9 ms·

One difficulty I see with the mission statement (https://alphabetworkersunion.org/principles/mission-statement/ https://alphabetworkersunion.org/principles/miss

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...
marcinzm 6y ago
Seems to me that the organizers are using a union to push their own personal agendas (which they otherwise don't have the power to push) which seems like the perfect way to form a corrupt union that harms workers.
- capableweb 6y ago
  What in the mission statement seems to be "personal agendas" to you? Here they are listed: - All Alphabet workers deserve a voice - Social and economic justice are paramount to achieving just outcomes - Everyone deserves a welcoming environment - All aspects of our work should be transparent - Our decisions are made democratically - We prioritize society and the environment - We stand in solidarity with workers and advocates everywhere Full statement: https://alphabetworkersunion.org/principles/mission-statement/ https://alphabetworkersunion.org/principles/mission-statemen... All in all, seems to be good values to want to have in a workplace, especially such a global and pervasive one as Google. If all of these things were pushed for and implemented in Google, you think that would harm the workers?
  - yanderekko 6y ago
    If I were a Google employee with an active social media account that promoted conservative politics, this would be pretty alarming to me. It's similar to the CoC debates - the visionary goals foreshadow the darker enforcement strategies.
    - capableweb 6y ago
      Now I'm not super into US politics, partly because it's so polarized today, but which one of these values are against conservative ideals? Seems to be pretty basic human decency, like everyone deserves a voice, welcoming environment, decisions are made democratically and more. Are those really against conservative ideas? Edit: My comment seems to have spawned replies to unrelated subjects so I'll repeat the question hopefully a bit more clear: What of the values proposed so far in the "Google Union", goes against modern conservative values in the US today?
Bresenham 6y ago
> 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. Unions with a very limited focus on their member's compensation negotiations tend to be either short-lived or so weak it is like they don't exist. Just for survival, unions want wider unionization in their own industry and then other industries and then internationally. Actually FAANG was already organized against employee compensation in the secret pact between Steve Jobs, Eric Schmidt etc. which courts found illegal. Are corporations and their majority controlling shareholders just representing the employers "during e.g. benefits and compensation negotiations". No. In 1938, the American Enterprise Association (now called AEI) was formed by Chrysler, General Mills, Paine Webber to push corporate hegemony. Their website is one screed after another attacking progressive values. If these companies think it important to spend money attacking, as you call them, progressive values, why should unions limit themselves in not defending them? It makes little sense to start things out with one hand tied behind the back. AEI is just one front of corporate America's many fronts.
Mauricebranagh 6y ago
Yes they should stick to actual "Trade union union issues" to start with - and remember that large number of Google employees would be ok working on defence and probably voted republican. Selling tech to oppressive nation states who are not the USA's friends is a separate issue
- capableweb 6y ago
  > large number of Google employees would be ok working on defence > probably voted republican I'm not saying you're wrong, but do you have any surveys or data points to support those two points? Seems you and a few others here on HN would do good by reading up on trade unions look around the world. As far as I'm reading their values, all of them are within "Trade union issues" and doesn't consider having a country-wide political impact. The people working on this are trying to adjust their own workplace.
  - dnissley 6y ago
    Santa Clara County (where Google's headquarters are) election results: Biden: 72.64% (617k votes) Trump: 25.23% (214k votes) Source: https://results.enr.clarityelections.com/CA/Santa_Clara/106043/web.264614/#/summary https://results.enr.clarityelections.com/CA/Santa_Clara/1060... Caveats galore of course: Not every Santa Clara resident works at Google, not every worker at that office lives in Santa Clara county, Google has many other offices in other areas, voting for Trump doesn't mean someone is republican, etc. etc. But, it would be pretty surprising to me if there wasn't a sizable minority -- say at least 10% -- of workers at Google that voted republican/trump. Here's another data point, re: donations to political parties by Google employees, with probably an even longer list of caveats than the above analysis: Democrats: $5,437,048 (88%) Republicans: $766,920 (12%) Source: https://www.cnbc.com/2020/07/02/most-liberal-tech-companies-ranked-by-employee-donations.html https://www.cnbc.com/2020/07/02/most-liberal-tech-companies-...
  - Mauricebranagh 6y ago
    Experience as an activist in Prospect/BECTU in the UK (this is the union for technical professions and film and telly)
seneca 6y ago
This is exactly why I would never join a tech union. Just read their mission statement: this is about enforcing political goals via any power source they can get their hands on. Much like a lot of recent codes of conduct in open source projects.
- capableweb 6y ago
  I think you might misunderstand the goal of a union. It's inherently political, that's the whole point of it. And the values from the mission statement does sound like something every company should aim for, but sometimes they forget we're all humans here, so we need something to keep companies in check. I'm not sure comparing unions to code of conducts are suitable. Unions are a historically old and proven way for workers to enact change in workplaces, industries and even entire countries. Code of conducts in open source is a fairly new invention (officially, written down ones at least) with no such track record.
  - seneca 6y ago
    > I think you might misunderstand the goal of a union. It's inherently political, that's the whole point of it. I think this is disingenuous. It's inherently political, yes, but historically it is the politics of the workplace that a union focuses on. Specifically workplace safety, compensation, and benefits. This mission statement is explicitly dragging larger social activism into the workplace. > Unions are a historically old and proven way for workers to enact change in workplaces, industries and even entire countries. Code of conducts in open source is a fairly new invention (officially, written down ones at least) with no such track record. It is the same pattern of dragging social activism into a domain where it is not inherently relevant, and using bureaucracy to force it onto members. One mechanism of doing so being old or new isn't the point.
    - capableweb 6y ago
      > historically it is the politics of the workplace that a union focuses on Might be so in the US, but certainly not everywhere. Nor just because it's been so in the US before, doesn't mean it has to be like that. In Spain for example, unions are one of the most active and most likely to actually achieve political change in the country, at least judging by how it's been so far. Which ones of the announced values you feel is trying to be applied to society at large? The way I'm reading it, all the values are geared towards Google and it's workplace, not going further than that.
bslyke 6y ago
Chicken, egg issue I think. The people most likely to seed the movement are gonna be activist type people whereas the actual majority of workers might just be left/libertarian leaning but mostly non-political people. Once the majority of workers are part of the union, and if it's really democratic, then the union should reflect what the members want it to reflect (even if it ends up being the same as the activists').
Dumblydorr 6y ago
I think you should point out what specifically is too broad? They are pretty banal points about fairness, ethics, environment, we know that Google employees are likely to push for a blue-ish agenda, and it's really not controversial imo.

