5 ms·

At least an idea of what they are trying to bargain for would be nice.

azernik 6y ago
They have a website with a platform and priorities at https://alphabetworkersunion.org/power/why/ https://alphabetworkersunion.org/power/why/ "We want to wield our power to ensure: * Our working conditions are inclusive and fair, * Perpetrators of harassment, abuse, discrimination, and retaliation are held accountable, * We have the freedom to decline to work on projects that don’t align with our values, * All workers, regardless of employment status, can enjoy the same benefits."
- gedy 6y ago
  While not totally unreasonable, this does sound more politically motivated than many traditional unions.
  - IX-103 6y ago
    I would say it's more culturally motivated than political. Google has accumulated a lot of idealists that have strong opinions about the direction of the company without being promoted to a level where they can actualize these opinions by themselves. Given the support previous walk-outs have received asking employees there seems to be at least a strong passive support for these opinions. Part of this is from how outside leadership has been brought in that is accidentally trampling over unwritten rules and part of this is conflicts in the different interpretations the increasing number of employees have of these unwritten rules.
    - humanrebar 6y ago
      Banjo music and high school sports are cultural. Rules about empowerment are political. The word power is right in there. I'll grant that there is support and perhaps increasing sentiment. I am not sure that there is consensus that those issues are paramount. I'm also not sure it's even enough for overwhelming majorities are sufficient to enact rules. There is such a thing as a democratic tyranny. But some sort of bill of rights might be interesting, depending.
- ALittleLight 6y ago
  Their union seems to be more social justice focused than I'd be interested in joining, e.g. "achieve just outcomes, social and economic justice are paramount". I'd be much more interested in tackling things like non-competes, employee ownership of side projects, better vesting schedules, better direction for the company, salaries, revisiting how many H1B visas there are, etc.
  - Rebelgecko 6y ago
    IMO Google's vesting schedule is one of (if not the) best out there. Basically the opposite of Amazon (who is something like 5-15-35-45)
    - ALittleLight 6y ago
      My general point is that I'd be up for unionizing to make things better for employees. Not for social justice. Another big one would be moving to a 32 hour work week. I want specific objectives that make life better for employees including me (although I don't work at Google, I mean hypothetically, if I did). I don't want generic platitudes.
      - AshWolfy 6y ago
        You should read this https://organizing.work/2020/12/there-is-something-missing-from-tech-worker-organizing/ https://organizing.work/2020/12/there-is-something-missing-f...
- bennysonething 6y ago
  Sounds political, which is the problem with unions. If I want to work I have to pay dues to a political organisation. Also, why should a company pay you when you refuse to work on a project?
  - AshWolfy 6y ago
    because they value the work you do more than the money they pay you
- salmon30salmon 6y ago
  Our working conditions are inclusive and fair How does one define "inclusive and fair". Who decides what is inclusive? The Union? I don't want to apply the fallacy of inclusion, but if someone wears a crucifix and that makes an atheist feel excluded, who is right? I know "the Union will decide" but tyranny of the majority is a real thing. See the ban on burkas/hijabs in many "inclusive" countries. Also, if you are appealing to the public, saying that the working conditions at Google, where you are paid near the top 1% of the all workers and have free food etc, "working conditions" might not be the right term. We have the freedom to decline to work on projects that don’t align with our values When do you declare your values? Is it always a moving target? To be a conscientious objector in the United States, there needs to be a demonstrable history of your objection. You can't get drafted and then suddenly find religion. How do you stop the inevitable abuse of this exclusion?
  - ahepp 6y ago
    >When do you declare your values? Is it always a moving target? To be a conscientious objector in the United States, there needs to be a demonstrable history of your objection. You can't get drafted and then suddenly find religion. How do you stop the inevitable abuse of this exclusion? Well, we're talking about working on software projects here. I work in defense and would have no qualms about the whole Project Maven thing. But if all they want is the freedom to decline to work on it, that seems pretty reasonable to me. They didn't sign up for that stuff, and Google isn't primarily a defense company. The draft is (in theory) an emergency measure for the good of the nation. Just like the government can force you to pay taxes, they can force you to fight in the military. That's certainly not a power a private corporation should have.
    - erklik 6y ago
      > They didn't sign up for that stuff I find this sentiment quite weird honestly. The "contract" between the employee and the employer is that the employee does what the employer asks of them, and in return gets paid for his work. If these employees do not desire to work on projects that Google is getting, then they should terminate the contract and find work elsewhere. So, Actually. That's exactly what they signed up for. It is bonkers to me that a employee does not work on what the employee wants to work on, within a company, and yet also expects the employer to keep paying them. This honestly sounds like so much privilege. These workers are top 1% of the world, it sounds like "whining" when you are not in their position.
- ergocoder 6y ago
  Thank you for, at least, hypothesizing the benefits, so we can have a proper discussion. The top two seem fine, but Google is one of the best places to work at on the planet. But I don't mind it being improved. The fourth one is really just a compensation package. I don't agree that every job should have the same compensation/benefits. The third one is what I oppose. If you don't want to work on a project, then don't. I don't want to work in a trash dump (oh the pay is great too), so I don't. I'm also certain that the fourth one will be weaponized and use for deplatforming people.

