17 ms·

Why wouldn't you want to be part of a union? I am a recent member of the UAW (a more white collar local), and it's been insightful. I think unions are much wea

Why wouldn't you want to be part of a union? I am a recent member of the UAW (a more white collar local), and it's been insightful. I think unions are much weaker than people perceive. Their strengths are mostly superficial. Striking is something members don't want to resort to. Other than that all you can really do is rally and file NLRB complaints. The NLRB is a slow moving bureaucracy that any competent employer can usually effectively dance around. Rallying and building public support comes with all the pitfalls of politics, media, etc. The worst part is actually my employer hates the union for no other reason than its an organization they can't control, so it makes the situation of being unionized a bit toxic unfortunately.

sfteus 4y ago
From a union supporter who's spent some time reading about anti-union sentiment here, I've found it generally boils down to a few things: 1) A large portion of users on this site are entrepreneurs or in higher-level tech. For the former, unions can be seen as getting in the way of the startup lifecycle; for the latter, many believe that the value they provide makes them untouchable, or believe that the supply of high-level tech workers will never meet demand so they will simply be able to move to another company if needed without much friction. 2) Many people believe that unions spend too much time protecting "low-performers," and that a union enacting barriers to protect employees from quick firing for performance will hurt the overall team/company. 3) Many people also believe that both paying union dues, and a union negotiating for the "average" worker will lead to them making significantly less money. IE, say your company was split 75% junior/25% senior devs, and paid junior devs $75k and senior devs $300k. If the union put pressure on the employer to raise the minimum salary to $100k, then they believe that money will come out of the senior devs salaries (reducing it to ~$225k). I can say in my experience, the first point is at least somewhat true right now (I had no issues moving to a more senior and better paid job after my last company sold out). I personally think the sentiment of point #2 is interesting; I generally don't view this as "protecting" those who should be fired, and more view it as a public defender ensuring everyone receives legal representation, even if they are clearly guilty. I'd also just note that even I'm not blanket pro-union; Police unions are a prime example of what happens when unions consolidate too much power because they went decades without any pushback. I'd consider that an extreme outlier though.
- taeric 4y ago
  There are at least a few of us that view unions as just a smaller extra government entity, and would prefer we rather had stronger governments. To wit, I don't want folks dependent on their job. Period. And unions often do give workers better conditions, but only so long as they are workers. That said, I typically fall on the pro-union side of most debates. Often is a better alternative than where we are.
  - dfxm12 4y ago
    It would be great if benefits unions are known for fighting for like health care was guaranteed by the government, but there's some things that a union closer to the workers, which is focused on one thing, can better fight for than the government, like standards for safety beyond OSHA, standards for scheduling, training, discipline, etc. If I understand what you're saying right. If you think unions are a smaller extra government entity, how do you view Apple in that same lens? Likely, the unions have the least power in this triangle (besides individual employees not covered by a union), and Apple has more power than the government in some, but not all, respects.
    - taeric 4y ago
      I'm not clear what you mean "safety beyond OSHA." Training and such can feel better tailored to the company, I suppose? I'm not sure what your point is on companies regarding smaller extra governments. I do think corporate power needs checks. My view is that that is best done by governments. I'm also game for training and other benefits, but I don't like them being tied to employment. Especially not a particular employment. Health care is a good example of how that goes wrong. Unions are odd because they are setup as representative governments. Complete with elections and essentially taxation of the represented individuals in the form of dues. Note that I am explicitly not arguing against the dues, necessarily. I would instead argue that those should go to make the entire community stronger in the form of general taxes. And again, with the current setup, I would likely fall fully on the "pro-union" side for most debates.
- Ancapistani 4y ago
wccrawford 4y ago
I think you made my point for me, at least partially. The real teeth in a union is the ability to strike. In joining a union, you signify that you're willing to strike if enough other people aren't getting what they want. I'm happy with what I have. My team seems pretty happy, too. If things were bad, I'd consider joining a union. But until they are bad, union dues are just wasted money, and the obligation to strike if enough others want to.
- dkonofalski 4y ago
  I think you've also pointed out the need for unions, though. Lots of employees literally can't afford to strike because it means they don't get paid, even if it's temporarily. That means that your assertion that "if enough others want to" is kinda meaningless.
catiopatio 4y ago
> Why wouldn't you want to be part of a union? There’s no upside for me, and severe downsides. My reasoning, in particular: 1) My skills are unique and in high demand. I can best maximize my own compensation through direct negotiation. 2) Compensation is effectively zero-sum, and I don’t want to subsidize low performers. 3) I don’t want to subsidize a parallel, mostly useless (and probably entirely useless) shadow management hierarchy in the form of union officials.
jcampbell1 4y ago
You joined a union where more than a dozen of the leaders were recently convicted of embezzlement. The UAW is in a bit of a pickle for awhile.
- teachrdan 4y ago
  Many of us on HackerNews work for businesses like Amazon, or Tesla, or Apple, or Microsoft, which have also been found to have broken the law. Anywhere there is power there is corruption. It seems to me that joining a union where some of leadership have been convicted of crimes should be no different than working for a corporation where some of the leadership has been convicted of crimes -- you make your own decision on a case by case basis. If none of us ever associated with anyone who's broken the law, I don't know how many folks here would ever work for a company bigger than 100 people.
  - splistud 4y ago
jpollock 4y ago
I have no desire to be part of a union because of my one-person removed (friends) experience with union violence. 1) Interns, not being part of the union, needed to cross the picket line (Canada Federal Government strike). My friend (female) was punched in the face by a union member. 2) Another friend working on the factory floor, doubled then tripled their work quota. They were pulled aside and told it was amazing how much damage can happen to a vehicle in the parking lot when it's snowy. Yeah, I have no interest in helping or encouraging that. However, I do support people's ability to organize and strike. I disagree with a union deciding that they won't cross picket lines. That's cartel-like behavior, like price fixing between shipping companies, or OPEC.
- krainboltgreene 4y ago
  > 1) Interns, not being part of the union, needed to cross the picket line (Canada Federal Government strike). My friend (female) was punched in the face by a union member. This would have made news and I cannot find it.
  - jpollock 4y ago
    It was in the early 90s. Why would you expect it to make the news?
    - krainboltgreene 4y ago
      Because the media is extremely pro-corporate/government and largely anti-trade union? America and Canadian media especially so.
- teachrdan 4y ago
  It seems you are anti-union because of bad experiences two friends had. Do you have any friends who have bad experiences with corporations? Do you hold corporations to a lower standard than unions?
  - jpollock 4y ago

