[sokoloff]

If someone wants to work in a union shop, they can choose a job that is unionized or try to unionize their current/next workplace.

People who don’t want to work for a union shop should have the same amount of voice as people who do (1 vote per employee). I think unions have struggled to gain traction because it’s obvious that they cost money to run (which is fine and proper) but it’s not obvious that that expense pays off for the typical member. If a median tech worker pays $1300-2600/yr in dues (1-2% of median salary), I think it’s reasonable for them to expect more than that on a net-present-value basis.

Plenty of people are strong advocates; plenty are strong detractors; I suspect that a well-run union (efficient in its own ops and partnering effectively for the long-term health of the company and its union members) would be good on balance and also fairly “under the radar” making it hard to know how good it actually was.

[Konnstann]

When I first started my current job I was upset that I'd have to pay $20/paycheck to get some unknown level of benefits, which comes out to around $500/year but all I had to do to understand the benefit was compare my health insurance premium to someone working a non-union gig for the same employer and realize that they're paying a way higher percentage of the monthly premium than I was. Not to mention that the union provides guaranteed unemployment benefits if you get laid off and help finding jobs, transportation funds, childcare funds, and guaranteed me a salary increase this year when the employer has declared a freeze on raises for non-union positions. I agree there should be more advertising on the part of the union with regards to benefits but they are pretty obvious if you do any reading.

A lot of the benefits my union provides might not matter to the average HN user making $X00,000/yr though so who knows?

[johnnyanmac]

>If a median tech worker pays $1300-2600/yr in dues (1-2% of median salary), I think it’s reasonable for them to expect more than that on a net-present-value basis.

The "NPV" is thst you aren't part of the next wave of layoffs. Losing a month of salary every 6-12 months is great insurance compared to losing a month of salary a month after you get laid off.

Do people really not value stability anymore? Do they have no craft to build nor challenge into? Is everyone here just older workers who don't realize how utterly abused Gen Z has been by this workforce, if they can even get in? I'd pay 10% of my salary for some stability after these 2 years of fallout, and I still ended up on thr more fortunate side of these layoffs for my sub-generation of late millennial.

[toomuchtodo]

I agree on all of your points. If the majority supports unions (citations in my above comment), and everyone has the same vote (as you mention), it's just a matter of time of continuing organizing efforts while the folks who don't support it either exit the labor force [1] [2] or filter out of orgs attempting to organize who don't believe in it (younger workers with a longer labor participation time horizon). I fully admit there are lots of people who believe they're special, who have been or believe they will be lucky, ignore the data on the benefits of organizing, etc; you might never win them over. It's going to be a long slog, but wages and job security for the broad majority of people will not go up without it. Startup founders grind for delusions far more grandiose than this imho, so while I recognize being at the foot of a mountain on this topic in this specific socioeconomic system and point in time, I also don't think it's impossible.

And I really want to touch on your point about dues and unions. Workers should absolutely have high expectations for what their unions deliver, and should not tolerate any sort of drag, apathy, or lack of effort. With that said, it is another political process one must participate in, it isn't ordering an Uber. I have zero tolerance for union grift. Perhaps this calls for something like a non profit ratings agency, but for unions.

[1] https://charleshughsmith.blogspot.com/2022/08/are-older-work... ("In 2000, only 17.6% of the 55 and older populace had a job. Now the percentage is 37.5%. A 20% increase in the percentage of 55+ who are employed in a 20-year span is unprecedented. If the percentage of employed 55+ had stayed the same, there would only be 17 million 55+ workers today. Instead, there are over 37 million.") [2022]

[2] https://www.americanprogress.org/article/the-closing-gender-... ("Gen Zers are the most supportive of unions, with a mean approval rating of 64.3 compared with 60.5 for Millennials, 57.8 for Gen Xers, and 57.2 for Baby Boomers." [death and retirement rate is progress rate in this regard by age cohort; the faster the older cohort(s) who don't support organizing exit the workforce, this should potentially reduced the lift required to organize forward looking])

(demographics + culture + advocacy + time is my mental model on this, and I have arrived at this model from first principles, as a macro and demographics scholar)

[aksss]

Liking unions in the abstract is very different than wanting to be part of one.

Opinions about unions tend to “mature” and become more nuanced with age (after exposure to both as a member and as a manager of union staff), for worse and better.

Adjust expectations for human behavior accordingly.

[toomuchtodo]

Demographics had to change and belief systems had to develop for Mamdani to win the NYC primary. Huge turn out, 12 point victory over Cuomo. Democratic socialist policy platform. This is the future as young people remain economically disadvantaged and old folks with their beliefs and wealth to protect age out. Young people aren't going to get more conservative because they don't have something to lose economically as older cohorts might have had.

If workers are not seeing improvements in life over time, why would their viewpoint change? I agree a minority of workers might change their mind when they luck into favorable economic and labor circumstances, but luck will not find the majority, and when it comes to voting, a majority matters.

How the US Is Destroying Young People’s Future | Scott Galloway | TED - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qEJ4hkpQW8E

Part 2: Scott Galloway’s Viral TED Talk on How the Old Are Stealing from the Young - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EjNV6JwlV2s

Millennials are shattering the oldest rule in politics: Western conservatives are at risk from generations of voters who are no longer moving to the right as they age - https://www.ft.com/content/c361e372-769e-45cd-a063-f5c0a7767... | https://archive.today/lQoLa

[sokoloff]

> Young people aren't going to get more conservative because

IOW, “this time is different!” Maybe that will be true this time, but it’s far from a given.

[toomuchtodo]

See the Financial Times citation with data backing my assertion. I agree the future is hard to predict, and humans are tricky.

https://d4pgq7fazddwpa.archive.ph/lQoLa/f1886c78af8eb03745a8...

https://careers.augsburg.edu/blog/2024/03/18/gen-z-does-not-...

https://www.pewresearch.org/social-trends/2020/05/14/on-the-...

[johnnyanmac]

To be fair, this time is literally different. So many social contracts that were built In for boomers and Gen X were never a thing in gen Z.

I don't know if it will be different in a good way, but I doubt in 30 years, Gen Z is going to be telling their kids and grandkids to walk into an office and give a good handshake to the hiring manager. Norms and etiquette have completely shifted.

[sokoloff]

It’ll interesting to see if GenZ support changes as they become GenX’s age.

[johnnyanmac]

I see it as sink or swim. They reform the job market that spited them, or they adjust and just tell the alphas and betas how they never had a steady job and why bother?