Union Is Formed at Los Angeles Times and Publisher Put on Leave

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/19/business/media/los-angeles-times-union.html

by chollida1 • 9 years ago

169 252 9 years ago

chollida1• 9 years ago

I thought this was interesting because if knowledge workers like journalists can do so, why not programmers, or what ever term you'd prefer to be called?

rhizome• 9 years ago

They could, and there have been rumblings about doing so for many years, including among sysadmins. It emerged from many corners: layoffs of the first dot com crash, unrealistic deadlines, afterhours work, general crappy management support, underpayage, etc. I think generally the attitude is "why would I want to be paid less?"

untog6• 9 years ago

It is interesting that programmers (as a whole) seem resistant to it. It's often described as being unnecessary, but when you go one or two posts down HN you find people decrying long hours, open plan offices, weekend callouts, etc. etc.

I suspect it's just that when the going is good, people don't really think they need a union. If the prophecies come true and AI starts writing code for us, you can bet people will suddenly be interested in unionisation.

ProAm• 9 years ago

It is interesting that programmers (as a whole) seem resistant to it.

Mostly because our working conditions are not bad, we are more or less paid fairly, there are a lot of options to move around.

Also it'd be bad if we had other people negotiating on our behalf, for what we probably feel is less pay than we are worth, and the concept of seniority would ruffle and stop a lot of newer grads from getting higher paying jobs over people that have been working already for 25 years in the industry.

icelancer2• 9 years ago

> It is interesting that programmers (as a whole) seem resistant to it

Software developers and people in IT are probably two orders of magnitude more likely to be libertarian / anarcho-capitalist and conservative in economic views than your average union worker in another field. That's definitely a large impact as well.

Dirlewanger2• 9 years ago

I think part of it is because the gap between the skill floor and ceiling is absolutely gargantuan. Unions work best when the skill gap is narrow, and ascension to different levels easily measurable.

The more I think about it, software engineering is almost completely antithetical to the idea of unions. Traditional engineers have so much structure around their fields because the laws of physics govern a large part of their craft. Not so with SE.

xienze• 9 years ago

I think the realistic among us realize that creating a software developer’s union would lead to dramatically increased offshoring. Actors, plumbers, etc.? Can’t offshore those, so the dynamic between workers and management is a little different. Software development, you can offshore the hell out of that. Shoot, look at automobile workers, granted there’s still a sizable amount in this country but nothing like it used to be — and I think unions had a lot to do with that (“we’re paying them how much? Just make em in Mexico”).

cookiecaper4• 9 years ago

Unions are romanticized a lot in the current culture, but we shouldn't just pretend that they're purely positive. The union is a middle man between the employee and the employer. Unions can and do extract dues, impose their own rules and stipulations, and add friction and bloat to employment. If you don't like the restrictions or the rates that have been negotiated, you have a lot less freedom to move around and do something about it. If you cross the union, well, good luck.

I'm not trying to argue that unions are wholly bad either, but there's a trade-off to be had here. It's not as simple as "people dislike unions because they're too dumb to realize that they want one".

kelnos2• 9 years ago

My feeling is that a lot of knowledge workers look down on unionizing as a "blue collar thing" (ignoring the fact that actors, writers, orchestral musicians, etc. are all often in unions as well).

ng127• 9 years ago

Why do we need a union in a seller's market? If I'm unhappy with my job I can quit and get a new one in a week.

It's not about being a knowledge worker. Screenwriters are unionized because there are many more people who want to write than there are gigs, therefore there's a high potential for abuse.

lr4444lr2• 9 years ago

For the sake of argument, you could ask for protected work hours, overtime, etc. I don't think we need it for this industry, mind you, but more so because there's no monopsony on the labor market from a select few large employers, not because of the supply and demand.

debt2• 9 years ago

I'm sure there's an argument lying around somewhere that would tell that the best time to start a union is in a seller's market.

frgtpsswrdlame3• 9 years ago

Even in a seller's market unions will still provide you with leverage you couldn't get otherwise. Unions aren't only so the dispossessed can bargain for more, they're so any group can bargain for more.

