5 ms·

> Forcing an existing organization to bend to your will is textbook entitlement. This is a mischaracterization of what unions do. When have you witnessed a uni

> Forcing an existing organization to bend to your will is textbook entitlement. This is a mischaracterization of what unions do. When have you witnessed a union do this? That must be a remarkably powerful union to be making decisions for the entire organization. Unions simply negotiate things related to their members, on behalf of their members. There's no "forcing" involved. If a company doesn't want to meet the union's expectations for the wages and benefits of their members, it can simply fire all the union members or wait for them to strike and hire their replacements. After all, it's just software, how hard could it be to replace the entire team? Surely no harder than a single person simply quitting and building a competitor to Blizzard.

dahdum 4y ago
> If a company doesn't want to meet the union's expectations for the wages and benefits of their members, it can simply fire all the union members or wait for them to strike and hire their replacements. Not agreeing with OP, but you generally can’t fire striking workers. Replacements are difficult as you still owe the striking workers their positions if they return. Lots of caveats to all of that, but it’s definitely not simple. If it were there would be very few private unions.
- komali2 4y ago
  I was mostly being as facetious and dismissive as the op, their take is so old fashioned I honestly wonder if they're doing a bit.
cowl 4y ago
This is a small Union but Unions in general are a political tool and not for the good of their members. In Italy we had a Union outraged that Tech Employees ere not joining it that it "negotiated"(forced) the government to automatically enroll them (meaning they take a fee from the salaries as a tax) if they did not opt-out. that shows you who the unions are working for and their power.
- komali2 4y ago
  I'm sure just like there's shit companies, there's shit unions. If "just find a different company" or even "just found your own company" is a valid form of anti union criticism, "just find / form a different union" is equally valid. Regardless, unions are a net positive. https://www.epi.org/publication/unions-and-well-being/ https://www.epi.org/publication/unions-and-well-being/ > We find that, on average, the 17 U.S. states with the highest union densities: > have state minimum wages that are on average 19% higher than the national average and 40% higher than those in low-union-density states > have median annual incomes $6,000 higher than the national average > have higher-than-average unemployment insurance recipiency rates (that is, a higher share of those who are unemployed actually receive unemployment insurance)
  - cowl 4y ago
    Nothing of these applies to The tech Sector and Especially to my example in Italy. where the Labour protection laws afforded to anyone (even without a Union) are enough. That is the way to go, State laws guarantee the job protection not Unions. Unions are a vestige of the past where everyone had the same repetive task/responsability and the employer could exchange Bob for Greg without a thought. Many Jobs today (Especially in the Tech Sector) you can't Exchange Bob For Greg and thus negotiations on "collective minimum Salary" do not make even sense. Protections from Firing and other unemployement assurances must come from the government in equl measure irrespective of whether you are in a union or not. And Especially "just form your own union" was precisly what this example demonstrated that is not valid. That union had enough political power to Force the State to autoenroll People that did not want to be part of that union because they did not see any benefit.
    - LBJsPNS 4y ago
      Oh yes, the tech sector. You're special. You're not replaceable. Those... those workers... They're replaceable. You're special. You negotiated and got a whole dime more for yourself. That makes you better than those... others. Of course, if you'd joined a union, you'd have got a buck more, and better benefits. But no, you're Speshul. Solidarity forever.

dahdum 4y ago

> If a company doesn't want to meet the union's expectations for the wages and benefits of their members, it can simply fire all the union members or wait for them to strike and hire their replacements. Not agreeing with OP, but you generally can’t fire striking workers. Replacements are difficult as you still owe the striking workers their positions if they return. Lots of caveats to all of that, but it’s definitely not simple. If it were there would be very few private unions.

komali2 4y ago
I was mostly being as facetious and dismissive as the op, their take is so old fashioned I honestly wonder if they're doing a bit.

cowl 4y ago

This is a small Union but Unions in general are a political tool and not for the good of their members. In Italy we had a Union outraged that Tech Employees ere not joining it that it "negotiated"(forced) the government to automatically enroll them (meaning they take a fee from the salaries as a tax) if they did not opt-out. that shows you who the unions are working for and their power.

komali2 4y ago
I'm sure just like there's shit companies, there's shit unions. If "just find a different company" or even "just found your own company" is a valid form of anti union criticism, "just find / form a different union" is equally valid. Regardless, unions are a net positive. https://www.epi.org/publication/unions-and-well-being/ https://www.epi.org/publication/unions-and-well-being/ > We find that, on average, the 17 U.S. states with the highest union densities: > have state minimum wages that are on average 19% higher than the national average and 40% higher than those in low-union-density states > have median annual incomes $6,000 higher than the national average > have higher-than-average unemployment insurance recipiency rates (that is, a higher share of those who are unemployed actually receive unemployment insurance)
- cowl 4y ago
  Nothing of these applies to The tech Sector and Especially to my example in Italy. where the Labour protection laws afforded to anyone (even without a Union) are enough. That is the way to go, State laws guarantee the job protection not Unions. Unions are a vestige of the past where everyone had the same repetive task/responsability and the employer could exchange Bob for Greg without a thought. Many Jobs today (Especially in the Tech Sector) you can't Exchange Bob For Greg and thus negotiations on "collective minimum Salary" do not make even sense. Protections from Firing and other unemployement assurances must come from the government in equl measure irrespective of whether you are in a union or not. And Especially "just form your own union" was precisly what this example demonstrated that is not valid. That union had enough political power to Force the State to autoenroll People that did not want to be part of that union because they did not see any benefit.
  - LBJsPNS 4y ago
    Oh yes, the tech sector. You're special. You're not replaceable. Those... those workers... They're replaceable. You're special. You negotiated and got a whole dime more for yourself. That makes you better than those... others. Of course, if you'd joined a union, you'd have got a buck more, and better benefits. But no, you're Speshul. Solidarity forever.