5 ms·

Unions have also perpetuated racism, sexism, xenophobia, organized crime, government corruption, etc. It’s not all sunshine and lollipops. America abandoned uni

Unions have also perpetuated racism, sexism, xenophobia, organized crime, government corruption, etc. It’s not all sunshine and lollipops. America abandoned unions for a reason.

dfxm12 3y ago
America abandoned unions for a reason. It's been a concerted effort of corporate capitalists: buying & influencing media outlets, lobbying, offshoring, etc.
- cmiles74 3y ago
  There are many unions in the US. My partner is a member of a union and has much better healthcare and, overall, a better benefit package than I do. They work at the state university.
- AnimalMuppet 3y ago
  So? Unions also bought and influenced media outlets. They also lobbied. It's not like unions just sat there while management poisoned the country's mind against unions. Unions were not able to make a compelling case. They had every chance to do so, starting with them being the default option in many industries. America abandoned unions for a reason. It may have taken a concerted effort by corporate capitalists to get there, but that's not why. "Why" is because more and more people felt that the unions were not a net positive for them.
  - workingjubilee 3y ago
    It can be the case that people didn't feel that unions were a net positive from the 1960s~2000s and now, starting from somewhere in the late 2010s, have begun reconsidering whether unions are net positive. All that needs to change is conditions altering which make unions seem to be a net positive.
    - AnimalMuppet 3y ago
      Sure. It can even be the case that unions were a net positive before 1960, too. It can even be the case that the gains achieved by the unions are what made conditions less terrible from ~1960 to ~2000, and that the absence of the unions is what allowed conditions to get worse after 2000. (I don't think that's the whole story, but it's a defensible reading of events...)
dxdm 3y ago
> have also perpetuated racism, sexism, xenophobia, organized crime, government corruption, The same is true for political parties, religious organizations, and all sorts of other organizations that are made of people, including privately owned companies. Which of these concepts would you like to abandon, and what do you propose should be their replacement? What you say is an argument for balancing power, not for concentrating it.
- zaphar 3y ago
  Unions are forced participation. I am not forced to participate in political parties or religious organizations. In theory a Union could be purely voluntary in which case cool. I'll opt out. But then the Union loses most of it's leverage so it in practice if a Union gets introduced it's no longer voluntary it's forced for anyone who works at that company. The only choice for someone who doesn't want to contribute to the union is to leave the company. Government is also forced participation but I accept it as necessary part of a functioning society. I don't see Software Engineering Unions as a necessary part of a functioning society though.
  - dxdm 3y ago
    That's not what we were talking about, but alright. Not sure how it works in the US, but from what I read you can't be forced to join a union there. But I think I get what you mean: once you work in a given place, there's usually not much choice which union you can join (or which will represent you in any case), and your only option is to change employer, location or career. I understand that point of view, but I don't think it's a good argument. Employers also organize and wield their influence in ways that you seem to resent in unions. Don't like it? You have the same choices as above. (I don't think people should be forced into unions; I just think your argument is not anti-union, or at least cannot be fairly applied to single them out.) The difference seems to be that the employer pays you and treats you well enough that you think you won't benefit from a union. Good for you! Hope it stays that way.
    - M2Ys4U 3y ago
      >once you work in a given place, there's usually not much choice which union you can join (or which will represent you in any case), and your only option is to change employer, location or career. Unions are generally democratic, too, so there's also the option of voting for different union reps (or volunteering to be a rep) in order to change the union's policy or how the union works.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]

Unions have also perpetuated racism, sexism, xenophobia, organized crime, government corruption, etc. It’s not all sunshine and lollipops. America abandoned unions for a reason.

dfxm12 3y ago

America abandoned unions for a reason. It's been a concerted effort of corporate capitalists: buying & influencing media outlets, lobbying, offshoring, etc.

cmiles74 3y ago
There are many unions in the US. My partner is a member of a union and has much better healthcare and, overall, a better benefit package than I do. They work at the state university.
AnimalMuppet 3y ago
So? Unions also bought and influenced media outlets. They also lobbied. It's not like unions just sat there while management poisoned the country's mind against unions. Unions were not able to make a compelling case. They had every chance to do so, starting with them being the default option in many industries. America abandoned unions for a reason. It may have taken a concerted effort by corporate capitalists to get there, but that's not why. "Why" is because more and more people felt that the unions were not a net positive for them.
- workingjubilee 3y ago
  It can be the case that people didn't feel that unions were a net positive from the 1960s~2000s and now, starting from somewhere in the late 2010s, have begun reconsidering whether unions are net positive. All that needs to change is conditions altering which make unions seem to be a net positive.
  - AnimalMuppet 3y ago
    Sure. It can even be the case that unions were a net positive before 1960, too. It can even be the case that the gains achieved by the unions are what made conditions less terrible from ~1960 to ~2000, and that the absence of the unions is what allowed conditions to get worse after 2000. (I don't think that's the whole story, but it's a defensible reading of events...)

dxdm 3y ago

> have also perpetuated racism, sexism, xenophobia, organized crime, government corruption, The same is true for political parties, religious organizations, and all sorts of other organizations that are made of people, including privately owned companies. Which of these concepts would you like to abandon, and what do you propose should be their replacement? What you say is an argument for balancing power, not for concentrating it.

zaphar 3y ago
Unions are forced participation. I am not forced to participate in political parties or religious organizations. In theory a Union could be purely voluntary in which case cool. I'll opt out. But then the Union loses most of it's leverage so it in practice if a Union gets introduced it's no longer voluntary it's forced for anyone who works at that company. The only choice for someone who doesn't want to contribute to the union is to leave the company. Government is also forced participation but I accept it as necessary part of a functioning society. I don't see Software Engineering Unions as a necessary part of a functioning society though.
- dxdm 3y ago
  That's not what we were talking about, but alright. Not sure how it works in the US, but from what I read you can't be forced to join a union there. But I think I get what you mean: once you work in a given place, there's usually not much choice which union you can join (or which will represent you in any case), and your only option is to change employer, location or career. I understand that point of view, but I don't think it's a good argument. Employers also organize and wield their influence in ways that you seem to resent in unions. Don't like it? You have the same choices as above. (I don't think people should be forced into unions; I just think your argument is not anti-union, or at least cannot be fairly applied to single them out.) The difference seems to be that the employer pays you and treats you well enough that you think you won't benefit from a union. Good for you! Hope it stays that way.
  - M2Ys4U 3y ago
    >once you work in a given place, there's usually not much choice which union you can join (or which will represent you in any case), and your only option is to change employer, location or career. Unions are generally democratic, too, so there's also the option of voting for different union reps (or volunteering to be a rep) in order to change the union's policy or how the union works.

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]