3 ms·
A couple things: * Unions could definitely use better software, but I don't think software can replace their core functionality. * Many companies whose main p
by pkkim 5y ago
A couple things:
* Unions could definitely use better software, but I don't think software can replace their core functionality.
* Many companies whose main product is a seemingly simple mobile app require surprisingly large staffs.
* Are unions actually bloated? The Teamsters for example had 616 regular staff and spending of $209 million in 2019, over a membership of 1.3 million workers. That seems reasonable to me. https://www.unionfacts.com/union/Teamsters https://www.unionfacts.com/union/Teamsters (anti-union but nonetheless useful site)
* Unions do lots of things besides electing representatives, voting on issues, and coordinating actions, all of which are big jobs in themselves. This may include contract negotiation, job training, research, organizing, and other things I can't think of right now.
* To focus specifically on organizing for a moment, a union is a coordination problem which takes a lot of work to overcome. Quoting myself from another comment (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24079465 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24079465):
> The labor organizer's job is to convince the worker, who likely and often rightly fears for her job if she actively and publicly supports the union, that it's still the right thing to do. Not only convince intellectually, but psychologically prepare the worker to stick with the union effort in the face of a concerted effort from the employer to defeat it. To do that the organizer needs to ask the right questions, listen carefully, build trust, and finally push, and potentially do this repeatedly with the same person. It is psychologically demanding and not everyone can do it; I tried and I couldn't. A chatbot cannot convince a factory worker with kids to feed that he needs to stick up for his coworkers who in turn will stick up for him.