The one example I always give is of my mom starting out working in the 70's. Her employer was not unionized but had several unionized competitors in the city. Because her employer didn't want to bother with union negotiations all the time they paid a quarter more an hour than their competitors and so no union ever started up. My mom was benefitting from a union she wasn't even a member of. You could be in that same position if a programmer union ever started up.

drb91• 9 years ago

Why pick up gold on the ground when you have bronze in your hand?

davidw• 9 years ago

a seller's market

Is it as much as we think? It seems that big companies in Silicon Valley had no qualms about talking among one another about not "poaching" developers (what a lame term poaching is).

I'm not terribly keen on the idea of unions either (or immigration restrictions for that matter), but we should damn well be sure that companies are not colluding.

LeifCarrotson• 9 years ago

Maybe you feel confident about your ability to get a job in a week, but there is a cost to your resume, cost to your work relationships, a risk of not being as successful in your search as you expect, and a limited number of buyers in your location. There are a lot of barriers that prevent the seller's market from working efficiently.

debt2• 9 years ago

Unions do other things like maybe even require certain working conditions; standing desk or that they provide computers to you of sufficient power, licenses they'd have to buy etc, maybe they absolutely will not implement certain complex things like a new type of orbital interceptor idk.

Unions create a legal framework around repetitive work.

ryandrake• 9 years ago

Congratulations if you honestly can "quit and get a new job in a week". This is not true for the vast majority of tech professionals. Even if it were currently true in general, it will not be true during the next inevitable tech downturn (I've survived two of them in 20 years so far, knock on wood).

Also, organizing is not just about protecting one's job. It's about collectively negotiating for stuff like pay, benefits, working conditions, etc. that are extremely difficult to negotiate as a single employee due to the vast power imbalance in the employee/employer relationship. I don't know about you, but my last few jobs offered almost zero room to negotiate anything--like most jobs, when you work in tech you work entirely on your employer's terms.

thrillgore• 9 years ago

Because you're looking at this like a "grr i'm angery because i'm underpaid," which couldn't be further from the truth. I'm becoming frustrated in this position not over pay, but the complete tone-deafness from management over planning, estimation, and overtime. This has been consistent everywhere i've worked -- pay has never been a factor.

If programmers need a union, its not for pay. It's to get management and executive expectations back in line with reality. I'm tired of 60 hour work weeks, and poorly managed pet projects. And I damn well don't want to risk a career change.

throwwwwaway9• 9 years ago

>Why do we need a union in a seller's market?

Take a look at big tech earnings http://www.businessinsider.com/tech-companies-revenue-employ... . It may look like you're getting a lot, but there's a lot of room left for even greater salaries and (still) insane profits. Maybe even double them.

Apocryphon7• 9 years ago

"Everyone has a job there; every week there's a new article about how tech interviews suck or how difficult it is to hire good engineers."

maxxxxx• 9 years ago

I think especially in a seller's market a union would have a strong negotiation position to raise salaries and improve conditions. I don't think a union can help much in a declining industry.

tptacek14• 9 years ago

If it's a "seller's market", why do so many developers work under onerous IP contracts that grant their employers rights to what they build in their spare time?

If it's a "seller's market", why do so many developers work in noisy bullpen environments where they have to blast music into their ears with headphones to focus their attention on what they're building?

If it's a "seller's market", why do so many developers have stories about working late at night and on weekends to ship features on bogus accelerated schedules they had little hand in setting?

If it's a "seller's market", why do so many developers accept payment in the form of equity that has to be executed at great expense immediately after leaving the company, and offers no actual guarantee of return after making that investment?

If it's a "seller's market", why are developers forced to move to the most expensive real estate markets in the country to work every day from a particular office when their work can be done more productively from their own home offices?

If it's a "seller's market", why are so many developers compensated with equity whose terms they're not even allowed to fully understand? And why is it that their common shares are last in line after liquidation preferences and VCs take their rake?

I don't understand how you can spend more than a few months on Hacker News without seeing the litany of complaints developers have about their working conditions. Not simply how much they're paid --- and make no mistake, plenty of developers have those complaints, and feel victimized by the way compensation is negotiated for in this market --- but also simply for how inefficiently and inhumanely their jobs are structured compared to what they so obviously could be.

Tech workers should organize. United they bargain, divided they write anonymous complaints on HN.

booleandilemma2• 9 years ago

Why do we need a union in a seller's market?

I think this is going to change soon (~10 years).

I have seen people with computer science masters degrees working in support positions. I’m not talking about maintenance development, I’m talking about tech support.

When I graduated there were maybe 5 people in my class, but now the market is starting to get flooded with CS people.

