8 ms·

Unions aren't 'fun'. They're serious business. "Seems like a no brainer for skilled programmers." Why? As a skilled developer, I can freely move from one job

Unions aren't 'fun'. They're serious business. "Seems like a no brainer for skilled programmers." Why? As a skilled developer, I can freely move from one job to another as employers are begging to get me to work for them. Why would I want to be limited by my co-workers? Unions are generally for people that 1) Can easily be replaced. 2) Don't have good negotiating skills On top of this, it just makes it more difficult for anyone in their dorm room to start a business. It's not a coincidence that the startup scene is nearly non-existent where unions have a strong presence (France, Sweden, Denmark, Norway).

obrero 11y ago
> Unions are generally for people that...Don't have good negotiating skills Wow, it's amazing that you have such incredible negotiating skills that you can beat out a Fortune 500 companies human resources department, their outside lawyers that make you sign an employment and terms of service agreement, and who have a boilerplate of similar agreements for all the other firms they have done this for etc. The hubris you have in saying this is farcicial. The fact is that you as an individual do not have the skills to out-negotiate this leviathan. You sound ridiculous claiming that you do have the skills to do this. This is why unions have massive legal teams, lobbyists and so forth. You may be right or wrong whether being in a union would currently be better for you, but the notion that you as an individual have super-negotiating powers, and that only losers when faced with a pack of lawyers need their own pack of lawyers, is risible. You do not have good negotiating skills because you're too dumb and hubristic to know that you're outmatched. These companies are laughing at you in that you think you're outmatching their negotiating teams singlehandedly. Why are they hiring you? Because for every dollar you make in salary, they are making $1 + $X off of you. They wouldn't hire you otherwise. That $X you are leaving on the table while patting yourself on the back about what a good negotiator you are. By the way, workers in the same jobs, one union and negotiated by a team of lawyers, one non-union - studies show the workers who have the contract negotiated by a union statistically get a better contract, more wages etc.
- paulhauggis 11y ago
  "The hubris you have in saying this is farcicial. The fact is that you as an individual do not have the skills to out-negotiate this leviathan." How so? I own my own business now (multiple, actually). But when I didn't, I easily negotiated my rates. How? I commanded a certain salary or I walked. When you have the skills, this isn't that difficult. I don't need a union. Once I was hired, I always made myself valuable. I was only ever let go once when the company went under. The rest of the time, the company would try to do anything to get me to stay. " but the notion that you as an individual have super-negotiating powers, and that only losers when faced with a pack of lawyers need their own pack of lawyers, is risible" When are you ever faced with a 'pack of lawyers' when getting a job?? If it's reading and signing a contract, It's not that expensive to get an attorney to read it over. "Why are they hiring you? Because for every dollar you make in salary, they are making $1 + $X off of you. They wouldn't hire you otherwise" This is how capitalism works. You are leaving out the fact that companies take almost all of the risk. If projects fail or products don't sell, the company pays the price. The worst thing that will happen to an employee is that they need to find another job. If you want all of the profit and take all of the risks (which most people don't want to do), start your own company. "By the way, workers in the same jobs, one union and negotiated by a team of lawyers, one non-union - studies show the workers who have the contract negotiated by a union statistically get a better contract, more wages etc" Of course they do. Because most unskilled people (and people that have negotiation skills) end up getting low-paid jobs. The unions prop these people up and force a company to pay them way more than they are worth. I have had family that joined an auto union. One of the big things they did was force companies to hire two workers for one job. The result? One person would work half the day while the other person golfed, went to the bar, had fun, etc. Both were paid a full wage for the day. It's things like this that bankrupted the American auto industry. A few years back, I went to a trade show in Vegas, because my company had a booth. We had to pay $500 for 1 person to setup a table and another $300 for someone to connect our computers to the network. Both took about 5 minutes. This was because the unions ran the show. Unions are also the ones opposing services like Uber. They are trying to use political force and violence to push them out in many cities (and succeeding) and so many people in the tech industry are against this. Yet, they can't put two and two together and see that this is how the unions work everywhere. I've seen it far too many times for you to tell me otherwise.
