9 ms·

Microsoft to Reportedly Recognize Raven Software’s Union After Aquisition

72 points by ddtaylor 4y ago

partido3619463 4y ago
Might be better to switch the link to a clearer article. Eg this one has more nuance: https://kotaku.com/xbox-phil-spencer-raven-qa-union-activision-blizzard-1848982555 https://kotaku.com/xbox-phil-spencer-raven-qa-union-activisi...
bantunes 4y ago
Aren't they legally obliged to do this, anyway?
- milliams 4y ago
  I would have thought so. Otherwise, all a company would have to do is "sell" the company to another subsidiary and wipe the slate clean.
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
- bigbillheck 4y ago
  There's lots of things companies are legally obligated to do but instead do not.
- namelessoracle 4y ago
  They can shut the studio down, same way Walmart shuts stores down.
PedroBatista 4y ago
Since when a company has the option to “recognize” or not a union? I feel this is one of those questions with a simple answer, but the more you learn the more your sadness increases..
- banannaise 4y ago
  Anyone has the option to do anything; the question is how you will be prevented from or punished for doing it. In this case, the answers are: not at all; and lightly at worst.
- a_humean 4y ago
  Well given that a union at least initially isn't part of the formal company structures almost by definition then there needs to be some process of recognition that yes this organisation that claims to represent my employees does in fact represent my employees. That is what those union ballots are about - the union needs evidence that they are representatives of the employees of the company. A union has to start somewhere. Of course depending upon the legal jurisdiction a company might not have much of a choice if a union meets a legal threshold, and in the case of union action they might not have a choice otherwise than deal with a union. In this case I doubt MS had a choice, I guess what is notable is that they have not needed to make such a choice before now.
  - pastacacioepepe 4y ago
    > recognition that yes this organisation that claims to represent my employees does in fact represent my employees. Uhm, and why should the company have a say in this, when it's the employees that are already telling the company that they are unionized?
    - chrisseaton 4y ago
      How else do you think the company should determine if it wants to interact with the union or not? Obviously the company isn’t going to work with literally any union that emails them and says it has a demand, without knowing if the union has anything to back up its demands or not. If someone came to demand your money and said ‘or else’ you’d ask what the ‘or else’ is, wouldn’t you?
      - pastacacioepepe 4y ago
        > How else do you think the company should determine if it wants to interact with the union or not? Pretty simple. Check how many employees are part of the union. Does the union represent a majority of the workforce or at least a minority but made of important employees? Then you better listen to what they say, or they could go on a strike. The only way to make companies agree to your demands is to promise them a larger loss if they don't agree.
carschno 4y ago
Unrelated to the content, but is this proper English: > when the tech giant acquired Activision Blizzard later next year As a non-native speaker, I am confused about the use of past tense for an (alleged) future event ("next year"). Is it just a typo and it should say "last year"? Or is it business English meaning "will have acquired"?
- actionablefiber 4y ago
  It's just a typo. It should read "when the tech giant acquires Activision Blizzard." The acquisition hasn't taken place yet.
- andyjohnson0 4y ago
  "after acquisition" is just a shorter, headline-friendly way of saying "after the acquisition has occurred". But I agree that the tense is unclear without reading the article.
sokoloff 4y ago
Is this article auto-generated, auto-translated to English from some other source language, or web-scraped and assembled automatically? It doesn’t read like an article written by a human, whether native or non-native English speaker.
- bornfreddy 4y ago
  Exactly this. The article doesn't make sense to me at all.
UltraViolence 4y ago
- bpodgursky 4y ago
  Every worker in the US should be free to unionize if they want to be in a union. I don't. Don't tell me what to do.
  - UltraViolence 4y ago
    What bugs me is that U.S. citizens are practically brainwashed from birth that unions and socialism are bad. I know, because I lived through it but came to see the light after I found out that UAW workers are practically the only decent-earning blue collar workers in the U.S.
  - toomuchtodo 4y ago
    You're both right, but the bell curve clearly demonstrates that the majority of workers who would benefit from union membership can outvote the minority who elect not to. Individual exceptionalism helped get us here (labor union declines leading to a decline in wages, benefits, and job security), and it will take some time to walk it back. https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:US_productivity_and_real_wages.jpg https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:US_productivity_and_... https://www.epi.org/publication/how-todays-unions-help-working-people-giving-workers-the-power-to-improve-their-jobs-and-unrig-the-economy/ https://www.epi.org/publication/how-todays-unions-help-worki... Folks who say "I like things the way they are" when things are terrible the way they are aren't going to change their mind, and it is an inefficient use of time to try to convince them otherwise. Organize and vote, and ignore the hardliners. Business as usual will led to only more business as usual [1]. [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7tOkpntQtBM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7tOkpntQtBM
    - bpodgursky 4y ago
      I mean, yes, we all know that democracy can point enough guns to force me to do anything. The question is whether that's where we want to ethically go as society, not whether the Collective has the might.
bestcoder69 4y ago
Goofus (Glitch) says “We’ve already achieved our goals. Let’s disband.” Gallant (Raven) gets one of the largest tech companies to recognize their union.