Everyone is hopping on the CS train like there is no tomorrow.

paul7986• 9 years ago

I had this same stupid attitude... 6 months later and after 30 phone & or in person interviews I am still unemployed.

I left my last job due to harassment thinking screw this I dont need it and can get a job wherever. Ooops there goes my $110k job/lifestyle!

dtornabene4• 9 years ago

Its amazing that none of the replies (so far) have pointed out something in the very article that spawned this thread, the status of women and minorities. Literally in the title its noted that the publisher is being put on leave, if you read the article it goes on to note that was because of sexual harrassment and his attitude toward gay men. These are bread and butter union issues.

JoeAltmaier• 9 years ago

Used to be true; not this year. Harder to find gigs, hiring takes longer. Used to turn down contracts regularly; haven't for a while now.

zzzcpan• 9 years ago

Job markets can be seller's markets only temporary, until large employers and investors realize this. At which point they can take away any power people had via secret anti-competitive agreements, artificial barriers for changing jobs, lobbying and investing into more supply, etc.

For software developers seller's market is long gone.

TaylorAlexander• 9 years ago

Many have already replied here but I will respond in my own words.

Not everyone can do what you can do and those people in particular benefit from a union. Others have also listed why you may benefit but I wanted to make clear that you assuming everyone is like you is silly.

bsder• 9 years ago

Why do we need a union in a seller's market? If I'm unhappy with my job I can quit and get a new one in a week.

Because you will one day be 45 years old ...

jimmaswell• 9 years ago

I did everything "right." I had a lot of side projects, I collaborated on big projects online with others, I knew a lot of languages, I got a 4 year CS degree and I had an internship. I applied to hundreds of places and heard back from maybe 3 places after months of trying. The best I could get before my current offer was one for 35k from a place that wasted two days of my time going half a state away to interview with them, and a return offer at the internship for $15/hr. I was "lucky" enough to eventually land this current job where I ended up being on more of a "support" team than being put on any real development, which is apparently all generally done offshore, so it's going to be more difficult down the road due to that, I'm sure. I don't recommend getting into tech to people anymore. The bubble is over.

pasquinelli3• 9 years ago

"Why do we need a union in a seller's market?"

that's a silly question, isn't it? "for when it becomes a buyer's market", seems like an obvious answer. and when that happens, it'll probably be harder to unionize.

e1ven• 9 years ago

I've talked to people in the past who associate a union with factory work, and they don't feel like it applies to them.

I sometimes point out that every movie star they've ever heard of is a member of a union.

I think part of the problem comes from the decline in unions in the US over the last few decades. New industries aren't unionizing, and older unions are being undermined where possible.

ng127• 9 years ago

The unions aren't for the A-list, they're for the struggling actors who would get paid minimum wage otherwise (or worse, you'd see a lot of "unpaid internships").

oh_sigh2• 9 years ago

Can you even work as an actor in Hollywood without being part of the SAG?

problems• 9 years ago

I'm a programmer who's currently in a union position - I want out. I pay dues and get basically nothing for them, as developers we're generally in decent negotiating positions. Unions are great when you're not in that position, but just an extra cost when you are.

CogitoCogito• 9 years ago

I'm a programmer who's currently in a union position - I want out.

Why not quit and find a non-union job?

geofft5• 9 years ago

I've always been in a fine negotiating position for pay, but I've never felt like I had any negotiating position for things like getting a cubicle or office instead of an open floor plan, getting IP rights to things I do in my spare time that are not related to my own job but related to something my employer is doing somewhere, running an interview process that doesn't suck for both candidates and interviewers, etc.

elihu2• 9 years ago

I think a lot of people are worried that being part of a bad union would be worse than no union at all, and existing unions don't seem like an obvious fit for tech jobs.

If there were a well-run union for tech workers that is responsive and accountable to its members and has a mission to negotiate in favor of goals that I share then I'd be interested in joining.

backtoyoujim• 9 years ago

that is a question for the The National Labor Relations Board.

ask about the overtime thing, too

neuland5• 9 years ago

I will quit from any employer that forces all programmers to negotiate as a unit, because I believe that compensation should be based purely on your individual skills and the market.

I also believe that forced collective bargaining is unconstitutional, because it requires people to associate with a group that they don't want to associate with.

If a group of people wish to collectively bargain with their employer, that's wonderful. But, they can leave me out of it, and I can do without whatever pay schedule and benefits they manage to extract from the employer.

