8 ms·

> It seems clear to me that these are people who are unwilling to sacrifice some of the money they earn to follow their ideals and principles, so they are tryin

> It seems clear to me that these are people who are unwilling to sacrifice some of the money they earn to follow their ideals and principles, so they are trying this instead. This phrasing is disingenuous. If you don't like what's going on you can stay and fight rather than giving up and leaving. The people unionizing are of the "stay and fight" variety. Where does this false dichotomy come from that your only options are to stay and shut up or leave and be vocal?

ATsch 6y ago
It probably comes the people that would prefer you shut up and stay.
mikecoles 6y ago
Absolutely not. People that want to unionize are the lazy or those whose dreams are sprinkled with unicorn glitter. Or a combination of the two. There are no benefits to modern unions. They are another level of bureaucracy. If you want better conditions or pay, earn it.
- jakelazaroff 6y ago
  So when a company tries to squeeze as much labor out of as little compensation as it can, it’s a shrewd business move… but when employees try to get the most compensation for the least labor, they’re lazy? Do you see the double standard here?
  - SpicyLemonZest 6y ago
    It's not a shrewd business move! Companies should pay well and treat their employees well, both because it's good for business and because it's the right thing to do. The adversarial model of employment where passionate employees fight against penny-pinching bosses is neither natural nor inevitable, and I think everyone who can avoid it should do so.
    - wrsh07 6y ago
      What if paying their employees who work in their warehouses as little as possible and tracking them to maximize productivity is actually what maximizes their profits? What if they don't have a shortage of labor but do employ a large number of people in a town? Should the company continue to provide awful working conditions? What should motivate the company to treat their employees better, if not the employees getting together collectively to say "we're not going to take this anymore"? Are the employees dependent on their plight becoming a national scandal that shames their employer? Or should they be able to cause the change they need themselves? See, for example, https://revealnews.org/article/how-amazon-hid-its-safety-crisis/ https://revealnews.org/article/how-amazon-hid-its-safety-cri...
      - SpicyLemonZest 6y ago
        Respectfully, I just don't understand what your stream of angry questions is about. As I said, what should happen is that companies just provide good pay and working conditions in the first place. If workers are being mistreated, I have no objection to them collectively organizing against it.
        ygjb 6y ago
        And respectfully, despite the fact that Google is an objectively good place to work for many people (good pay, good opportunities for growth and advancement, etc), there is an abundance of evidence in recent years that for minorities, and for teams under specific leaders, Google has not been a good place to work. Unions aren't just about wages and workloads, it's entirely possible that employees of tech companies (and shareholders of tech companies) that are unionized could be protected from the impact of shitty leaders through the power of collective bargaining and action that demands that abusive leaders and managers be held accountable.
        SpicyLemonZest 6y ago
        I think unions should be just about wages and workloads. It's not obvious to me that collective bargaining is a good way to handle more complex questions about how things ought to be, because rhetoric of solidarity and workers rights can be very easily subverted to serve the personal and ideological goals of union leaders.
  - underseacables 6y ago
    It’s like politicians saying that $600 is significant. How would they know? Google unionizing is like politicians asking for free parking. They seem to just want to unionize as a way to force their beliefs on others.
    - prox 6y ago
      That’s a very black-and-white way of looking at it, you do know that? How is unionizing and asking for reasonable demands “forcing your beliefs on others” The company is not some helpless animal that just rolls over when a union appears. Especially if you regulate it well, like in Europe.