72 points by ddtaylor 4y ago

partido3619463 4y ago

Might be better to switch the link to a clearer article. Eg this one has more nuance: https://kotaku.com/xbox-phil-spencer-raven-qa-union-activision-blizzard-1848982555 https://kotaku.com/xbox-phil-spencer-raven-qa-union-activisi...

bantunes 4y ago

Aren't they legally obliged to do this, anyway?

milliams 4y ago
I would have thought so. Otherwise, all a company would have to do is "sell" the company to another subsidiary and wipe the slate clean.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
bigbillheck 4y ago
There's lots of things companies are legally obligated to do but instead do not.
namelessoracle 4y ago
They can shut the studio down, same way Walmart shuts stores down.

PedroBatista 4y ago

Since when a company has the option to “recognize” or not a union? I feel this is one of those questions with a simple answer, but the more you learn the more your sadness increases..

banannaise 4y ago
Anyone has the option to do anything; the question is how you will be prevented from or punished for doing it. In this case, the answers are: not at all; and lightly at worst.
a_humean 4y ago
Well given that a union at least initially isn't part of the formal company structures almost by definition then there needs to be some process of recognition that yes this organisation that claims to represent my employees does in fact represent my employees. That is what those union ballots are about - the union needs evidence that they are representatives of the employees of the company. A union has to start somewhere. Of course depending upon the legal jurisdiction a company might not have much of a choice if a union meets a legal threshold, and in the case of union action they might not have a choice otherwise than deal with a union. In this case I doubt MS had a choice, I guess what is notable is that they have not needed to make such a choice before now.
- pastacacioepepe 4y ago
  > recognition that yes this organisation that claims to represent my employees does in fact represent my employees. Uhm, and why should the company have a say in this, when it's the employees that are already telling the company that they are unionized?
  - chrisseaton 4y ago
    How else do you think the company should determine if it wants to interact with the union or not? Obviously the company isn’t going to work with literally any union that emails them and says it has a demand, without knowing if the union has anything to back up its demands or not. If someone came to demand your money and said ‘or else’ you’d ask what the ‘or else’ is, wouldn’t you?
    - pastacacioepepe 4y ago
      > How else do you think the company should determine if it wants to interact with the union or not? Pretty simple. Check how many employees are part of the union. Does the union represent a majority of the workforce or at least a minority but made of important employees? Then you better listen to what they say, or they could go on a strike. The only way to make companies agree to your demands is to promise them a larger loss if they don't agree.

carschno 4y ago

Unrelated to the content, but is this proper English: > when the tech giant acquired Activision Blizzard later next year As a non-native speaker, I am confused about the use of past tense for an (alleged) future event ("next year"). Is it just a typo and it should say "last year"? Or is it business English meaning "will have acquired"?

actionablefiber 4y ago
It's just a typo. It should read "when the tech giant acquires Activision Blizzard." The acquisition hasn't taken place yet.
andyjohnson0 4y ago
"after acquisition" is just a shorter, headline-friendly way of saying "after the acquisition has occurred". But I agree that the tense is unclear without reading the article.

sokoloff 4y ago

Is this article auto-generated, auto-translated to English from some other source language, or web-scraped and assembled automatically? It doesn’t read like an article written by a human, whether native or non-native English speaker.

bornfreddy 4y ago
Exactly this. The article doesn't make sense to me at all.

UltraViolence 4y ago

bpodgursky 4y ago
Every worker in the US should be free to unionize if they want to be in a union. I don't. Don't tell me what to do.
- UltraViolence 4y ago
  What bugs me is that U.S. citizens are practically brainwashed from birth that unions and socialism are bad. I know, because I lived through it but came to see the light after I found out that UAW workers are practically the only decent-earning blue collar workers in the U.S.
- toomuchtodo 4y ago
  You're both right, but the bell curve clearly demonstrates that the majority of workers who would benefit from union membership can outvote the minority who elect not to. Individual exceptionalism helped get us here (labor union declines leading to a decline in wages, benefits, and job security), and it will take some time to walk it back. https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:US_productivity_and_real_wages.jpg https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:US_productivity_and_... https://www.epi.org/publication/how-todays-unions-help-working-people-giving-workers-the-power-to-improve-their-jobs-and-unrig-the-economy/ https://www.epi.org/publication/how-todays-unions-help-worki... Folks who say "I like things the way they are" when things are terrible the way they are aren't going to change their mind, and it is an inefficient use of time to try to convince them otherwise. Organize and vote, and ignore the hardliners. Business as usual will led to only more business as usual [1]. [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7tOkpntQtBM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7tOkpntQtBM
  - bpodgursky 4y ago
    I mean, yes, we all know that democracy can point enough guns to force me to do anything. The question is whether that's where we want to ethically go as society, not whether the Collective has the might.

bestcoder69 4y ago

Goofus (Glitch) says “We’ve already achieved our goals. Let’s disband.” Gallant (Raven) gets one of the largest tech companies to recognize their union.