Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by Apocryphon 2852 days ago
I'm firmly convinced that tech workers will come around to unionizing once they accidentally reinvent it under a different name
4 comments

Personal anecdata: every company I've worked at would have been worse off (and worse to work at) if the developers had been unionized.

I've also avoided working anywhere that thinks you can only be professional if you're wearing a button down shirt and / or a tie, so I don't doubt that some places might benefit.

Edit: to be clear, I've never advocated for a union, and I doubt I ever will so long as I am fortunate enough to choose my employer, rather than the other way around. This is why, I am guessing, so many tech workers don't bother attempting to unionize.

I doubt I ever will so long as I am fortunate enough

Think of it as insurance. When misfortune strikes - it will be too late.

I think in that case I would be better off putting the money in savings than paying into dues.
Is there not at least two orders or magnitude difference between union dues and meaningful savings? Maybe even three or four!
Can you elaborate on what would’ve been worse if the devs had unionized?
At each of the companies I've worked at in this field, management and developers had a close and healthy relationship.

Introducing collective bargaining would only have created an artificial distance between individuals.

One company stands out as a good example. Great benefits, sub par pay. They actively solicited feedback on a regular basis, and at one point gave out near universal raises when they introduced pay bands. They also realized that limited vacation but unlimited sick time was being abused by a minority, and changed to a PTO system that was far more fair to the majority of employees.

He'll, one of them had paid "overtime" even though we were salaried (havent had to work more than 40 at any of the others).

In short, we got everything we needed, and it has been fair. Some employees individually bargained for more time off, or for work from home time, or higher pay. Some were put on performance plans and improved, some were let go (and some not nearly soon enough).

IMHO, collectively bargaining contracts at any of those places would have been less successful at making everyone happy.

>In short, we got everything we needed, and it has been fair. Some employees individually bargained for more time off, or for work from home time, or higher pay.

There is nothing preventing a union from bargaining a system like this. We have this at my work.

Everyone gets 20days off for holiday, but other than that we have a 12.5% annual bonus ('13th month') with a system where people can opt for 7.5% bonus in return for more days off. This is just an example you can set the percentage yourself.

Or you can put it towards your pension, life insurance... idk there is a whole range of options.

A union could bargain for that, true. But, when you've already got it, there's a real concern that starting one will make difficult the already good relationship with management.
As usual, we never seem to be able to learn from the past, except by accidentally reinventing it under a different name. I wonder why the software industry is so uniquely stricken by such monumental hubris?
Genuine question: Do other high-skilled professions have unions (like marketeers, scientists, lawyers, doctors, electrical engineers, ...)?
Engineers, Lawyers and Doctors have professional associations rather than unions. Arguably, this is what software engineer should have. The American Medical Association (AMA) is extraordinarily influential.

Edit: one could argue the difference between a professional association and a union is a matter of degrees. A professional association certainly seems an easier sell. Possibly a professional association with aspects of a union could be considered.

All of those professional associations were enshrined with their exclusive rights by law. We live in a democracy, and the law is at least nominally enacted for the public good. The case for requiring professional licensure was that it would protect the public from unqualified practitioners, and it would allow bad apples to be held to account.

If you want a professional association like engineers, lawyers or doctors, it needs to have a clear public benefit. Benefiting software developers is not enough. That is one of the important differences between a professional association and a union.

Disclosure: I am a licenced professional engineer (software).

If you want a professional association like engineers, lawyers or doctors, it needs to have a clear public benefit. Benefiting software developers is not enough. That is one of the important differences between a professional association and a union.

I think in practice, the line is much fuzzier than you describe. Union rights are also written into law with the implication that they benefit society directly and indirectly. An electricians' union at least ostensibly benefits society through making certain qualified people engage in electrical work and even having qualified medical attendants has obvious benefits.

Of course, one can point to huge potential benefits to society from making certain that various sorts of software is constructed correctly so the case for a professional software engineers' association isn't that hard.

Yes, Boeing engineers have a union.

Why wouldn't you want a contract with your employer? Top executives have contracts and professional athletes have contracts. My contract is I can be fired at any time for any reason, or no reason.

