17 ms·

Sadly these lessons are always re-learned only in economics downturns, since those who only worked in times of economic boom have the feeling they're special an

Sadly these lessons are always re-learned only in economics downturns, since those who only worked in times of economic boom have the feeling they're special and irreplaceable. Almost nobody ever irreplaceable.

mschuster91 3y ago
It's time for unionization to spread in tech as well.
- Andrew_nenakhov 3y ago
  Yeah, if you want tech companies to move their development centers to Bangalore and Vietnam.
  - huygens6363 3y ago
    If they could, they would. What’s stopping them?
    - Rinzler89 3y ago
      Nothing is stopping them, they already have offices there or hire candidates remote and are growing. The IT market in those areas always booms whenever there's an economic downturn in the west as executives lay people off in the expensive locations and move their jobs to cheaper locations abroad to save costs. On paper this short term move makes them look like Rockstars to shareholders since they reduced operational costs with the stroke of a pen without decreasing profits. What happens long term is not their problem since they won't be around if the shit hits the fan, but that's not always the case. A friend of mine leads a team of devs in Vietnam and he's super happy with their output so assuming all offshore work is automatically poor quality is in bad faith.
    - mschuster91 3y ago
      > What’s stopping them? Quality of education and certifications. At the moment, even if you got someone with a b.sc degree, it's a lottery game if they will be usable for more than following a callcenter script - I've worked with offshorers who were absolutely top-notch, and others where I disconnected from a telco and wondered "WTF did I just witness". The problem is: this can rapidly change, when the Indian government gets its shit together, and actually fights against corruption in education. Add 4-5 years for the changes to become effective, and suddenly the US/EU will be at a serious disadvantage in numbers.
  - michaelmrose 3y ago
    There are more employees than owners. You could charge ruinous tariffs to companies that moved overseas.
    - littlestymaar 3y ago
      And prevent the capital from moving abroad in the first place. Allowing corporations to play a reverse auction on salaries and work conditions is the main reason why economic inequalities have skyrocketed at the expense of workers.
      - Rinzler89 3y ago
        Yeah but that's also the reason why you have cheap gadgets made in China.
        littlestymaar 3y ago
        And that's another reason to be against it.
  - glimshe 3y ago
    I've been hearing that was about to happen for, let's say, 30 years?
    - Andrew_nenakhov 3y ago
      3 days ago: "Google layoffs: Company fires entire Python team for 'cheaper labour'" https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40202281 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40202281
      - littlestymaar 3y ago
        And that's caused by Google Unions being too strong I guess? Do you realize this example is actually hurting your argument a lot?
        Andrew_nenakhov 3y ago
        It actually does not.
        littlestymaar 3y ago
        It does, as the rebuttal to your argument is that corporations will move jobs no matter if there are Unions or not and no matter if the unions are powerful or not, and your example illustrates just that. You can't win the rat race to lower wages.
        Andrew_nenakhov 3y ago
        Do you have any doubts that unionizing will greatly accelerate this natural process? The race to big wage can be honestly won with only one method: the company should extract more value from your work than it costs them to pay you, and more than it would extract from a cheaper replacement. If it is so, firing you hurts the company more than paying you a lot, and no sensible business will ever get rid of such an employee.
  - littlestymaar 3y ago
    When the owner could do that, they already have, and not having a Union is not going to make you competitive against people working with a fraction of your salary anyway. If you care about preventing corporations from moving jobs abroad, voting for more capital control is a good addition to unionizing.

mschuster91 3y ago

It's time for unionization to spread in tech as well.

Andrew_nenakhov 3y ago
Yeah, if you want tech companies to move their development centers to Bangalore and Vietnam.
- huygens6363 3y ago
  If they could, they would. What’s stopping them?
  - Rinzler89 3y ago
    Nothing is stopping them, they already have offices there or hire candidates remote and are growing. The IT market in those areas always booms whenever there's an economic downturn in the west as executives lay people off in the expensive locations and move their jobs to cheaper locations abroad to save costs. On paper this short term move makes them look like Rockstars to shareholders since they reduced operational costs with the stroke of a pen without decreasing profits. What happens long term is not their problem since they won't be around if the shit hits the fan, but that's not always the case. A friend of mine leads a team of devs in Vietnam and he's super happy with their output so assuming all offshore work is automatically poor quality is in bad faith.
  - mschuster91 3y ago
    > What’s stopping them? Quality of education and certifications. At the moment, even if you got someone with a b.sc degree, it's a lottery game if they will be usable for more than following a callcenter script - I've worked with offshorers who were absolutely top-notch, and others where I disconnected from a telco and wondered "WTF did I just witness". The problem is: this can rapidly change, when the Indian government gets its shit together, and actually fights against corruption in education. Add 4-5 years for the changes to become effective, and suddenly the US/EU will be at a serious disadvantage in numbers.
- michaelmrose 3y ago
  There are more employees than owners. You could charge ruinous tariffs to companies that moved overseas.
  - littlestymaar 3y ago
    And prevent the capital from moving abroad in the first place. Allowing corporations to play a reverse auction on salaries and work conditions is the main reason why economic inequalities have skyrocketed at the expense of workers.
    - Rinzler89 3y ago
      Yeah but that's also the reason why you have cheap gadgets made in China.
      - littlestymaar 3y ago
        And that's another reason to be against it.
- glimshe 3y ago
  I've been hearing that was about to happen for, let's say, 30 years?
  - Andrew_nenakhov 3y ago
    3 days ago: "Google layoffs: Company fires entire Python team for 'cheaper labour'" https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40202281 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40202281
    - littlestymaar 3y ago
      And that's caused by Google Unions being too strong I guess? Do you realize this example is actually hurting your argument a lot?
      - Andrew_nenakhov 3y ago
        It actually does not.
        littlestymaar 3y ago
        It does, as the rebuttal to your argument is that corporations will move jobs no matter if there are Unions or not and no matter if the unions are powerful or not, and your example illustrates just that. You can't win the rat race to lower wages.
        Andrew_nenakhov 3y ago
        Do you have any doubts that unionizing will greatly accelerate this natural process? The race to big wage can be honestly won with only one method: the company should extract more value from your work than it costs them to pay you, and more than it would extract from a cheaper replacement. If it is so, firing you hurts the company more than paying you a lot, and no sensible business will ever get rid of such an employee.
- littlestymaar 3y ago
  When the owner could do that, they already have, and not having a Union is not going to make you competitive against people working with a fraction of your salary anyway. If you care about preventing corporations from moving jobs abroad, voting for more capital control is a good addition to unionizing.