- scsilver 6y ago
  Yeah and network effects add value, coordination adds value, individual contributors can only do so much, a well oiled group of engineers has outsized production, and by bargaining collectively, leverage their productivity for better compensation. Why allow yourself to be divided and conquered?
  - slumpt_ 6y ago
    > Why allow yourself to be divided and conquered? Most are convinced they are “special” or otherwise immune from anything that would warrant union representation. At least until they maybe sustain an injury that makes them less productive, or even simply grow old enough to face age discrimination. It’s always the privileged and somewhat myopic that discount the value of collective action. We act together to lift each other up. To extract the best conditions for our work and the most support from our employer because the ‘free market’ has given us coordinated wage suppression among tech giants and a mountain of sexual and racial discrimination in the workplace. Together we are stronger. America used to get this more in the early 1900s. Then the ruling class got better at controlling the narrative and crushing class consciousness. To the kids reading this who think they don’t need a union - nearly every positive workplace condition you have is a result of collective action in the past.
- 14 6y ago
  So mistaken. My union has done so much for me and my fellow workers. Any time I have a meeting with management my union sits at my side. If I was wrongfully fired my union would fight it and even hire a lawyer. Why would I not want those protections? How is that not needed in a modern world? And finally what do you do for work that hour industry needs no union I am very curious?
- wrsh07 6y ago
  So when the mlb & mlbpa negotiated stricter covid protocols (which both allowed them to complete the season and improved player safety), you're saying that provided the players no benefits? This is a statement made in ignorance. https://www.cbssports.com/mlb/news/mlb-mlbpa-reportedly-agree-to-new-covid-19-safety-protocols-rule-breakers-face-season-long-suspension/amp/ https://www.cbssports.com/mlb/news/mlb-mlbpa-reportedly-agre...
- orestarod 6y ago
  Ironic, how do you think better conditions and pay were earned historically?
- cad1 6y ago
  Unions are involved in more than pay negotiations. Sure I can work hard and earn a promotion and pay raise. Working hard cannot, for example, get me out of signing a non-compete agreement. Unionized employees could collectively bargain to ban non-compete agreements.
  - ghostwriter 6y ago
    They also can, under certain circumstances, collectively demand that the company stops hiring anyone outside the union, and make other unsubstantiated demands such as mandatory membership fees, that benefit the union itself and not high-skilled individual employees who know how to beneficially sell their skills to the employer without third-parties involved. Also, contractors with individual LLCs usually don't sign non-compete agreements, so you don't need a union to be able to benefit from an expertise that is currently in high demand.
    - adamsea 6y ago
      Yes that can occur. Lots of things can and do occur. If we think unions are bad because they do bad things under certain circumstances then that should also apply to corporations, no? Worker exploitation, ignoring externalities and such? So, we could get rid of corporations and unions? Or ... have both, since like any human institution, both are fallible.
      - ghostwriter 6y ago
        > Yes that can occur. Lots of things can and do occur. so, what's your solution to the problem of fallible unions? > Or ... have both, since like any human institution, both are fallible. You are yet to prove that unions solve anything in the setting that you outlined. How about just having corporations and a small government that doesn't prevent new players entering the market by restrictive laws and quotas, in place of those that fall prey to corruption, fraud, and short-sighted destructive practices? There's more than two options to consider.
        6y ago