IMO the real issue with current law is that collective bargaining agreements must apply to all employees in a bargaining unit.

frgtpsswrdlame3• 9 years ago

Except collective bargaining won't exist without that law. The free rider problem will destroy any possibility of collective bargaining. That's why I think it's disingenuous to say:

Well you can't really 'opt out' of the benefits of their negotiation in that way, and for the same reason you can't opt out of the union. You're not talking about a future with some unions where people can also choose to go it alone, you're talking about a future with no unions at all. At least be honest about that.

untog6• 9 years ago

I will quit from any employer that forces all programmers to negotiate as a unit

You realise that unions are something imposed on employers, right? They don't like them.

geofft5• 9 years ago

I will quit from any employer that forces all programmers to negotiate as a unit, because I believe that compensation should be based purely on your individual skills and the market.

But that is the market, is it not? If your employer chooses to require all employees to negotiate as a unit, and is not required to do so by law, aren't they just doing that because they're a rational actor in the market?

The law is a different question, yes, but the fundamental motivation is to prevent 80% of the company from negotiating, say, "We all get 1-hour lunch breaks" and the remaining 20% from benefiting from the negotiation because that's the rational thing for the company to do in that situation, thereby providing an incentive for people to remove themselves from the "agreement" and coast on it nonetheless. What would you do to solve this problem in other ways?

Avshalom6• 9 years ago

>compensation should be based purely on your individual skills

First: Profit seeking organizations don't care about skill they care: about wait for it... profit which is the money you add vs the money you cost, which may be completely divorced from skill.

Second: Literally nobody can accurately measure a specific individuals contribution, through skill or otherwise.

s73ver_4• 9 years ago

"because I believe that compensation should be based purely on your individual skills and the market."

It's not based on that now.

stale20023• 9 years ago

I 100% agree. I'd quit immediately from any job that forced me to join a union. I will not have someone else negotiating for me. I can do that on my own, thank you very much.

pjmlp• 9 years ago

Programmers have unions in some European countries, for example IG Metal in Germany.

arca_vorago• 9 years ago

I think the tech group that ought to unionize is sysadmins. We run the world yet get shit on by management left and right, and it's high time to take some of that power back.

LOPSA is innefective and does nothing and doesn't count in my book.

Of course unions in general have become what they were formed to prevent in many ways, and need massive amounts of reform internally themselves.

kzrdude• 9 years ago

Um what? I'm already in a union.

ucaetano• 9 years ago

I thought this was interesting because if knowledge workers like journalists can do so, why not programmers, or what ever term you'd prefer to be called?

Because unions have no standing across international borders.

Apocryphon7• 9 years ago

Michael O. Church: "Software engineers aren't a privileged set. They're just less fucked than the rest of the U.S. Former Middle Class."

https://www.quora.com/Why-do-software-engineers-make-so-much...

oh-kumudo• 9 years ago

Because Programmers as a profession can be easily outsourced? Can't really think a profession, where location is as unimportant as programming. Union will drive employers away, which is a fact. To prevent this, there has to some regulation in place, where forbid employers to hire unlicensed programmers from doing programming job. Pretty much the whole programming culture will need to be overhauled for union to be a real option.

yakitori• 9 years ago

Most of the news industry is unionized. LA Times was an anomaly.

dmix2• 9 years ago

I'm curious what effect this will have on all the constant cries for more "real journalism" instead of companies pushing for low budget high volume output and semi-digitized content milling. Hiring "real journalists" full time just got a lot more expensive for a company that was already attempting to reinvent itself in a struggle for profitability in a strained industry.

Also, can't the LA Times easily just buy up more freelance material from non-employees (not only journalism, graphics, web work, etc)?

AnimalMuppet2• 9 years ago

Also, can't the LA Times easily just buy up more freelance material from non-employees (not only journalism, graphics, web work, etc)?

Not if the union's any good.

dmix2• 9 years ago

In what way could they stop the company from doing this? Besides making firing (even bad) employees difficult?

Any future growth that may have previously resulted in hiring full time workers could easily now be redirected to freelance, temp work, and p/t workers regardless of the union.

