[quinequine]

You're right. Most developers could care less about anything that doesn't impact their daily working life.

But I would argue that issues like wage suppression, security, and privacy have a huge impact on our work-life balance, income and the software we write.

An organization of developers dedicated to collective bargaining would be able to support advocacy groups and give them teeth in their dealings with large multinational corporations and even governments.

Would you agree?

[dsacco]

No, I wouldn't agree. Collective bargaining organizations ("unions") are fundamentally designed to advocate for their members, not for peripheral issues in the industry (except where they directly impact members' work life balance, safety or compensation in a tangible way).

Personally, I would not be willing to join a union because I don't see any benefits they could give me in return for my money. I'm quite happy bargaining on my own, and advocating for the issues I care about, without a conglomerate middleman.

[quinequine]

Yeah, I see what you're saying.

Developers like most people are motivated by self-interest and have little motivation to see change in the status quo.

With regards to advocacy, it's much easier to cut a check to the EFF (or similar organizations) when your conscience is moved.

We as developers could careless about actually seeing meaningful results outside of the code we write and money we make.

That's what you're saying more or less?

I strongly disagree with your statement that collective bargaining isn't beneficial because at no point are the efforts of individuals more effective than that of a group. Only together is there change. The people's movements of the world have demonstrated that time and time again.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_People's_History_of_the_Unit...

[Kalium]

It is perhaps possible that you are misinterpreting dsacco. dsacco is mainly noting that unions are not designed to or particularly good at advancing the causes you have listed.

I may have missed it, but it is also possible that dsacco didn't opine on whether developers care about things that are greater than code.

[Kalium]

You're absolutely right, some things are unquestionably greater than code!

I think most developers, if asked, do in fact care about security, privacy, standards, net neutrality, and open source software. The issue, I have found in my many conversations with developers, is not that developers do not care about the items you have listed. Most do! That the EFF and the FSF and similar groups continue to exist shows this.

The issue I see at hand is that unions need to look like a good deal for people to sign up. People need to expect to gain more for their dues and participation than they could gain on their own. If a union is going to send money to the EFF, and I can send money to the EFF myself without the administrative overhead of a union, what does the union gain me?

Think of it in business terms, as successful unionizers have always done. What unique value does your new model union offer that justifies the costs? You're asking people to make a major financial commitment to group together and advocate for themselves, but you're focusing almost exclusively on secondary issues.

It is not that a union could or could not do all the things you suggest. The issue I see is that a compelling case has not been made that a new model union is the best way to advance the causes we care about. Where's the return on investment in collective bargaining for us?

Also: I see that you created an account solely to have this conversation. Have you come to understand why developers don't unionize, or did you expect to convincingly advocate for unions of software engineering professionals?

[Nomentatus]

The law in the U.S. now prevents sofware developers from getting overtime pay. Start by getting that, which might reduce stress and the suicide rate of developers.

[ThrowawayR2]

> ...security, ...

Who's implementing the security? Developers and operations. I seriously doubt the union is going to be naming and shaming their own membership for shoddy work.

> ...privacy...

If developers cared about that, nobody would be working at all these advertising supported businesses and Google would be a forgotten footnote in history. Here too, such a union would be alienating a large portion of its potential members.