cared about the workers, they'd talk about non compete agreements.
• credit_guy 6y ago
  Would it be possible to create a union that opposes this union? If this union lobbies against contracts with the US military and US law enforcement, my union to let the management know that we are actually ok with these contracts? Something like a union to speak for the "silent majority"?
• deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
• musicale 6y ago
  I wish them luck in their new jobs.
• bfrog 6y ago
  Step 1,replace the board with morally inclined individuals. No more Sundar.
• yawaworht1978 6y ago
  I suppose why not. Google employs some of the smartest minds walking earth, subseque tly , this is a reflection of their thoughts. I do not think this is a group of extreme left wingers who have infiltrated google to bring change. I think this is a reaction to the some actions they have observed and decided it is time for an intervention. I do not understand the people who are against this, especially the ones not even working there. Nobody is forced to join the union. Maybe the unions are different in the US. But in Europe they have proven to be a good anti exploitation tool and are the foundation of a happy middle class
• XOXO1 6y ago
  if you do your magic everywhere , then you will need unions, to save your arse.
• JoshTko 6y ago
  While I generally support unions, I think this is a pretty bearish signal for Google. I think it totally makes sense for the contractors but less so for the rank and file Googlers as they consistently are at the upper end in the industry benefits and pay.