I remember watching a Tronc video when it was trendy to make fun of them and they were already talking heavily about digitizing much of the work that was done manually. It's a much more dynamic industry than an old-school factory that needed a set of bodies with predictable roles to show up.

pktgen• 9 years ago

You're being downvoted, but I don't know why. The employer's ability to subcontract/outsource bargaining unit work is negotiable in a collective bargaining agreement.

untog6• 9 years ago

Arguably, the journalists forming this union are now better placed to fight the company pushing for high volume clickbait trash. They can, collectively, refuse to publish it.

jostmey• 9 years ago

The journalist have no leverage. The job market for journalist is horrendously awful. It won't be difficult to replace the them quickly and easily

joemaller1• 9 years ago

Because forming a union worked out so well at Gothamist and DNA Info...

theklr• 9 years ago

That was a totally different environment, it was a monopsonistic structure where the head determined the ROI wasn't even worth the discussion. But same issue, most media is bad at revenue streams, but technically Walmart and Amazon (and most retailers) are for that mark.

What troubles me if this is the logic for our newspapers (especially local which cover tangible issues that we could actually change in comparison to a CNN/Fox News/MSNBC) what does that say about our trust in the fourth estate? When they disappear, who will watch our officials? Cause we collectively have been on the ball for the last 30 odd years...

visarga• 9 years ago

Many politicians don't give a crap about "being watched by the press" because they can always fix it with more bullshit and fake news.

AndyMcConachie• 9 years ago

They were shutdown by management as retaliation for the workers unionizing. I don't know if that's an argument in favour of unions or against them. But it's definitely an argument for organized labor in general.

aphextron• 9 years ago

Solidarity forever.

p_monk2• 9 years ago

For those people suggesting programmers shouldn't unionize, read the op-ed in Financial Times written by Sequoia's Michael Moritz this week to see why programmers should unionize ASAP:

https://www.ft.com/content/42daca9e-facc-11e7-9bfc-052cbba03...

In this article, he suggests Silicon Valley engineers should be worked to the bone like their Chinese counterparts. Some of the things he suggests in the articles:

1) End vacation days (he refers to taking a vacation day as "stealing")

2) Workers should get used to not seeing their kids

3) End the weekend (employees should work 14 hour days, 6-7 days a week)

4) Buildings should turn off the heat. Instead, employees can wear coats and scarves at their desks.

5) Physical fitness should be discouraged.

jdross• 9 years ago

And yet here we are today in Silicon Valley with lavish perks, much higher than average pay in the country for software development, and no unions.

We also have the ability to fire untalented or unpleasant people, and promote especially talented individuals regardless of age or tenure.

You don't need to work at any company that looks like the above. And I don't know of any company that looks like the above.

Apocryphon7• 9 years ago

I'm sure there was an assembly line in '70s Detroit with this same conversation.

oh_sigh2• 9 years ago

Please, don't pile on the mentally ill. The symptoms of Parkinsons include: amnesia, confusion in the evening hours, dementia, or difficulty thinking and understanding, which may explain his absolutely ludicrous article in FT

paxy4• 9 years ago

So programmers across the country should unionize because one guy has an opinion?

p_monk2• 9 years ago

"Some guy"

Moritz is one of the most esteemed partners at the most prestigious VC firm in the world. He's a multi-billionaire with immense power. He's not "some guy."

"has an opinion"

He wrote an op-ed in the most widely read international business journal. This isn't an opinion, it's a rallying cry.

acchow• 9 years ago

Except none of these are happening in SV, and I can't imagine them happening in the foreseeable future.

bmmayer1• 9 years ago

How does unionization protect workers against the decline in demand for journalists and the collapse of the newspaper industry? (serious question)

tptacek14• 9 years ago

Here's one possible way: by exploiting their negotiating position to act as a check against management's impulses to sell cathedrals of journalism for spare parts on the promise that maybe the resulting third-tier incarnation of Buzzfeed that will result might temporarily juice returns to owners. Maybe it's possible that the people actually doing the work know better about how to run a successful media company than the Troncs do?

jamiequint• 9 years ago

Maybe it's possible that the people actually doing the work know better about how to run a successful media company than the Troncs do?

Why don't they start their own media company then rather than resort to short-term value extraction tactics which will likely drive said "cathedral of journalism" into the ground?

andrewprock• 9 years ago

The LA Times is long time anti-union organization, but bad leadership at the top was the issue. It appears that forming a union was a last ditch effort to get rid of the bad leadership. It seems to have worked.

