Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by winkeltripel 1285 days ago
I don't think you quite understand how the unions work.

-in most cases, the employer is able to fire with cause. The union keeps the employer from using layoffs as a weapon.

- pay scales reward loyalty and keeps the workplace stable.

- without the union, you have almost no bargaining power. The union usually gets a better rate for everyone than any one person could have negotiated. This is in fact the point of collective bargaining. Even the presence of a union job site can lift wages across industries. I see this in Oshawa, where the CAW jobs making car bits helps waitresses and sales associates draw higher wages.

-the employer is rent-seeking on their capital. The union balances this.

-unions are not criminal organizations. The teamsters have done some things in the past. If we didn't have so much union busting, there would be more unions competing for workplaces, and this would drive bad unions out of business.

-unions are political, and need legal protections for workers. Tesla will eventually have to deal with a union or treat their workers better than the UAW.

-I don't like that the state grants asymmetric privileges to the employer class, like never prosecuting white collar crimes, and not clawing back exec severances during bankruptcy, and giving them a lower tax rate than their employees.

-there are many things wrong with policing in the us, but all could be fixed with fedral legislation. The unions are aligned with their membership, and doing great work. The wider outcomes are horrible, but that's a good union doing good work.

3 comments

> without the union, you have almost no bargaining power.

You absolutely do. The most powerful bargaining power of all: the power of the alternative. It's also called "pay me, or I leave" (most often accompanied by "I have an outside offer"). I exercised this power a few times in my career. I did not need any union to bargain for me.

You're describing a bargaining power that unions have, except instead of "pay me or I leave" it's "pay me or we leave".

Why would you want a less powerful version of the same thing? Even if you don't involve your union, you can still do what you're describing.

You've gained nothing unique by avoiding the union.

> you can still do what you're describing.

I doubt you can. Your boss will tell you he can't pay you more than what's on the grid negotiated with the union. My wife works in a place with a union (and is a member of it), and there is such a grid. Nobody even thinks individual bargaining is a possibility.

So you leave, like you said.
"Pay me or I leave" is bargaining. "I leave" is not bargaining.
I feel like I'm taking crazy pills, we are directly talking about a scenario where a worker says "pay me more or I leave" and the company says "Our union doesn't want nonmembers to be paid more" or "We can't pay you more because of the union" and you're telling me "then leaving" is not bargaining.
> pay scales reward loyalty and keeps the workplace stable.

The tech industry has arguably developed quickly because people move around a lot, taking best practices with them. Workplace stability might appear locally great, but it hurts the industry as a whole.

The tech industry is flooded with money, but is enormously inefficient. How many projects are you familiar with that got trashed, often after key people moved on?
You forgot the part where they are all founded on organized crime.

/s