5 ms·

It's been said many times before, but Tesla and Toyota are the biggest winners. Unions are great at destroying their hosts; it's funny that they never found or

It's been said many times before, but Tesla and Toyota are the biggest winners. Unions are great at destroying their hosts; it's funny that they never found or invest in companies.

AlexandrB 3y ago
Unions are the democratization of work.
Apocryphon 3y ago
Worker cooperatives are conceptually not too different from union-founded companies. As far as unions investing, not a bad idea. In a financialized age where everything from FAANG to nations have their own investment portfolios, perhaps labor unions oughta get in on that action as well.
- pdonis 3y ago
  > Worker cooperatives are conceptually not too different from union-founded companies. But they are conceptually different from unions that aren't actual companies. Worker cooperatives and union-founded companies take on actual business risks: it's up to them to find markets for their products and services and organize themselves to make the most efficient use of the capital they own (much of which is the skills and knowledge of their workers/owners). Traditional unions do not take on business risks; they expect the corporations their workers all work for to do that. But refusing to take on business risk also means you are giving up upside; risk and reward go together. So unions that don't take the initiative to become worker cooperatives or actual corporations should not be complaining that the corporations are taking more upside.
  - Apocryphon 3y ago
    I'm not aware of actual union-founded companies so the notion is fascinating to me. As far as unions not taking on business risk, I'd have to imagine that most unions aren't going to ask for the moon to the extent of bankrupting the business. And there are some examples where unions have the foresight to demand the company make smart market moves: Audi's unions demand electric model for main German plant (2017) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13986889 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13986889 General Electric workers launch protest, demand to make ventilators (2020) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22731087 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22731087 In the tech space, one could imagine a coders' union demanding management to take technical limitations or issues more seriously. How many times have you worked somewhere where product, or simply upper management, has overruled software concerns?
  - autoexec 3y ago
    Unions are made up of workers so they automatically have skin in the game. If the workers can't work, the union dies. Workers (and therefore unions) are very much interested in companies being successful. Stable employment is a nice thing for a worker to have.
    - salamanderss 3y ago
      Does unionization really make companies more successful? If unions have such high interest in the company stability and success I presume the evidence shows union shop companies have more success and longevity after unionizing vs like ones that dont? And my biggest fear as a worker is not longevity but my marketability to gain new jobs. If unions make it easier for me to get hired and promoted without consideration of tenure of other union members I'd probably be interested in joining
      - autoexec 3y ago
        I'd argue that workers who don't feel exploited are more productive and that more productive employees can have a positive impact on a company. I'd bet that employees who are treated well tend to stick around longer too and that also can have a positive impact a company. I think research might be a little difficult since there are a lot of things that can impact a company's longevity and success (however that's being defined) that have nothing to do with employees (unionized or otherwise), but I imagine a good study might be able to account for that to some extent.
        salamanderss 3y ago
        NBER research suggests unions correlate with lower relative employment for certain more vulnerable populations such as young and old. There's also the risk the union basically exploits the young and old by driving their wage from shitty to zero (by setting them too high to bear for anything but the most able bodied middle age). This pretty much mimics my experience younger working construction; union gigs set my wage at '0' by making me the outgroup. Being exploited by middle age union workers is bad for longevity imo.
wheatoceans 3y ago
Well, Tesla has lost 20%+ of its value during these negotiations, so it sounds like you have some knowledge here that other investers don't. FYI Having a company founded by a union member and having it be a union shop from the start is exceedingly common among the trades (where most unions are). There are also various similar processes such as co-ops, or granting shared equity among founders who also have voting rights which are very similar concepts to unions.
rqtwteye 3y ago
Imagine how well companies would do if we would do away with these pesky workplace safety regulations and the five day workweek the unions fought for.
- pdonis 3y ago
  Why would that happen if unions actually took ownership of companies? If the unions' claims are correct, then them becoming actual corporations, owned by the workers, selling the service of organized labor to industries like the auto industry, should be more efficient than the current system, without having to sacrifice anything. Things like workplace safety regulations and the five day work week would simply be non-negotiable contract terms that the worker companies require in order to sell their services.
  - Teever 3y ago
    Because of the sarcasm dripping from your post I have no idea what you're actually trying to say.
    - pdonis 3y ago
      What I'm trying to say is simple: the unions' basic position is that corporations don't treat workers the way they deserve to be treated. If that is really true, unions should be able to increase productivity and efficiency by putting their money where their mouth is and forming their own corporations that treat workers better, and selling the services of the workers to other corporations. Then negotiations like the ones described in the article would be straightforward contract negotiations between corporations with roughly equal bargaining power. That's what the unions claim to want. And yet it doesn't happen: the UAW, for example, has never even considered becoming the United Auto Workers Corporation and selling services to GM and Ford.
      - PlunderBunny 3y ago
        What makes you think a corporatised union would be able to access the kind of money required to do something like that, as opposed to the 'C' suite types that currently run the show?