In some ways, this looks like a reflection of what happened at Uber. Ousting bad leadership can be a difficult and complex process sometimes.

losteverything3• 9 years ago

Imo union-ism is an attitide and coupled with experience is effective.

Just because you are salaried and "professional" does not mean you collectively do not have extreme clout.

Whatever the hot issues are - say hours worked in a 7 day period - and the desire is to place limits (say 4 twelve hour days amd 1 eight hour day) having a union attitude means your bargained (agreed upon) rules are enforceable. And you carry a right to not work outside your agreed upon scope.

The attitide comes in when you stop work after the last day. It's your right.

People in unions (i am one) are the beneficiaries of years of compromise and abuse But it's fragile.

All the union is is a sturdy frame which everyone stands on. Its sure footed. Otherwise workers - even professionals- have no true security, no true predictable work conditions.

Iz is very unfortunate that union has become such a negative word. If a handful of people got together and simply stopped the management "abuse" i guarantee (!!!!) you you would be surprised how much power even engineer types can have

phil213• 9 years ago

Dunno. Maybe.

All a union did for me in my younger years was have me work my ass off so older union members could sit around doing literally nothing. In fact as far as I could tell their jobs were effectively finding ways to do nothing, and then when they got too good at that finding ways to keep others from doing anything.

I would not be paid nearly what I am today had I been stuck in my first union job. Even if I had stayed in the same field.

Until unions can stop being basically safe havens for either the lazy, incompetent, or corrupt (what they've effectively become in the US) I want zero part of them. The two I were in in my teens and early 20's were enough for me. They were so bad I did not want to be morally associated with them in any way whatsoever. All I ever saw from them was protection for the worst kind of people, and the high performers were ran out of the company as soon as possible by all the other members.

It sucks there isn't something else that can champion the rights and pay of the workers without simply serving the lowest common denominator. I'd actively join and support a "trade guild" where membership was predicated on competence and work ethic - and members actively policed to ensure they meet the standard. I'd also seek out employing such guilds when possible.

Unfortunately that doesn't exist, and I tend to actively avoid union shops with a few notable exceptions. Typically when you say the word "union labor" to me that means it's going to be 4x the price, take 5x as long, and be done halfassed so we'll have to re-do half the work anyways.

rm_-rf_slash2• 9 years ago

If you don’t mind revealing more about your past, I would be very interested in hearing more about the kind of work you were in, and the ways in which certain union members abused the system.

Too much political commentary about unions these days is from pundits looking in from the outside, and there is too much paid anti-unionism to get an accurate description of unions’ actual shortcomings without it being washed out by vague exaggerations.

majormajor3• 9 years ago

Sad secret is that you'll find pay-your-dues-ism, laziness, incompetence, and corruption everywhere. I've seen it at elite universities, government contractor engineering/research firms, startups, and larger tech companies, and none of those have been union positions.

The more important thing is the freedom to leave a job that doesn't work for you. That's how I went from the shitty non-union jobs to (eventually) a lucky couple decent ones.

fjsolwmv• 9 years ago

A union is simply am government. It can be good or bad, but it's almost always better for almost everyone than the natural law of the jungle.

The fact that almost every billion dollar company with decamillionaore CEOs is dead set against unions (not even willing to form a partnership agreement with a union), should prove how good they are for everyone who isn't a multimillionaire.

SteveGerencser• 9 years ago

My experience is quite similar, in two different unions. The first was in the Teamsters at a bottling plant and the second was some years later, on the other side of the country, in the Teacher's Union in California. I left both jobs because of the way they were run by the unions.

In the first, it was 100% seniority-based with zero regards to effort or skill. The second I left for basically the same reason. Ability played very little part in pay or benefits. It was simply a time served deal.

Anecdotally, a friend of mine was named shop steward at an automobile manufacturer. The next day he showed up at the airport, in the middle of a workday, in a brand new truck that he just took off the lot as a perk. When we asked why he was hanging out with us at the airport rather than at work, he smiled and said that all complaints went over his desk first, and he wasn't likely to let a complaint against him go past him.

I know that unions played a massively important role in the past, but like all bureaucracies, as it aged and evolved, they became something far different.

stale20023• 9 years ago

"Otherwise workers - even professionals- have no true security, no true predictable work conditions."

How do you shore this up the the fact that many of us engineers have pretty freaking awesome, high paying jobs?

Things have seemed to work out great for those of us who are willing and able to negotiate well for ourselves.