nosuchthing 11y ago
Startups would be mostly the same, hiring lower talent non-union labor. Unions give skilled labor immensely greater negotiation leverage, as the alternative for employers would be hiring lower skilled workers.
- paulhauggis 11y ago
  "Unions give skilled labor immensely greater negotiation leverage, as the alternative for employers would be hiring lower skilled workers." Most higher-skilled employees want to maximize their pay. A union isn't the way to do it. Why? Because if you get a raise, everyone in your position also has to get a raise. Why would I even want to try any harder if I know I will be limited by other people in my company? We would still have startups, but the days would be over for 2 guys in a garage starting a successful company. Because of the regulations involved, the only people that would be able to start a company already would need to have lots of money. IE: big companies. But big companies would love the idea because it prevents competition.
  - dragonwriter 11y ago
    > Most higher-skilled employees want to maximize their pay. A union isn't the way to do it. Why? Because if you get a raise, everyone in your position also has to get a raise. That's not correct. Union contracts do not universally (or even normally) require all people in the same position to get the same pay. They may require objective criteria or standardized processes and established ranges for compensation for certain positions, but that's not the same thing at all.
    - paulhauggis 11y ago
      "They may require objective criteria or standardized processes and established ranges for compensation for certain positions, but that's not the same thing at all." In theory, you might be correct. But practice is much different. My Uncle wanted to get a raise. He couldn't just ask for one. He had to go to the Union board who then had to talk to company management to not only give him a raise, but everyone else in his department that had the same position. This is what I'm talking about. It creates other problems as well. In Denmark, for instance, youth and lower-skilled people just aren't being hired. Why? Because it takes a literal court case with the union and the company to fire someone. So, companies don't want to take risks on employees that they don't think will work out in the end. The sad thing is that unions will destroy competition and then the same people that fought to get the unions in place will then start crying about busting up the same monopolies that they created. Just like how unions fought for a $15/hour wage increase, but they are exempt. They fought for government-run healthcare, but yet again, they are also exempt from the dues. I guess I'm tired of seeing people blindly giving all of their power away to the many greedy organizations that call themselves unions.
jazzyk 11y ago
s/union/guild/ just like doctors, lawyers. A good doctor/lawyer is not easily replaced, and lawyers have fantastic negotiation skills by definition :-) Yet they have very powerful guilds (professional organizations)
- paulhauggis 11y ago
  This is because so many people decide to sue them for silly reasons. They need protection from big government.
Riesling 11y ago
> On top of this, it just makes it more difficult for anyone in their dorm room to start a business. It's not a coincidence that the startup scene is nearly non-existent where unions have a strong presence (France, Sweden, Denmark, Norway). As someone from a country with stronger unions, I would like to propose a different interpretation. As a result of a strong union culture, regular jobs are just too comfortable to consider doing a startup. A startup is a very risky venture where most founders have to work at their utmost limits. I am sure many startups have been created out of a dissatisfaction with the circumstances of the former employment. In contrast, many jobs in unionized countries pay fair wages, force you to take 30 or more days of vacation and respect your work-life balance. Nowadays you also get a lot of time off, if you become a father or mother. Would you give up all those things, just to try something that has a 80 percent (or more) failure rate? I know this is a forum for entrepreneurs, so most people would. But a job you are really satisfied with, makes this decision a lot harder.
bjourne 11y ago
> It's not a coincidence that the startup scene is nearly non-existent where unions have a strong presence (France, Sweden, Denmark, Norway). FYI, there is a very strong startup scene in Sweden. I can't speak for the other countries, but the part about Sweden is incorrect. You might have heard about Skype, Spotify, Minecraft, iZettle... :)