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...

marcinzm 6y ago

Seems to me that the organizers are using a union to push their own personal agendas (which they otherwise don't have the power to push) which seems like the perfect way to form a corrupt union that harms workers.

capableweb 6y ago
What in the mission statement seems to be "personal agendas" to you? Here they are listed: - All Alphabet workers deserve a voice - Social and economic justice are paramount to achieving just outcomes - Everyone deserves a welcoming environment - All aspects of our work should be transparent - Our decisions are made democratically - We prioritize society and the environment - We stand in solidarity with workers and advocates everywhere Full statement: https://alphabetworkersunion.org/principles/mission-statement/ https://alphabetworkersunion.org/principles/mission-statemen... All in all, seems to be good values to want to have in a workplace, especially such a global and pervasive one as Google. If all of these things were pushed for and implemented in Google, you think that would harm the workers?
- yanderekko 6y ago
  If I were a Google employee with an active social media account that promoted conservative politics, this would be pretty alarming to me. It's similar to the CoC debates - the visionary goals foreshadow the darker enforcement strategies.
  - capableweb 6y ago
    Now I'm not super into US politics, partly because it's so polarized today, but which one of these values are against conservative ideals? Seems to be pretty basic human decency, like everyone deserves a voice, welcoming environment, decisions are made democratically and more. Are those really against conservative ideas? Edit: My comment seems to have spawned replies to unrelated subjects so I'll repeat the question hopefully a bit more clear: What of the values proposed so far in the "Google Union", goes against modern conservative values in the US today?

Bresenham 6y ago

> 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. Unions with a very limited focus on their member's compensation negotiations tend to be either short-lived or so weak it is like they don't exist. Just for survival, unions want wider unionization in their own industry and then other industries and then internationally. Actually FAANG was already organized against employee compensation in the secret pact between Steve Jobs, Eric Schmidt etc. which courts found illegal. Are corporations and their majority controlling shareholders just representing the employers "during e.g. benefits and compensation negotiations". No. In 1938, the American Enterprise Association (now called AEI) was formed by Chrysler, General Mills, Paine Webber to push corporate hegemony. Their website is one screed after another attacking progressive values. If these companies think it important to spend money attacking, as you call them, progressive values, why should unions limit themselves in not defending them? It makes little sense to start things out with one hand tied behind the back. AEI is just one front of corporate America's many fronts.