Thats the problem I have with unions. I do not for a single second want someone else to be negotiating for me. I can do that on my own, and I have done well for myself using my own negotiation power.

bmelton• 9 years ago

Every time there's an article about unionization (here, yes, but anywhere else too), there's someone in that article extolling the virtues of all unions, followed up by others denigrating the state of unions.

As a younger man, I've been a member of unions that were good, and unions that were bad, and while I don't remotely proclaim myself to be an expert on them, but I am experienced enough to have observed what I believe are patterns.

Ideally, unions aim to solve power imbalance between workers and employers, which it does by giving power to a presumably disadvantaged party. Where the employees are already in demand, or are highly skilled, what have you, employers already have to work hard to maintain the employee base it has because replacement employees are difficult to find.

Where the employees are less skilled, or more easily replaceable, unions can be super effective at raising workplace standards and wage negotiations.

That said, I'm wary of anyone who speaks in absolutes to either end. Some unions arrive at too much power, and can be self-defeating or exploitative. Some unions are corrupt. Some unions don't work very hard for their members. Some unions are horrible, and then turn it around, and vice versa. Unions can be effective at raising wage floors, but can also lower ceilings for workers who might be best off without them.

The assertion that any given union is de facto good or bad seems flawed to me, as I've seen both sides of that particular coin, and like all eco-systems, work very well when a particular set of conditions are met and a particular balance is struck.

pfooti• 9 years ago

Consider a few ways engineers could have things Even Better:

Less / No crunch time. Ethical support so you can refuse to do something shady. Support for union members getting equal pay and equal treatment, despite marginalized status. Job security for people over 50.

Those are just off the top of my head. And yes, I get that not all of those things are delivered by all unions. But ultimately, there is a lot to be gained from banding together and cooperating, which cannot be negotiated singly.

tinokid• 9 years ago

Things have seemed to work out great for those of us who are willing and able to negotiate well for ourselves.

Yeah, but companies are also really good at making people think they are getting a great deal when they aren't.

There was a thread a few years ago where someone posted a police agency's salary database disclosure and the comments were along the lines of "zomg some random guy I knew in high school makes way more than me".

Not to contradict the poster who claims that unions can become parasitical--both on employers/taxpayers and on newer members--but in the end which benny is more valuable: free meals, or a fully COLA'ed pension that's still paying out when you're 80?

zjaffee2• 9 years ago

My personal issue with unions is I've seen the way my family members work places have acted through the fact that collective bargaining has given them the ability to leverage things such as years served as a way to dictate many aspects of how the organization is run. Additionally, it is very hard to fire people, where people can coast for years and still continue to get raises and even promotions.

Additionally, unions force costs to go up on many projects and revert any productivity gains that technology has provided. This prevents projects from getting done reducing the GDP impact of the larger industry even though certain people would likely get paid less.

Yes, for labor jobs, unions are absolutely necessary, but from my perspective collective bargaining presents many failures when it comes to coordinating large projects across multiple union groups, in addition to demoralizing high performers as unions as of right now have not adopted well to any sort of up or out promotion structure.

pfranz• 9 years ago

Additionally, unions force costs to go up on many projects and revert any productivity gains that technology has provided.

Honestly, I think this is worth some honest discussion about the big picture. Many of the critiques against neoliberalism[1] is that all of the benefits of opening international trade and automation have gone to the rich. In 1930 John Keynes predicted 15 hour workweek for his grandchildren[2]. The average workweek in the U.S. is 47-49 hours[3]. This is in a world where dual incomes is common.

I'm not advocating paying people to sit around all day, but I think it would be good to look at what we're trading work/life balance, job security, income, life expectancy, age of retirement, and the other things we give up for it. Personally, I still like the current world of iPhones and Amazon delivery, so it's not a clear argument in one direction, but it's not something I hear people talk about.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neoliberalism#Focus_on_economi...

[2] http://www.businessinsider.com/john-keynes-predicted-15-hour...

[3] https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/on-leadership/wp/2014/09...

noobermin• 9 years ago

Additionally, unions force costs to go up on many projects and revert any productivity gains that technology has provided.

Perhaps at individual companies, but the overall trend is pay has not kept pace with productivity gains, so the overall trend across society is the reverse of what you're worrying about.

