4 ms·

It's not that Stallman had the monopoly on bad management. In fact, the interests of workers and management are intrinsically at odds, and every workplace needs

It's not that Stallman had the monopoly on bad management. In fact, the interests of workers and management are intrinsically at odds, and every workplace needs a union.

olliej 6y ago
Everywhere has bad managers, but this is a case where a union was formed specifically because of a single actor, and that actor has a demonstrated history of abuses yet was then silently brought back despite that history because of a few zealots who cared more about him than what was ostensibly their mission.
- HarryHirsch 6y ago
  Oh, come on! Tone is set at the top everywhere. Uber, Amazon, SpaceX, these are great examples with tens of thousands affected. And what's with the abuse? One makes strange remarks about women and abhors soap, and the other manages you out a few months before vesting cliff. That isn't even the same league.
  - chowells 6y ago
    One denies you money. The other denies you dignity and humanity. You're right that it's not even close, but I suspect you've got the analysis backwards.
    - HarryHirsch 6y ago
      The thing is that money really helps with your dignity, many people who had income dislocations this year thanks to COVID will confirm. On the other hand, words are just words.
    - Daho0n 6y ago
      Are you saying that not getting a raise is so much worse than having to pee in a bottle at work that it isn't even in the same league?
      - chowells 6y ago
        I'm not sure how you arrived at that conclusion. Does having to pee in a bottle sound more like "having your humanity denied" or "having your money denied"? What about the actual example from the GP, having your stock options clawed back? Which one of those categories does that fit in? And then, as to my point, what about RMS's pattern of sexual harassment? Which category does that fall in? Sure, he denied raises too. But that's not why people are upset with his reinstatement, and not anything more than one single example in the story being discussed. It feels deceptive to focus on that one detail and ignore everything else that makes RMS a bad person to work with.
  - ikerdanzel 6y ago
    Snowflakes. IT sector have quite a lot snowflakes. And since they have access to media outlets much more readily then most other workers, their voices are amplified. They are free to work in any other companies given the skillsets they have. They chose to be there and chose to embrace the conditions there. Suddenly they want to unionised because their feelings hurt when they could have done so years ago. Their "bad treatments" are light years milder than what others had to endure.
Mc91 6y ago
The thread begins "RMS created non-safe spaces at both MIT & the FSF", which is a giveaway in itself. "prior cost of living adjustments were a battle and not annual" - the federal minimum wage has not changed since 2009, and millions of workers across the US have not gotten a raise for over a decade. For businesses making a profit - not a non-profit like the FSF. So staff getting COLAs once in a while sounds good in comparison. I don't know if staff of the FSF non-profit were being paid fairly or not, but he does not seem to be living in the real world. Someone else writing a diatribe against Stallman said he made MIT an "non-safe space" because he took naps in his office on a mattress as opposed to a couch.

It's not that Stallman had the monopoly on bad management. In fact, the interests of workers and management are intrinsically at odds, and every workplace needs a union.

olliej 6y ago

Everywhere has bad managers, but this is a case where a union was formed specifically because of a single actor, and that actor has a demonstrated history of abuses yet was then silently brought back despite that history because of a few zealots who cared more about him than what was ostensibly their mission.

HarryHirsch 6y ago
Oh, come on! Tone is set at the top everywhere. Uber, Amazon, SpaceX, these are great examples with tens of thousands affected. And what's with the abuse? One makes strange remarks about women and abhors soap, and the other manages you out a few months before vesting cliff. That isn't even the same league.
- chowells 6y ago
  One denies you money. The other denies you dignity and humanity. You're right that it's not even close, but I suspect you've got the analysis backwards.
  - HarryHirsch 6y ago
    The thing is that money really helps with your dignity, many people who had income dislocations this year thanks to COVID will confirm. On the other hand, words are just words.
  - Daho0n 6y ago
    Are you saying that not getting a raise is so much worse than having to pee in a bottle at work that it isn't even in the same league?
    - chowells 6y ago
      I'm not sure how you arrived at that conclusion. Does having to pee in a bottle sound more like "having your humanity denied" or "having your money denied"? What about the actual example from the GP, having your stock options clawed back? Which one of those categories does that fit in? And then, as to my point, what about RMS's pattern of sexual harassment? Which category does that fall in? Sure, he denied raises too. But that's not why people are upset with his reinstatement, and not anything more than one single example in the story being discussed. It feels deceptive to focus on that one detail and ignore everything else that makes RMS a bad person to work with.
- ikerdanzel 6y ago
  Snowflakes. IT sector have quite a lot snowflakes. And since they have access to media outlets much more readily then most other workers, their voices are amplified. They are free to work in any other companies given the skillsets they have. They chose to be there and chose to embrace the conditions there. Suddenly they want to unionised because their feelings hurt when they could have done so years ago. Their "bad treatments" are light years milder than what others had to endure.

Mc91 6y ago

The thread begins "RMS created non-safe spaces at both MIT & the FSF", which is a giveaway in itself. "prior cost of living adjustments were a battle and not annual" - the federal minimum wage has not changed since 2009, and millions of workers across the US have not gotten a raise for over a decade. For businesses making a profit - not a non-profit like the FSF. So staff getting COLAs once in a while sounds good in comparison. I don't know if staff of the FSF non-profit were being paid fairly or not, but he does not seem to be living in the real world. Someone else writing a diatribe against Stallman said he made MIT an "non-safe space" because he took naps in his office on a mattress as opposed to a couch.