5 ms·
[edit] Yes, I know we have a title limit here, thanks for pointing it out again and again. The question is why the, in my humble opinion, most important word of
by skore 13y ago
[edit] Yes, I know we have a title limit here, thanks for pointing it out again and again. The question is why the, in my humble opinion, most important word of the original title was dropped.
OP: Revealed: Apple and Google’s wage-fixing cartel involved dozens more companies, over one million employees
HN: Apple and Google’s wage-fixing involved dozens more companies, over 1M employees
Maybe this is too nit-picky even for HN, but: Why does the headline here on HN only name "wage-fixing" (aka the symptom of the problem) instead of also naming the underlying cause like the article does: This is a cartel. Dropping the word has a whiff of spin.
I sure as heck hope they get the treatment they deserve and that this will strengthen the understanding that this type of stuff is exactly why you want strong unions. Judging from the history of both in the US, I'm not holding my breath, though.
- deleted 13y ago[deleted]
- tylerkahn 13y ago"Apple and Google’s wage-fixing involved dozens more companies, over 1M employees" - 80 characters "Revealed: Apple and Google’s wage-fixing cartel involved dozens more companies, over one million employees" - 106 characters HN has an 80 character limit for titles.
- cpncrunch 13y agoThe Pando article itself is spin. It wasn't a 'wage fixing cartel'. It was a non-poaching agreement, which may or may not have resulted in lower wages as a side-effect. I'm not sure it's even accurate to call it a 'cartel'. A cartel agrees to fix prices, which didn't happen in this case. They didn't even agree to fix wages, so the article is essentially bullshit in my opinion.
- corresation 13y agoA cartel are competitors who privately agree to essentially not compete, and this can include on the production side (which in this case are tech workers). The unavoidable, and intentional impact of that is wage suppression. This isn't a "maybe", this is absolute certainty: A rising Google upset the apple cart by offering more than those other companies were, and everyone else was sour that they'd have to start paying more to keep their employees. This agreement, without any doubt at all, took money out of the pockets of tech workers. I'm generally a fan of Google, but I have a negative opinion of Eric Schmidt. So many times he says and does things that seem so fundamentally detached from real life. EDIT: Just wanted to add that the hero of this story -- the only one who actually saw that it was wrong and probably illegal, was Edward Colligan, then the CEO of Palm - http://pando.com/2014/02/19/court-documents-reveal-steve-jobs-blistering-threat-to-ceo-who-wouldnt-join-wage-fixing-cartel/ http://pando.com/2014/02/19/court-documents-reveal-steve-job...
- cpncrunch 13y agoNot according to any defn i can see. All defns say a cartel regulates production and output.
- chrismcb 13y agoWhile they didn't agree to "fix" wages. They did this for two purposes. One was to keep down employee churn , and so they can keep the salary lower. How do you hire someone away? One way is to offer them more money. How to keep the employee, one way is to offer them more money.
- Roboprog 13y agoThen why the investigations by DOJ and Cal AG?
- cpncrunch 13y agoBecause it is illegal. No need to be a dbag and downvote me because you didnt read my comment properly. Its illegal but not wage fixing and not a cartel.
- DanBC 13y agoHN titles have an 80 character limit. This has nothing to do with spin.
- corresation 13y ago"this will strengthen the understanding that this type of stuff is exactly why you want strong unions" Unions are fundamentally socialist. That isn't using socialism as a bad word, but as a factual description of the fundamental fairness and equality notions of union. In many situations it provides protection and balance between the employee and employer. Does that really apply to highly paid employees who are actively recruited as standouts? The ones paid far above many of their peers because they're at the high end of the curve? Unions are the antithesis of the solution. Indeed, the union approach would be the same problem (if not worse). There would be no standouts. No exemplary talents. Unions would mandate the specific lowest common denominator compensation and conditions. Again, I see the value in some places, but it is woefully ill-suited for this situation. Professional associations -- ala doctors and lawyers -- is more suitable for this field. Unions are not something most would benefit from.
- walshemj 13y agoThat's not how M&P unions like the AMA and BMA work in practice your just repeating the union busters propaganda. You negotiate the "rate for the job" if some one is good and need s more pay well promote them to a higher grade thats why you need to have a proper career track for all you staff.
- corresation 13y agoI'm not "repeating" anyone's propaganda. I've worked in union situations before. I understand the ramifications of unions. As someone who tends to do quite well in this field, unions would be very deleterious for me personally: Unions are as much if not more about "equality" between union members, even where equality is measured by specious metrics (such as seniority), as it is about the employee/employer relationship. The AMA is not a union by any traditional metric. It is a professional association. If a doctor is lured to a hospital for enormous sums of money, the AMA has absolutely no say over it. Nor do they dictate that another doctor has to be offered the job because they've been practicing for two months longer. Nor do they dictate that the doctor has to be paid for scale grade 7E because to do otherwise would cause resentment among other doctor's. It would be great to have a professional association (presuming it didn't become too involved in its own enrichment). No thanks to unions.
- aspensmonster 13y ago>Why the, in my humble opinion, most important word of the original title was dropped For the same reason HN wants to roll out pending comments.