Most of those that you mentioned are considered professions that require some sort of specialized training and/or board certification with some sort of oversight body. While they don't engage in collective bargaining, they do serve to control who is allowed to practice a given profession, thereby limiting the pool of qualified individuals. While different from a union, these professional bodies serve some of the same functions in the end (raising wages, establishing standards, etc.)

As far as why software engineers haven't unionized, I think this answer at the top about sums it up https://www.quora.com/Should-Silicon-Valley-software-enginee...

In Alberta, Canada, professional engineers are barred from joining unions. While not universal, it is quite common for provincial engineering associations to bar their members from joining unions. Engineers are also exempt from many labour law protections (overtime, minimum wage, vacation time, etc.). Needless to say, I am not exactly happy with the current state of affairs.
In the UK I quit the IMechE when I realised it existed to serve large employers, not its individual members.
Pro-athletes and Hollywood stars
Doctors do. And the terrible influence the AMA has had has warned me off professional unions for life. Never again.
The AMA isn't a union.
Of course. Their constraining the amount of available labour is classic union-behaviour. Walks like a duck, quacks like a duck.
Marketers dont.
What tangible benefits would the average tech worker get? What benefits would a FAANGer get?

Not surprisingly I work in tech. I'm not morally opposed to unions - I just don't see how they would make my life any better.

Remember that time that most of FAANG and others were involved in a wage fixing scheme and we're fined way less than they profited from the scheme?

Just because you're paid well compared to other sectors doesn't mean that you're being properly compensated.

Yes, and I even got a check for hundreds(!) of dollars because of it. How would a union have prevented that?
I don't know about FAANG but definitely needed for small startups where exploitation is very real. For example, your manager should not be allowed to contact you in the middle of the night to discuss work. You should not have to come in over the weekend because you are afraid to get fired. You also should be able to negotiate better conditions in lieu of the "startup haircut" pay.

Of course this doesn't apply to well run startups with good leaders, but the truth is in my experience, they are rare and few.

The whole industry could benefit, much like the men who worked under American tycoons of the 18th century in steel mills, oil fields and other shitty conditions, software engineering is engineering period.

Just because you can't hold and physically touch the output from software engineers doesn't mean that it's somehow less demanding or not deserving of the same unionization that other laborers/engineers have access to.

I used to work at Google. Without going into specifics in this public of a forum, yes I've personally witnessed examples of unjustified pay disparities, due to arbitrary factors uncorrelated with job qualifications or performance.

At the very least, collective assistance could be very useful at Google in negotiating fair compensation for new hires and in sustaining that fairness over time based on performance data.

After all, Google has huge quantities of data to let them decide on compensation, the employees have extremely little and unevenly distributed access to similar data, and it doesn't feel like there is much opportunity to recover lost wages if you realize you've been underpaid compared to peers (aside from discrimination on illegal grounds).

I presume the same would help at other tech companies.

None of this requires the stereotypical fossilized rigidity that give unions a bad name, and I wouldn't want that either. Even in the US NLRA system that's not at all required.

Won't unions level out pay contrary to disparities in talent?
I think you're referring to the fossilized rigidity I intended to reject in my last two sentences. A rigid pay scale is merely common in US unionism, not required.

Also, be careful not to confuse talent with performance. A slacker with amazing talent can still underperform whoever works diligently to improve and apply their skills.

As with other situations such as the insistence on face-time rather than embracing remote work, "unions are bad" is a truism in the tech industry, and a weird selective attitude towards disruption. Can't we build a better union? Why can't traditional labor dynamics be disrupted, in a way that benefits workers? The rise of the sharing economy proves that the opposite is possible.
Here's some issues that a collective advocacy organization could help with:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15596221

Also:

"Even if you don't believe in unions, unions are necessary to force the hand of government. Bismarck instituted a welfare state in Germany to undercut the popularity of socialism and the left. You need unions to get to a stronger safety net, even if the powers-that-be are establishing it in opposition to them."

As a single data point, I worked at a union shop once. It wasn't very good.