ATsch 6y ago

It probably comes the people that would prefer you shut up and stay.

mikecoles 6y ago

Absolutely not. People that want to unionize are the lazy or those whose dreams are sprinkled with unicorn glitter. Or a combination of the two. There are no benefits to modern unions. They are another level of bureaucracy. If you want better conditions or pay, earn it.

jakelazaroff 6y ago
So when a company tries to squeeze as much labor out of as little compensation as it can, it’s a shrewd business move… but when employees try to get the most compensation for the least labor, they’re lazy? Do you see the double standard here?
- SpicyLemonZest 6y ago
  It's not a shrewd business move! Companies should pay well and treat their employees well, both because it's good for business and because it's the right thing to do. The adversarial model of employment where passionate employees fight against penny-pinching bosses is neither natural nor inevitable, and I think everyone who can avoid it should do so.
  - wrsh07 6y ago
    What if paying their employees who work in their warehouses as little as possible and tracking them to maximize productivity is actually what maximizes their profits? What if they don't have a shortage of labor but do employ a large number of people in a town? Should the company continue to provide awful working conditions? What should motivate the company to treat their employees better, if not the employees getting together collectively to say "we're not going to take this anymore"? Are the employees dependent on their plight becoming a national scandal that shames their employer? Or should they be able to cause the change they need themselves? See, for example, https://revealnews.org/article/how-amazon-hid-its-safety-crisis/ https://revealnews.org/article/how-amazon-hid-its-safety-cri...
    - SpicyLemonZest 6y ago
      Respectfully, I just don't understand what your stream of angry questions is about. As I said, what should happen is that companies just provide good pay and working conditions in the first place. If workers are being mistreated, I have no objection to them collectively organizing against it.
      - ygjb 6y ago
        And respectfully, despite the fact that Google is an objectively good place to work for many people (good pay, good opportunities for growth and advancement, etc), there is an abundance of evidence in recent years that for minorities, and for teams under specific leaders, Google has not been a good place to work. Unions aren't just about wages and workloads, it's entirely possible that employees of tech companies (and shareholders of tech companies) that are unionized could be protected from the impact of shitty leaders through the power of collective bargaining and action that demands that abusive leaders and managers be held accountable.
        SpicyLemonZest 6y ago
        I think unions should be just about wages and workloads. It's not obvious to me that collective bargaining is a good way to handle more complex questions about how things ought to be, because rhetoric of solidarity and workers rights can be very easily subverted to serve the personal and ideological goals of union leaders.
- underseacables 6y ago
  It’s like politicians saying that $600 is significant. How would they know? Google unionizing is like politicians asking for free parking. They seem to just want to unionize as a way to force their beliefs on others.
  - prox 6y ago
    That’s a very black-and-white way of looking at it, you do know that? How is unionizing and asking for reasonable demands “forcing your beliefs on others” The company is not some helpless animal that just rolls over when a union appears. Especially if you regulate it well, like in Europe.
scsilver 6y ago
Yeah and network effects add value, coordination adds value, individual contributors can only do so much, a well oiled group of engineers has outsized production, and by bargaining collectively, leverage their productivity for better compensation. Why allow yourself to be divided and conquered?
- slumpt_ 6y ago
  > Why allow yourself to be divided and conquered? Most are convinced they are “special” or otherwise immune from anything that would warrant union representation. At least until they maybe sustain an injury that makes them less productive, or even simply grow old enough to face age discrimination. It’s always the privileged and somewhat myopic that discount the value of collective action. We act together to lift each other up. To extract the best conditions for our work and the most support from our employer because the ‘free market’ has given us coordinated wage suppression among tech giants and a mountain of sexual and racial discrimination in the workplace. Together we are stronger. America used to get this more in the early 1900s. Then the ruling class got better at controlling the narrative and crushing class consciousness. To the kids reading this who think they don’t need a union - nearly every positive workplace condition you have is a result of collective action in the past.
14 6y ago
So mistaken. My union has done so much for me and my fellow workers. Any time I have a meeting with management my union sits at my side. If I was wrongfully fired my union would fight it and even hire a lawyer. Why would I not want those protections? How is that not needed in a modern world? And finally what do you do for work that hour industry needs no union I am very curious?
wrsh07 6y ago
So when the mlb & mlbpa negotiated stricter covid protocols (which both allowed them to complete the season and improved player safety), you're saying that provided the players no benefits? This is a statement made in ignorance. https://www.cbssports.com/mlb/news/mlb-mlbpa-reportedly-agree-to-new-covid-19-safety-protocols-rule-breakers-face-season-long-suspension/amp/ https://www.cbssports.com/mlb/news/mlb-mlbpa-reportedly-agre...
orestarod 6y ago
Ironic, how do you think better conditions and pay were earned historically?
cad1 6y ago
Unions are involved in more than pay negotiations. Sure I can work hard and earn a promotion and pay raise. Working hard cannot, for example, get me out of signing a non-compete agreement. Unionized employees could collectively bargain to ban non-compete agreements.
- ghostwriter 6y ago
  They also can, under certain circumstances, collectively demand that the company stops hiring anyone outside the union, and make other unsubstantiated demands such as mandatory membership fees, that benefit the union itself and not high-skilled individual employees who know how to beneficially sell their skills to the employer without third-parties involved. Also, contractors with individual LLCs usually don't sign non-compete agreements, so you don't need a union to be able to benefit from an expertise that is currently in high demand.
  - adamsea 6y ago
    Yes that can occur. Lots of things can and do occur. If we think unions are bad because they do bad things under certain circumstances then that should also apply to corporations, no? Worker exploitation, ignoring externalities and such? So, we could get rid of corporations and unions? Or ... have both, since like any human institution, both are fallible.
    - ghostwriter 6y ago
      > Yes that can occur. Lots of things can and do occur. so, what's your solution to the problem of fallible unions? > Or ... have both, since like any human institution, both are fallible. You are yet to prove that unions solve anything in the setting that you outlined. How about just having corporations and a small government that doesn't prevent new players entering the market by restrictive laws and quotas, in place of those that fall prey to corruption, fraud, and short-sighted destructive practices? There's more than two options to consider.
      - 6y ago