Mauricebranagh 6y ago

Yes they should stick to actual "Trade union union issues" to start with - and remember that large number of Google employees would be ok working on defence and probably voted republican. Selling tech to oppressive nation states who are not the USA's friends is a separate issue

capableweb 6y ago
> large number of Google employees would be ok working on defence > probably voted republican I'm not saying you're wrong, but do you have any surveys or data points to support those two points? Seems you and a few others here on HN would do good by reading up on trade unions look around the world. As far as I'm reading their values, all of them are within "Trade union issues" and doesn't consider having a country-wide political impact. The people working on this are trying to adjust their own workplace.
- dnissley 6y ago
  Santa Clara County (where Google's headquarters are) election results: Biden: 72.64% (617k votes) Trump: 25.23% (214k votes) Source: https://results.enr.clarityelections.com/CA/Santa_Clara/106043/web.264614/#/summary https://results.enr.clarityelections.com/CA/Santa_Clara/1060... Caveats galore of course: Not every Santa Clara resident works at Google, not every worker at that office lives in Santa Clara county, Google has many other offices in other areas, voting for Trump doesn't mean someone is republican, etc. etc. But, it would be pretty surprising to me if there wasn't a sizable minority -- say at least 10% -- of workers at Google that voted republican/trump. Here's another data point, re: donations to political parties by Google employees, with probably an even longer list of caveats than the above analysis: Democrats: $5,437,048 (88%) Republicans: $766,920 (12%) Source: https://www.cnbc.com/2020/07/02/most-liberal-tech-companies-ranked-by-employee-donations.html https://www.cnbc.com/2020/07/02/most-liberal-tech-companies-...
- Mauricebranagh 6y ago
  Experience as an activist in Prospect/BECTU in the UK (this is the union for technical professions and film and telly)

seneca 6y ago

This is exactly why I would never join a tech union. Just read their mission statement: this is about enforcing political goals via any power source they can get their hands on. Much like a lot of recent codes of conduct in open source projects.

capableweb 6y ago
I think you might misunderstand the goal of a union. It's inherently political, that's the whole point of it. And the values from the mission statement does sound like something every company should aim for, but sometimes they forget we're all humans here, so we need something to keep companies in check. I'm not sure comparing unions to code of conducts are suitable. Unions are a historically old and proven way for workers to enact change in workplaces, industries and even entire countries. Code of conducts in open source is a fairly new invention (officially, written down ones at least) with no such track record.
- seneca 6y ago
  > I think you might misunderstand the goal of a union. It's inherently political, that's the whole point of it. I think this is disingenuous. It's inherently political, yes, but historically it is the politics of the workplace that a union focuses on. Specifically workplace safety, compensation, and benefits. This mission statement is explicitly dragging larger social activism into the workplace. > Unions are a historically old and proven way for workers to enact change in workplaces, industries and even entire countries. Code of conducts in open source is a fairly new invention (officially, written down ones at least) with no such track record. It is the same pattern of dragging social activism into a domain where it is not inherently relevant, and using bureaucracy to force it onto members. One mechanism of doing so being old or new isn't the point.
  - capableweb 6y ago
    > historically it is the politics of the workplace that a union focuses on Might be so in the US, but certainly not everywhere. Nor just because it's been so in the US before, doesn't mean it has to be like that. In Spain for example, unions are one of the most active and most likely to actually achieve political change in the country, at least judging by how it's been so far. Which ones of the announced values you feel is trying to be applied to society at large? The way I'm reading it, all the values are geared towards Google and it's workplace, not going further than that.

bslyke 6y ago

Chicken, egg issue I think. The people most likely to seed the movement are gonna be activist type people whereas the actual majority of workers might just be left/libertarian leaning but mostly non-political people. Once the majority of workers are part of the union, and if it's really democratic, then the union should reflect what the members want it to reflect (even if it ends up being the same as the activists').

Dumblydorr 6y ago

I think you should point out what specifically is too broad? They are pretty banal points about fairness, ethics, environment, we know that Google employees are likely to push for a blue-ish agenda, and it's really not controversial imo.