4 ms·
> We aren’t interchangeable cogs Turns out we largely are, just like in most other industries. Probably like to think we’re irreplaceable snowflakes. But we’re
by xref 4y ago
> We aren’t interchangeable cogs
Turns out we largely are, just like in most other industries. Probably like to think we’re irreplaceable snowflakes. But we’re not.
> people who do better than average should not be held down
Ah yes that old chestnut, that unions mandate No Employee May Achieve Above Average
- twblalock 4y agoNo, I meant that above average achievement is not rewarded. (And in that case, why would anyone try harder than the bare minimum?) One of the first things a union would do is decouple compensation from performance and introduce a standard compensation structure for all workers, segmented by job level. (And somehow the people who are personal friends of the union leaders seem to rise in job level faster than the others…) The kind of people who are attracted to that kind of structure are not the ones who build successful industries, and they are demoralizing to have as coworkers.
- sangnoir 4y agoCounterpoint: Hollywood.
- nr2x 4y agoSome of the most famous and wealthy people on earth are in the same union!
- ropable 4y ago> One of the first things a union would do is decouple compensation from performance and introduce a standard compensation structure for all workers, segmented by job level. (And somehow the people who are personal friends of the union leaders seem to rise in job level faster than the others…) This argument is a strawman, and really is a worsr-possible-case caricature of union activity. I've worked in a number of workplaces having a unionised workforce my entire professional career (~25 years, private industry and government) and I've never observing anything like the scenario you describe. Ambitious, talented people are promoted and improve their compensation. Average-performance clock-punchers reach a certain level and stop. Poor performers are managed out of the organisation. Union membership is no ticket to a cushy job for life. I'm not denying that the worst-case scenario could happen, but it's by no means a given. IMO this kind of fundamentalist opinion is unhelpful, and doesn't reflect the reasonable balance of priorities and opinions which people have out there in a modern society.
- throwaway2037 4y agoAre you a software engineer? What union(s) and what do they do for you?
- ropable 4y agoYes, I'm primarily a software engineer. Unions are quite often sector-based rather than profession-based. For example, the union I belong to currently covers the public sector in Western Australia rather than any specific profession. As to what it does for me: negotiates on my behalf for any required changes to my award, provides a counselling service to assist with localised work issues or general mental health, provides a travel insurance policy that covers my daily commute, provides a purchase negotiation service for appliances and furniture, and provides a number of other discounts at various stores.
- ummonk 4y agoHow much do you get paid as a fraction of what unionized tech workers in the US get paid?
- ropable 4y agoThat's a difficult question for me to answer, given that 1) I'm in Australia and 2) "tech workers" is a very general term. Given the current exchange rate, I can say that I'm currently paid in the range of US$70000-80000 per annum (it varies a bit based on voluntary deployments to bushfire incidents that my org manages). It's a full-time role, mainly software dev but with the mix of sysadmin, BA, DBA and other odd IT jobs that any tech worker does. I coordinate 1-2 more junior software devs to a small extent. I have no idea how that compares to a similar role in the US, but over here that's a pretty comfortable middle-class wage.
- throwaway2037 4y agoI estimate 50% higher in tech-focused places in US. However, that would ignore worse work-life balance and insanely high living costs in those places! I sounds like you are being paid well. I would love to live in Perth for few years, then explore the beaches, reefs, and bush in my free time.
- whitemary 4y agoThere are many legitimate criticisms one can make of American unions, but this isn't one of them. I am not a union cheerleader by any stretch of the imagination, but you obviously don't have the slightest clue what you're talking about. Hard work and valuable contribution are recognized, celebrated, and rewarded as much or more among union workforces as otherwise.
- xracy 4y agoThe original case of tech startups was that if you gave people a living wage (such they were comfortable), then the fact that they're not keeping up with the Jones's becomes meaningless, and then how they thrive is about how interesting their job is to them. This is seen, at least partially, as what drew a lot of people to the current "big tech" companies. They wanted to work on interesting problems. The pay was high, but it mattered a lot less than that the work was actually rewarding.
- mjevans 4y agoYes but also No. Onboarding or 'getting someone up to speed' is a far more invasive and disruptive task than many believe. Manager probably dream about adding and removing employees as easily as buying more or less food for a catering event. Institutional knowledge and employee quality are no where near that easy.
- llampx 4y agoOnboarding is also very dependent on employee goodwill. Too much churn, and people stop wanting to bring new employees up to speed.
- Sparkyte 4y agoIt is more like they want to fire and hire to show shareholders they want maintain status quo. Business don't really save money firing and hiring over and over. It is the share holders who think nothing good is coming from employees who stick around or have earned too much annual increase in pay to keep them. If you make 180k a year and you get an annual bump of 4% pay every year, you'll get 7.2k bump. So 194, 202, 210, 220... in five years. It is a sizable bump. They fire rehire to sometimes reset those annual bumps.