They have a website with a platform and priorities at https://alphabetworkersunion.org/power/why/ https://alphabetworkersunion.org/power/why/ "We want to wield our power to ensure: * Our working conditions are inclusive and fair, * Perpetrators of harassment, abuse, discrimination, and retaliation are held accountable, * We have the freedom to decline to work on projects that don’t align with our values, * All workers, regardless of employment status, can enjoy the same benefits."

gedy 6y ago
While not totally unreasonable, this does sound more politically motivated than many traditional unions.
- IX-103 6y ago
  I would say it's more culturally motivated than political. Google has accumulated a lot of idealists that have strong opinions about the direction of the company without being promoted to a level where they can actualize these opinions by themselves. Given the support previous walk-outs have received asking employees there seems to be at least a strong passive support for these opinions. Part of this is from how outside leadership has been brought in that is accidentally trampling over unwritten rules and part of this is conflicts in the different interpretations the increasing number of employees have of these unwritten rules.
  - humanrebar 6y ago
    Banjo music and high school sports are cultural. Rules about empowerment are political. The word power is right in there. I'll grant that there is support and perhaps increasing sentiment. I am not sure that there is consensus that those issues are paramount. I'm also not sure it's even enough for overwhelming majorities are sufficient to enact rules. There is such a thing as a democratic tyranny. But some sort of bill of rights might be interesting, depending.
ALittleLight 6y ago
Their union seems to be more social justice focused than I'd be interested in joining, e.g. "achieve just outcomes, social and economic justice are paramount". I'd be much more interested in tackling things like non-competes, employee ownership of side projects, better vesting schedules, better direction for the company, salaries, revisiting how many H1B visas there are, etc.
- Rebelgecko 6y ago
  IMO Google's vesting schedule is one of (if not the) best out there. Basically the opposite of Amazon (who is something like 5-15-35-45)
  - ALittleLight 6y ago
    My general point is that I'd be up for unionizing to make things better for employees. Not for social justice. Another big one would be moving to a 32 hour work week. I want specific objectives that make life better for employees including me (although I don't work at Google, I mean hypothetically, if I did). I don't want generic platitudes.
    - AshWolfy 6y ago
      You should read this https://organizing.work/2020/12/there-is-something-missing-from-tech-worker-organizing/ https://organizing.work/2020/12/there-is-something-missing-f...
bennysonething 6y ago
Sounds political, which is the problem with unions. If I want to work I have to pay dues to a political organisation. Also, why should a company pay you when you refuse to work on a project?
- AshWolfy 6y ago
  because they value the work you do more than the money they pay you
salmon30salmon 6y ago
Our working conditions are inclusive and fair How does one define "inclusive and fair". Who decides what is inclusive? The Union? I don't want to apply the fallacy of inclusion, but if someone wears a crucifix and that makes an atheist feel excluded, who is right? I know "the Union will decide" but tyranny of the majority is a real thing. See the ban on burkas/hijabs in many "inclusive" countries. Also, if you are appealing to the public, saying that the working conditions at Google, where you are paid near the top 1% of the all workers and have free food etc, "working conditions" might not be the right term. We have the freedom to decline to work on projects that don’t align with our values When do you declare your values? Is it always a moving target? To be a conscientious objector in the United States, there needs to be a demonstrable history of your objection. You can't get drafted and then suddenly find religion. How do you stop the inevitable abuse of this exclusion?
- ahepp 6y ago
  >When do you declare your values? Is it always a moving target? To be a conscientious objector in the United States, there needs to be a demonstrable history of your objection. You can't get drafted and then suddenly find religion. How do you stop the inevitable abuse of this exclusion? Well, we're talking about working on software projects here. I work in defense and would have no qualms about the whole Project Maven thing. But if all they want is the freedom to decline to work on it, that seems pretty reasonable to me. They didn't sign up for that stuff, and Google isn't primarily a defense company. The draft is (in theory) an emergency measure for the good of the nation. Just like the government can force you to pay taxes, they can force you to fight in the military. That's certainly not a power a private corporation should have.
  - erklik 6y ago
    > They didn't sign up for that stuff I find this sentiment quite weird honestly. The "contract" between the employee and the employer is that the employee does what the employer asks of them, and in return gets paid for his work. If these employees do not desire to work on projects that Google is getting, then they should terminate the contract and find work elsewhere. So, Actually. That's exactly what they signed up for. It is bonkers to me that a employee does not work on what the employee wants to work on, within a company, and yet also expects the employer to keep paying them. This honestly sounds like so much privilege. These workers are top 1% of the world, it sounds like "whining" when you are not in their position.
ergocoder 6y ago
Thank you for, at least, hypothesizing the benefits, so we can have a proper discussion. The top two seem fine, but Google is one of the best places to work at on the planet. But I don't mind it being improved. The fourth one is really just a compensation package. I don't agree that every job should have the same compensation/benefits. The third one is what I oppose. If you don't want to work on a project, then don't. I don't want to work in a trash dump (oh the pay is great too), so I don't. I'm also certain that the fourth one will be weaponized and use for deplatforming people.