[powatom]

Yes - despite the bleating about unions from people who I can only assume have never had to fight exploitation and unfair practices, unions are one of the only ways that you as an employee can adequately defend yourself from bad employers AND bad employees.

Yes, software developers are generally paid well and if you can earn the respect of your peers, you're usually treated pretty well too. However, the industry is rife with horror stories about sexism, over-working, burnout, family disruption, harassment and abuse - not to mention the ridiculous burdens placed on developers who are also expected to be on call 24/7, manage the company's IT infrastructure, and generally do whatever the hell their superior demands at a moment's notice.

For a privileged segment of the industry, there is no problem - but that is by no means representative of the whole. Software mills churn out shitty software and treat their employees with the same respect they give to quality and professionalism.

Being part of a union gives you the numbers required to do meaningful damage to a company which doesn't treat you right. As always, a balance must be struck between the strength of the employer and the strength of the union(s), but for many in this industry, it's currently a losing battle. More and more demands every year, but fuck you if you want to be treated better.

Don't delude yourselves into thinking that being part of a union is only about money. If you ever have to work ridiculous hours, not see your kids or your partner, suffer from lack of sleep, do things outside of your job spec, and generally just feel like you're being taken advantage of, then the reason for this is that YOU ARE INTERCHANGEABLE. You're not a special little snowflake just because you're pretty darn up to date with the latest technical shizzle-wizzle you read about on HN. You may be technically very proficient, but then so are a lot of your peers, and there's no shortage of developers out there.

This may be a highly skilled industry, but it's also one with a very low barrier to entry and a shit-load of people producing OK work at a fraction of the cost of your salary. You're not immune to abuse just because you're good at what you do.

[raldi]

You'll find it easier to persuade people in life if you can resist making the first thing to come out of your mouth an insult comparing them to bleating sheep.

[powatom]

Perhaps it was a little too strong, apologies. I've just had this conversation far too many times and much of the opposition to unionisation is of the ridiculously simplistic 'why don't you just leave and find a different job?' kind.

[endeavour]

There is a shortage of good developers almost everywhere. If you don't like your job get another one. If you're a good developer you won't have a problem finding one, and your employer will probably learn that you are not easily interchangeable.

[powatom]

> There is a shortage of good developers almost everywhere.

Most organisations don't required 'good' developers. They require 'good enough' developers. If a business can save some money by paying people less, they will.

> If you don't like your job get another one.

Actually, I love my job - but this is a ridiculous argument to make. If it was that easy, why would anybody stay in a job they didn't like? Life's not that simple.

> If you're a good developer you won't have a problem finding one, and your employer will probably learn that you are not easily interchangeable.

So your solution to poor working conditions is to teach your employer a lesson by giving up and leaving, so they can hire somebody less qualified for less money but who still manages to muddle through and deliver?

The problem with saying that 'there is a shortage of good developers almost everywhere' is that it's completely subjective. What are you classifying as 'good'? Does your employer's definition of 'good' match up with the share-holders definition of 'good value'? This is precisely why developers can be so self-destructive. You may be the best in your domain, but it doesn't necessarily mean that you're the best and most profitable option for an employer.