[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.