3 ms·

>Is there such a mechanism for unions? Unions should be democratic. The workers in the union should collectively decide how it is run, and it should have a fai

>Is there such a mechanism for unions? Unions should be democratic. The workers in the union should collectively decide how it is run, and it should have a fairly flat hierarchical structure. So if you feel that your union does not sufficiently represent your interests, you can get rid of the leadership and change the union for the better. As opposed to companies where you essentially have the choice to tolerate it or leave if you don't like what's happening (without unions, that is).

Sodman 6y ago
The problem is that democracy is imperfect, it can be (and is) frequently gamed and manipulated. Many people are worried about the following scenario: - Software engineers unionize - Some "bad" rules get implemented, perhaps passing vote by misleading slogans or over-represented groups etc. Maybe it was a narrow 51% vs 49% vote. - Top talent leaves, over time that 51% in favor of the bad rules becomes a larger and larger majority - Now your option is essentially tolerate it or leave if you don't like what's happening. So it's the same as before, except now you owe union dues. - "Top talent" starts new company that's more focused on "work" and has fewer rules. - Company grows... - Software engineers unionize... repeat When I say "bad rules" I'm thinking things that are the software equivalent to existing union rules like "Only union members can plug in that HDMI cable" etc etc.
- stefan_ 6y ago
  Well that's a convoluted mess. Here is the game plan on the other side of the bargaining table: - Conspire with others to not pay top talent market rate and not poach employees - The end.
  - Sodman 6y ago
    This particular scandal involved FANG companies... While obviously bad for employees, I don't think "we don't get paid enough" is a primary complaint amongst the FANG workers currently trying to unionize. Outside of FANG, poaching and competing on salary are common, at least in the startup space.
    - edmundsauto 6y ago
      After the lawsuit, within FAANG, they poach and compete on salary. Take a look at levels.fyi and compare to startup salary bands.
- moate 6y ago
  So we agree that "nothing is perfect". My question is why did this group unionize if nothing has changed for the better (in your words "its the same as before except now you owe union dues")? Wouldn't it be more likely that the group makes some gains, some losses and is better for most of the people in the group overall? That tends to be what happens in real unionization efforts (I'm more than happy to provide case studies).
  - Sodman 6y ago
    I should clarify that I was talking specifically about unionizing as tech workers. Warehouse workers are a totally different situation. My opinion is admittedly strongly influenced by the fact that at most tech companies I've worked for, the conditions have been great, and any strong employee feedback and reasonable demands were usually listened to and acted up by management. The same can obviously not be said for warehouse workers, so unionizing would almost certainly benefit them. I'll agree that there would most likely be some gains and some losses. I'm just not personally convinced the gains will outweigh the losses for software engineers specifically. I think the key difference here between warehouse workers and tech workers is that if non-union talks with management break down, most tech workers can move jobs and keep similar benefits/comp/location without huge effort, the same can't be said of many warehouse workers.
- 8note 6y ago
  You still get some good time between unionization and "bad" rules being implemented where you get to do something good. You don't get that otherwise.
6gvONxR4sf7o 6y ago
Democracy is great, but why democratically try to arrive at a single choice when you could democratically arrive at multiple choices? It would be great to have a union. If my union had different priorities than mine, it would also be great to have other options too that also benefit from collective bargaining.

Sodman 6y ago

The problem is that democracy is imperfect, it can be (and is) frequently gamed and manipulated. Many people are worried about the following scenario: - Software engineers unionize - Some "bad" rules get implemented, perhaps passing vote by misleading slogans or over-represented groups etc. Maybe it was a narrow 51% vs 49% vote. - Top talent leaves, over time that 51% in favor of the bad rules becomes a larger and larger majority - Now your option is essentially tolerate it or leave if you don't like what's happening. So it's the same as before, except now you owe union dues. - "Top talent" starts new company that's more focused on "work" and has fewer rules. - Company grows... - Software engineers unionize... repeat When I say "bad rules" I'm thinking things that are the software equivalent to existing union rules like "Only union members can plug in that HDMI cable" etc etc.

stefan_ 6y ago
Well that's a convoluted mess. Here is the game plan on the other side of the bargaining table: - Conspire with others to not pay top talent market rate and not poach employees - The end.
- Sodman 6y ago
  This particular scandal involved FANG companies... While obviously bad for employees, I don't think "we don't get paid enough" is a primary complaint amongst the FANG workers currently trying to unionize. Outside of FANG, poaching and competing on salary are common, at least in the startup space.
  - edmundsauto 6y ago
    After the lawsuit, within FAANG, they poach and compete on salary. Take a look at levels.fyi and compare to startup salary bands.
moate 6y ago
So we agree that "nothing is perfect". My question is why did this group unionize if nothing has changed for the better (in your words "its the same as before except now you owe union dues")? Wouldn't it be more likely that the group makes some gains, some losses and is better for most of the people in the group overall? That tends to be what happens in real unionization efforts (I'm more than happy to provide case studies).
- Sodman 6y ago
  I should clarify that I was talking specifically about unionizing as tech workers. Warehouse workers are a totally different situation. My opinion is admittedly strongly influenced by the fact that at most tech companies I've worked for, the conditions have been great, and any strong employee feedback and reasonable demands were usually listened to and acted up by management. The same can obviously not be said for warehouse workers, so unionizing would almost certainly benefit them. I'll agree that there would most likely be some gains and some losses. I'm just not personally convinced the gains will outweigh the losses for software engineers specifically. I think the key difference here between warehouse workers and tech workers is that if non-union talks with management break down, most tech workers can move jobs and keep similar benefits/comp/location without huge effort, the same can't be said of many warehouse workers.
8note 6y ago
You still get some good time between unionization and "bad" rules being implemented where you get to do something good. You don't get that otherwise.

6gvONxR4sf7o 6y ago

Democracy is great, but why democratically try to arrive at a single choice when you could democratically arrive at multiple choices? It would be great to have a union. If my union had different priorities than mine, it would also be great to have other options too that also benefit from collective bargaining.