7 ms·

Ah, the old corporate myth of meritocracy.

by fu9ar 11y ago

learnstats2 11y ago
Either you believe programmers have unique skill, or you believe programmers are equally good replaceable parts. If you believe the latter, you should probably join the union.
- whybroke 11y ago
  Those unique skills did not protect them from being abused by Oracle, Google, Microsoft, Apple, Adobe, Intel or any others. Either you believe many companies abuse their employees with no real consequences or you don't. If you believe the former then avoiding the solution because it is contrary to your ideology is never going to fix anything.
  - icebraining 11y ago
    What if one agrees that company abuse their employees but think that, in this case, a union would be worse a cure than the disease? By saying it's the solution, aren't you the one being held by your ideology?
    - whybroke 11y ago
      Because empirically it would not be. There is a great deal of mis-information about them from right leaning media that might create the contrary impression: That they limit wages, but the screen actor's guild certainly doesn't cap actor's wages. That they limit outside work, but for example, state employed court reporters do all their transcripts outside working hours and make quite a bit not being paid hourly for that. Indeed they have protected pilot wages for decades beyond what would have been possible otherwise. There is no case where an effective professional organization of some sort doesn't make things better for it members. To suppose that you as an individual will ever have any hope of negotiating on an equal basis with a multibillion dollar company because of "market forces" hand waving is utterly unreasonable and the poster child of limiting yourself due to ideology. Your one and only protection right now are few pieces of rapidly diminishing legislation. For better or worse you live in a society where if you don't have a lobbyist you are invisible and where what is considered bribery in every other country (ie money in politics) is considered free speech. A lobbyist alone would work wonders let alone the other advantages of an organization.
      - learnstats2 11y ago
        I know many actors and I don't know what their union is doing, but they don't exactly have an easy lifestyle. You're suggesting I should join a union to have a lobbyist working on my (group's) behalf? This seems to me like playing multi-billionaire corporations at their own game by their own rules - and playing it badly. Where is the empirical evidence that you claim?
        whybroke 11y ago
        >I know many X... Confirmation bias mean that exceptional or confirmatory anecdotes are much more likely to be remembered[1] I continue to be amazed that there armies of people who consider sentences that begin with "I know someone who..." to somehow be definitive evidence of anything whatsoever. [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anecdotal_evidence http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anecdotal_evidence
        learnstats2 11y ago
        I continue to be amazed by people who criticise anecdotal evidence as an ad hominem or straw man attack without providing any kind of evidence of anything you have said. We are talking about benefits for people, we are not talking about abstract mathematics - you don't want to accept the situation of those people because that would be inconvenient for you, considering what you have said. Constructive discussion is now over; you failed to convince me.
        fu9ar 11y ago
        You don't need a blue collar union patterned after UAW, but there have been multiple successful lawsuits about illegal wage suppression across many areas of high tech. They are probably the tip of an iceberg. These lawsuits suggest a much deeper pattern of high level collusion between these incestuous companies to systematically depress wages. There are professional organizations for every major profession. Technically, the ACM would probably be the closest thing to a union that programmers actually need, but it's limited to the big iron scientific computing... So, yeah. I don't know if there is something for all of the webdev 2.0 gluelib writers out there. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Professional_association https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Professional_association P.S. You're might be a good programmer. I don't know. We've never met, but stop trying to play rhetoric games. You're not very good at them.
- Dewie3 11y ago
  Even having unique skills is not enough. People can still take advantage of you if you aren't career- or business-savvy enough. This is a complex environment, not simply a question of being special snowflake 10X programmer or whatever. "Oh, you're skilled, Jimmy. You get the job done. But see, Jimmy; you are not a team player. We've been having a lot of work to do lately, and you are not putting in the extra effort by staying late enough, Jimmy. You see, Pete, now that's a guy that goes the extra mile! And there are plenty of others. Frankly, you should try and put in just a little more effort (because you're easily replaceable, Jimmy)". What good does it do to be a "10X Ninja" if you feel like a small fish in a big pond with no bargaining chips?
  - learnstats2 11y ago
    I don't really see what the benefit for Jimmy to stay in that situation is. If Jimmy is skilled, and the company thinks or acts like Jimmy is replaceable, then Jimmy is in a bad job. Jimmy should leave before Jimmy is mentally harmed. I believe this to the extent that I think creating a union to protect people in that type of situation is a net negative, where the union acts to help keep people in that type of job, where the union acts like those people are replaceable parts, which ends up being to the benefit mainly of that type of employer: as those workers indeed become replaceable parts. We should encourage those skilled workers to leave instead, by offering them something better.
    - Dewie3 11y ago
      > I don't really see what the benefit for Jimmy to stay in that situation is. If Jimmy is skilled, and the company thinks or acts like Jimmy is replaceable, then Jimmy is in a bad job. Jimmy should leave before Jimmy is mentally harmed. You are assuming a perfectly rational actor. And with perfect information - we tend to suck up and endure a lot of shit if we just think it is "normal".
- s73v3r 11y ago
  Bullshit. I can believe that programmers have unique skills, and also believe that companies don't give a shit about that, and largely try to treat them like replaceable parts.
  - smil 11y ago
    Both are correct. It's cyclical, or rather a matter of social evolution. Private enterprises will always look for and highly reward unique individuals whose skills will significantly increase their earnings/effectiveness and give them an edge over the competition. At the same time, private enterprise tries to standardize processes and jobs, so that no individual employee will be of outsized importance (other than the owners), and they will try to extend the unique skill to their other employees, thereby making it less scarce, lowering its cost. Years down the road when that skill is common place, it all starts anew with another skillset being introduced.