sfteus 4y ago

From a union supporter who's spent some time reading about anti-union sentiment here, I've found it generally boils down to a few things: 1) A large portion of users on this site are entrepreneurs or in higher-level tech. For the former, unions can be seen as getting in the way of the startup lifecycle; for the latter, many believe that the value they provide makes them untouchable, or believe that the supply of high-level tech workers will never meet demand so they will simply be able to move to another company if needed without much friction. 2) Many people believe that unions spend too much time protecting "low-performers," and that a union enacting barriers to protect employees from quick firing for performance will hurt the overall team/company. 3) Many people also believe that both paying union dues, and a union negotiating for the "average" worker will lead to them making significantly less money. IE, say your company was split 75% junior/25% senior devs, and paid junior devs $75k and senior devs $300k. If the union put pressure on the employer to raise the minimum salary to $100k, then they believe that money will come out of the senior devs salaries (reducing it to ~$225k). I can say in my experience, the first point is at least somewhat true right now (I had no issues moving to a more senior and better paid job after my last company sold out). I personally think the sentiment of point #2 is interesting; I generally don't view this as "protecting" those who should be fired, and more view it as a public defender ensuring everyone receives legal representation, even if they are clearly guilty. I'd also just note that even I'm not blanket pro-union; Police unions are a prime example of what happens when unions consolidate too much power because they went decades without any pushback. I'd consider that an extreme outlier though.