It's been said many times before, but Tesla and Toyota are the biggest winners. Unions are great at destroying their hosts; it's funny that they never found or invest in companies.

AlexandrB 3y ago

Unions are the democratization of work.

Apocryphon 3y ago

Worker cooperatives are conceptually not too different from union-founded companies. As far as unions investing, not a bad idea. In a financialized age where everything from FAANG to nations have their own investment portfolios, perhaps labor unions oughta get in on that action as well.

pdonis 3y ago
> Worker cooperatives are conceptually not too different from union-founded companies. But they are conceptually different from unions that aren't actual companies. Worker cooperatives and union-founded companies take on actual business risks: it's up to them to find markets for their products and services and organize themselves to make the most efficient use of the capital they own (much of which is the skills and knowledge of their workers/owners). Traditional unions do not take on business risks; they expect the corporations their workers all work for to do that. But refusing to take on business risk also means you are giving up upside; risk and reward go together. So unions that don't take the initiative to become worker cooperatives or actual corporations should not be complaining that the corporations are taking more upside.
- Apocryphon 3y ago
  I'm not aware of actual union-founded companies so the notion is fascinating to me. As far as unions not taking on business risk, I'd have to imagine that most unions aren't going to ask for the moon to the extent of bankrupting the business. And there are some examples where unions have the foresight to demand the company make smart market moves: Audi's unions demand electric model for main German plant (2017) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13986889 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13986889 General Electric workers launch protest, demand to make ventilators (2020) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22731087 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22731087 In the tech space, one could imagine a coders' union demanding management to take technical limitations or issues more seriously. How many times have you worked somewhere where product, or simply upper management, has overruled software concerns?
- autoexec 3y ago
  Unions are made up of workers so they automatically have skin in the game. If the workers can't work, the union dies. Workers (and therefore unions) are very much interested in companies being successful. Stable employment is a nice thing for a worker to have.
  - salamanderss 3y ago
    Does unionization really make companies more successful? If unions have such high interest in the company stability and success I presume the evidence shows union shop companies have more success and longevity after unionizing vs like ones that dont? And my biggest fear as a worker is not longevity but my marketability to gain new jobs. If unions make it easier for me to get hired and promoted without consideration of tenure of other union members I'd probably be interested in joining
    - autoexec 3y ago
      I'd argue that workers who don't feel exploited are more productive and that more productive employees can have a positive impact on a company. I'd bet that employees who are treated well tend to stick around longer too and that also can have a positive impact a company. I think research might be a little difficult since there are a lot of things that can impact a company's longevity and success (however that's being defined) that have nothing to do with employees (unionized or otherwise), but I imagine a good study might be able to account for that to some extent.
      - salamanderss 3y ago
        NBER research suggests unions correlate with lower relative employment for certain more vulnerable populations such as young and old. There's also the risk the union basically exploits the young and old by driving their wage from shitty to zero (by setting them too high to bear for anything but the most able bodied middle age). This pretty much mimics my experience younger working construction; union gigs set my wage at '0' by making me the outgroup. Being exploited by middle age union workers is bad for longevity imo.

wheatoceans 3y ago

Well, Tesla has lost 20%+ of its value during these negotiations, so it sounds like you have some knowledge here that other investers don't. FYI Having a company founded by a union member and having it be a union shop from the start is exceedingly common among the trades (where most unions are). There are also various similar processes such as co-ops, or granting shared equity among founders who also have voting rights which are very similar concepts to unions.

rqtwteye 3y ago

Imagine how well companies would do if we would do away with these pesky workplace safety regulations and the five day workweek the unions fought for.

pdonis 3y ago
Why would that happen if unions actually took ownership of companies? If the unions' claims are correct, then them becoming actual corporations, owned by the workers, selling the service of organized labor to industries like the auto industry, should be more efficient than the current system, without having to sacrifice anything. Things like workplace safety regulations and the five day work week would simply be non-negotiable contract terms that the worker companies require in order to sell their services.
- Teever 3y ago
  Because of the sarcasm dripping from your post I have no idea what you're actually trying to say.
  - pdonis 3y ago
    What I'm trying to say is simple: the unions' basic position is that corporations don't treat workers the way they deserve to be treated. If that is really true, unions should be able to increase productivity and efficiency by putting their money where their mouth is and forming their own corporations that treat workers better, and selling the services of the workers to other corporations. Then negotiations like the ones described in the article would be straightforward contract negotiations between corporations with roughly equal bargaining power. That's what the unions claim to want. And yet it doesn't happen: the UAW, for example, has never even considered becoming the United Auto Workers Corporation and selling services to GM and Ford.
    - PlunderBunny 3y ago
      What makes you think a corporatised union would be able to access the kind of money required to do something like that, as opposed to the 'C' suite types that currently run the show?