obrero 11y ago

> Unions are generally for people that...Don't have good negotiating skills Wow, it's amazing that you have such incredible negotiating skills that you can beat out a Fortune 500 companies human resources department, their outside lawyers that make you sign an employment and terms of service agreement, and who have a boilerplate of similar agreements for all the other firms they have done this for etc. The hubris you have in saying this is farcicial. The fact is that you as an individual do not have the skills to out-negotiate this leviathan. You sound ridiculous claiming that you do have the skills to do this. This is why unions have massive legal teams, lobbyists and so forth. You may be right or wrong whether being in a union would currently be better for you, but the notion that you as an individual have super-negotiating powers, and that only losers when faced with a pack of lawyers need their own pack of lawyers, is risible. You do not have good negotiating skills because you're too dumb and hubristic to know that you're outmatched. These companies are laughing at you in that you think you're outmatching their negotiating teams singlehandedly. Why are they hiring you? Because for every dollar you make in salary, they are making $1 + $X off of you. They wouldn't hire you otherwise. That $X you are leaving on the table while patting yourself on the back about what a good negotiator you are. By the way, workers in the same jobs, one union and negotiated by a team of lawyers, one non-union - studies show the workers who have the contract negotiated by a union statistically get a better contract, more wages etc.

paulhauggis 11y ago
"The hubris you have in saying this is farcicial. The fact is that you as an individual do not have the skills to out-negotiate this leviathan." How so? I own my own business now (multiple, actually). But when I didn't, I easily negotiated my rates. How? I commanded a certain salary or I walked. When you have the skills, this isn't that difficult. I don't need a union. Once I was hired, I always made myself valuable. I was only ever let go once when the company went under. The rest of the time, the company would try to do anything to get me to stay. " but the notion that you as an individual have super-negotiating powers, and that only losers when faced with a pack of lawyers need their own pack of lawyers, is risible" When are you ever faced with a 'pack of lawyers' when getting a job?? If it's reading and signing a contract, It's not that expensive to get an attorney to read it over. "Why are they hiring you? Because for every dollar you make in salary, they are making $1 + $X off of you. They wouldn't hire you otherwise" This is how capitalism works. You are leaving out the fact that companies take almost all of the risk. If projects fail or products don't sell, the company pays the price. The worst thing that will happen to an employee is that they need to find another job. If you want all of the profit and take all of the risks (which most people don't want to do), start your own company. "By the way, workers in the same jobs, one union and negotiated by a team of lawyers, one non-union - studies show the workers who have the contract negotiated by a union statistically get a better contract, more wages etc" Of course they do. Because most unskilled people (and people that have negotiation skills) end up getting low-paid jobs. The unions prop these people up and force a company to pay them way more than they are worth. I have had family that joined an auto union. One of the big things they did was force companies to hire two workers for one job. The result? One person would work half the day while the other person golfed, went to the bar, had fun, etc. Both were paid a full wage for the day. It's things like this that bankrupted the American auto industry. A few years back, I went to a trade show in Vegas, because my company had a booth. We had to pay $500 for 1 person to setup a table and another $300 for someone to connect our computers to the network. Both took about 5 minutes. This was because the unions ran the show. Unions are also the ones opposing services like Uber. They are trying to use political force and violence to push them out in many cities (and succeeding) and so many people in the tech industry are against this. Yet, they can't put two and two together and see that this is how the unions work everywhere. I've seen it far too many times for you to tell me otherwise.

nosuchthing 11y ago

Startups would be mostly the same, hiring lower talent non-union labor. Unions give skilled labor immensely greater negotiation leverage, as the alternative for employers would be hiring lower skilled workers.

paulhauggis 11y ago
"Unions give skilled labor immensely greater negotiation leverage, as the alternative for employers would be hiring lower skilled workers." Most higher-skilled employees want to maximize their pay. A union isn't the way to do it. Why? Because if you get a raise, everyone in your position also has to get a raise. Why would I even want to try any harder if I know I will be limited by other people in my company? We would still have startups, but the days would be over for 2 guys in a garage starting a successful company. Because of the regulations involved, the only people that would be able to start a company already would need to have lots of money. IE: big companies. But big companies would love the idea because it prevents competition.
- dragonwriter 11y ago
  > Most higher-skilled employees want to maximize their pay. A union isn't the way to do it. Why? Because if you get a raise, everyone in your position also has to get a raise. That's not correct. Union contracts do not universally (or even normally) require all people in the same position to get the same pay. They may require objective criteria or standardized processes and established ranges for compensation for certain positions, but that's not the same thing at all.
  - paulhauggis 11y ago
    "They may require objective criteria or standardized processes and established ranges for compensation for certain positions, but that's not the same thing at all." In theory, you might be correct. But practice is much different. My Uncle wanted to get a raise. He couldn't just ask for one. He had to go to the Union board who then had to talk to company management to not only give him a raise, but everyone else in his department that had the same position. This is what I'm talking about. It creates other problems as well. In Denmark, for instance, youth and lower-skilled people just aren't being hired. Why? Because it takes a literal court case with the union and the company to fire someone. So, companies don't want to take risks on employees that they don't think will work out in the end. The sad thing is that unions will destroy competition and then the same people that fought to get the unions in place will then start crying about busting up the same monopolies that they created. Just like how unions fought for a $15/hour wage increase, but they are exempt. They fought for government-run healthcare, but yet again, they are also exempt from the dues. I guess I'm tired of seeing people blindly giving all of their power away to the many greedy organizations that call themselves unions.

jazzyk 11y ago

s/union/guild/ just like doctors, lawyers. A good doctor/lawyer is not easily replaced, and lawyers have fantastic negotiation skills by definition :-) Yet they have very powerful guilds (professional organizations)

paulhauggis 11y ago
This is because so many people decide to sue them for silly reasons. They need protection from big government.

Riesling 11y ago

> On top of this, it just makes it more difficult for anyone in their dorm room to start a business. It's not a coincidence that the startup scene is nearly non-existent where unions have a strong presence (France, Sweden, Denmark, Norway). As someone from a country with stronger unions, I would like to propose a different interpretation. As a result of a strong union culture, regular jobs are just too comfortable to consider doing a startup. A startup is a very risky venture where most founders have to work at their utmost limits. I am sure many startups have been created out of a dissatisfaction with the circumstances of the former employment. In contrast, many jobs in unionized countries pay fair wages, force you to take 30 or more days of vacation and respect your work-life balance. Nowadays you also get a lot of time off, if you become a father or mother. Would you give up all those things, just to try something that has a 80 percent (or more) failure rate? I know this is a forum for entrepreneurs, so most people would. But a job you are really satisfied with, makes this decision a lot harder.

bjourne 11y ago

> It's not a coincidence that the startup scene is nearly non-existent where unions have a strong presence (France, Sweden, Denmark, Norway). FYI, there is a very strong startup scene in Sweden. I can't speak for the other countries, but the part about Sweden is incorrect. You might have heard about Skype, Spotify, Minecraft, iZettle... :)