Ah, the old corporate myth of meritocracy.

by fu9ar 11y ago

Ah, the old corporate myth of meritocracy.

Either you believe programmers have unique skill, or you believe programmers are equally good replaceable parts. If you believe the latter, you should probably join the union.

whybroke 11y ago
Those unique skills did not protect them from being abused by Oracle, Google, Microsoft, Apple, Adobe, Intel or any others. Either you believe many companies abuse their employees with no real consequences or you don't. If you believe the former then avoiding the solution because it is contrary to your ideology is never going to fix anything.
- icebraining 11y ago
  What if one agrees that company abuse their employees but think that, in this case, a union would be worse a cure than the disease? By saying it's the solution, aren't you the one being held by your ideology?
  - whybroke 11y ago
    Because empirically it would not be. There is a great deal of mis-information about them from right leaning media that might create the contrary impression: That they limit wages, but the screen actor's guild certainly doesn't cap actor's wages. That they limit outside work, but for example, state employed court reporters do all their transcripts outside working hours and make quite a bit not being paid hourly for that. Indeed they have protected pilot wages for decades beyond what would have been possible otherwise. There is no case where an effective professional organization of some sort doesn't make things better for it members. To suppose that you as an individual will ever have any hope of negotiating on an equal basis with a multibillion dollar company because of "market forces" hand waving is utterly unreasonable and the poster child of limiting yourself due to ideology. Your one and only protection right now are few pieces of rapidly diminishing legislation. For better or worse you live in a society where if you don't have a lobbyist you are invisible and where what is considered bribery in every other country (ie money in politics) is considered free speech. A lobbyist alone would work wonders let alone the other advantages of an organization.
    - learnstats2 11y ago
      I know many actors and I don't know what their union is doing, but they don't exactly have an easy lifestyle. You're suggesting I should join a union to have a lobbyist working on my (group's) behalf? This seems to me like playing multi-billionaire corporations at their own game by their own rules - and playing it badly. Where is the empirical evidence that you claim?
      - whybroke 11y ago
        >I know many X... Confirmation bias mean that exceptional or confirmatory anecdotes are much more likely to be remembered[1] I continue to be amazed that there armies of people who consider sentences that begin with "I know someone who..." to somehow be definitive evidence of anything whatsoever. [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anecdotal_evidence http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anecdotal_evidence
        learnstats2 11y ago
        I continue to be amazed by people who criticise anecdotal evidence as an ad hominem or straw man attack without providing any kind of evidence of anything you have said. We are talking about benefits for people, we are not talking about abstract mathematics - you don't want to accept the situation of those people because that would be inconvenient for you, considering what you have said. Constructive discussion is now over; you failed to convince me.
        fu9ar 11y ago
        You don't need a blue collar union patterned after UAW, but there have been multiple successful lawsuits about illegal wage suppression across many areas of high tech. They are probably the tip of an iceberg. These lawsuits suggest a much deeper pattern of high level collusion between these incestuous companies to systematically depress wages. There are professional organizations for every major profession. Technically, the ACM would probably be the closest thing to a union that programmers actually need, but it's limited to the big iron scientific computing... So, yeah. I don't know if there is something for all of the webdev 2.0 gluelib writers out there. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Professional_association https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Professional_association P.S. You're might be a good programmer. I don't know. We've never met, but stop trying to play rhetoric games. You're not very good at them.
Dewie3 11y ago
Even having unique skills is not enough. People can still take advantage of you if you aren't career- or business-savvy enough. This is a complex environment, not simply a question of being special snowflake 10X programmer or whatever. "Oh, you're skilled, Jimmy. You get the job done. But see, Jimmy; you are not a team player. We've been having a lot of work to do lately, and you are not putting in the extra effort by staying late enough, Jimmy. You see, Pete, now that's a guy that goes the extra mile! And there are plenty of others. Frankly, you should try and put in just a little more effort (because you're easily replaceable, Jimmy)". What good does it do to be a "10X Ninja" if you feel like a small fish in a big pond with no bargaining chips?
- learnstats2 11y ago
  I don't really see what the benefit for Jimmy to stay in that situation is. If Jimmy is skilled, and the company thinks or acts like Jimmy is replaceable, then Jimmy is in a bad job. Jimmy should leave before Jimmy is mentally harmed. I believe this to the extent that I think creating a union to protect people in that type of situation is a net negative, where the union acts to help keep people in that type of job, where the union acts like those people are replaceable parts, which ends up being to the benefit mainly of that type of employer: as those workers indeed become replaceable parts. We should encourage those skilled workers to leave instead, by offering them something better.
  - Dewie3 11y ago
    > I don't really see what the benefit for Jimmy to stay in that situation is. If Jimmy is skilled, and the company thinks or acts like Jimmy is replaceable, then Jimmy is in a bad job. Jimmy should leave before Jimmy is mentally harmed. You are assuming a perfectly rational actor. And with perfect information - we tend to suck up and endure a lot of shit if we just think it is "normal".
s73v3r 11y ago
Bullshit. I can believe that programmers have unique skills, and also believe that companies don't give a shit about that, and largely try to treat them like replaceable parts.
- smil 11y ago
  Both are correct. It's cyclical, or rather a matter of social evolution. Private enterprises will always look for and highly reward unique individuals whose skills will significantly increase their earnings/effectiveness and give them an edge over the competition. At the same time, private enterprise tries to standardize processes and jobs, so that no individual employee will be of outsized importance (other than the owners), and they will try to extend the unique skill to their other employees, thereby making it less scarce, lowering its cost. Years down the road when that skill is common place, it all starts anew with another skillset being introduced.