taeric 4y ago
There are at least a few of us that view unions as just a smaller extra government entity, and would prefer we rather had stronger governments. To wit, I don't want folks dependent on their job. Period. And unions often do give workers better conditions, but only so long as they are workers. That said, I typically fall on the pro-union side of most debates. Often is a better alternative than where we are.
- dfxm12 4y ago
  It would be great if benefits unions are known for fighting for like health care was guaranteed by the government, but there's some things that a union closer to the workers, which is focused on one thing, can better fight for than the government, like standards for safety beyond OSHA, standards for scheduling, training, discipline, etc. If I understand what you're saying right. If you think unions are a smaller extra government entity, how do you view Apple in that same lens? Likely, the unions have the least power in this triangle (besides individual employees not covered by a union), and Apple has more power than the government in some, but not all, respects.
  - taeric 4y ago
    I'm not clear what you mean "safety beyond OSHA." Training and such can feel better tailored to the company, I suppose? I'm not sure what your point is on companies regarding smaller extra governments. I do think corporate power needs checks. My view is that that is best done by governments. I'm also game for training and other benefits, but I don't like them being tied to employment. Especially not a particular employment. Health care is a good example of how that goes wrong. Unions are odd because they are setup as representative governments. Complete with elections and essentially taxation of the represented individuals in the form of dues. Note that I am explicitly not arguing against the dues, necessarily. I would instead argue that those should go to make the entire community stronger in the form of general taxes. And again, with the current setup, I would likely fall fully on the "pro-union" side for most debates.
Ancapistani 4y ago

wccrawford 4y ago

I think you made my point for me, at least partially. The real teeth in a union is the ability to strike. In joining a union, you signify that you're willing to strike if enough other people aren't getting what they want. I'm happy with what I have. My team seems pretty happy, too. If things were bad, I'd consider joining a union. But until they are bad, union dues are just wasted money, and the obligation to strike if enough others want to.

dkonofalski 4y ago
I think you've also pointed out the need for unions, though. Lots of employees literally can't afford to strike because it means they don't get paid, even if it's temporarily. That means that your assertion that "if enough others want to" is kinda meaningless.

catiopatio 4y ago

> Why wouldn't you want to be part of a union? There’s no upside for me, and severe downsides. My reasoning, in particular: 1) My skills are unique and in high demand. I can best maximize my own compensation through direct negotiation. 2) Compensation is effectively zero-sum, and I don’t want to subsidize low performers. 3) I don’t want to subsidize a parallel, mostly useless (and probably entirely useless) shadow management hierarchy in the form of union officials.

jcampbell1 4y ago

You joined a union where more than a dozen of the leaders were recently convicted of embezzlement. The UAW is in a bit of a pickle for awhile.

teachrdan 4y ago
Many of us on HackerNews work for businesses like Amazon, or Tesla, or Apple, or Microsoft, which have also been found to have broken the law. Anywhere there is power there is corruption. It seems to me that joining a union where some of leadership have been convicted of crimes should be no different than working for a corporation where some of the leadership has been convicted of crimes -- you make your own decision on a case by case basis. If none of us ever associated with anyone who's broken the law, I don't know how many folks here would ever work for a company bigger than 100 people.
- splistud 4y ago

jpollock 4y ago

I have no desire to be part of a union because of my one-person removed (friends) experience with union violence. 1) Interns, not being part of the union, needed to cross the picket line (Canada Federal Government strike). My friend (female) was punched in the face by a union member. 2) Another friend working on the factory floor, doubled then tripled their work quota. They were pulled aside and told it was amazing how much damage can happen to a vehicle in the parking lot when it's snowy. Yeah, I have no interest in helping or encouraging that. However, I do support people's ability to organize and strike. I disagree with a union deciding that they won't cross picket lines. That's cartel-like behavior, like price fixing between shipping companies, or OPEC.

krainboltgreene 4y ago
> 1) Interns, not being part of the union, needed to cross the picket line (Canada Federal Government strike). My friend (female) was punched in the face by a union member. This would have made news and I cannot find it.
- jpollock 4y ago
  It was in the early 90s. Why would you expect it to make the news?
  - krainboltgreene 4y ago
    Because the media is extremely pro-corporate/government and largely anti-trade union? America and Canadian media especially so.
teachrdan 4y ago
It seems you are anti-union because of bad experiences two friends had. Do you have any friends who have bad experiences with corporations? Do you hold corporations to a lower standard than unions?
- jpollock 4y ago