Aloha• 9 years ago

my attitude in general is that unions are something you earn - as a company, you either treat your employees fairly (and pay reasonably well), be transparent in management, and give non-management people a voice at the table of how the enterprise is run, or you earn a union, the LAT was a bastion of anti-unionism for years, but the Chandler family (who owned it) treated its folks (for the most part) quite well.

I've experienced union and non-union workplaces - I'd have no problem working in either - in the end, if the company rewards loyalty, and longevity - you're going to have a good time all around - union or not.

saas_co_de2• 9 years ago

I am a Teamster and I have worked in union labor jobs, non union labor jobs, and professional jobs.

One of the big misconceptions is that unions are just for workers. In my experience unions benefit the employers just as much as the workers by providing a formal process for raising and resolving grievances. This helps corporations by keeping things smooth and puts a check on low level management that benefits the organization over all.

Unions also bring a lot of BS. They are another hierarchy with their own bosses, and rules, etc. But you will not find any more generous group of people then in a union. When there is a collection for someone who has a sick kid or some other tragic life event the amount of money that gets collected in a single meeting is surprising. I have never seen that kind of generosity in any professional setting.

I have also seen unions vote repeatedly to take cuts in their own pay to help out their fellow members on the pension issue, even knowing that those people f--ked themselves up with their own stupid decisions, but the point of a union is that you take care of your own, and members are willing to take a very real and significant personal hit to do that.

One of the best things about unions is fixed contracts and pay scales. Haggling over money used to be considered disgraceful and beneath the dignity of respectable people. Unions are old school so they still stick to that code and younger people would do well to learn from them on that.

I don't really think that software engineers could benefit much from unionization. Seizing the means of production doesn't have much meaning when you are the means of production. People who already have all the power don't need a union. But understanding how unions work and the benefits that they provide for organizing labor, corporations, and society is definitely a good thing.

losteverything3• 9 years ago

This is a great comment. Your point "dont really think that software engineers could benefit much from unionization" I disagree in one respect: hours and time of day worked. If rules exist that mean you dont work weekends or holidays or more than 50 hours in a week you as an engineer could simply cite rules amd say no. Rules could exist for who has to work those times...

jpollock• 9 years ago

Unions are a negative word because they (in my experience) provide negative experiences. My personal experiences:

1) When a co-op student, a female friend (also a co-op student) was assaulted (punched in the face) when she crossed a picket line to go to work - she wasn't in a union job so she _had_ to go to work.

2) At my first job, another friend related an experience where they beat their daily quota by 3-4x. They were taken aside and told it was amazing how much property damage happened in the parking lot, and perhaps they should slow down a bit.

3) An immediate relative was bullied at work. The union represented her until a point it became contentious. Then they ignored the issue hoping it would go away.

4) Another immediate member of my family had someone protected from repercussions after endangering 100+ people in a safety critical role because they were part of a union drive.

Those experiences all happened in rapid succession in the 90s, it formed an opinion in my head of what a union is, and I didn't want anything to do with them.

knieveltech2• 9 years ago

None of these anecdotes are union-specific. People are assholes and behave poorly at work in every industry regardless of how the labor force is organized.

skrebbel2• 9 years ago

I only know American unions from stories (such as the ones in this thread, or the one where a Hollywood director got in trouble for using a towel to wipe some sweat off the face of an actor - that was someone else's job), but wow.

Both American political parties are (from a socio-economic perspective) more right-wing than all mainstream parties in my country. Even the most right-wing party we have is pro (partly) subsidized health care, pro minimum wage, pro decent unemployment and disability benefits, etc etc. You could say my country is way more left wing than the US.

But the unions! Wow USA unions appear to be little communist islands. I've never seen unions so extremely, maybe obscenely left wing than those in the USA. Again, this is just from stories so maybe I have it all wrong, but the unions appear to me like the last remaining instance of "all animals are equal, but some are more equal than others" in the Western world.

If I'm not mistaken (and I might be), then I wonder whether maybe this is because US politics is so bizarrely (from a European perspective) right-wing. If you can actually die from hunger in your trailer home after a bad day at work, then extremely protective unions make a lot more sense than if you know you'll stay alive even if you lose an arm or your boss screws you over.

Not sure whether there's a point I'm trying to make but I wonder what HN thinks about all this :-)

linkregister3• 9 years ago

I think that you're not well-informed about the character of U.S. unions. Most are in the trades and manufacturing sectors. Members of those unions are typically right-wing and would be appalled at your characterization. The largest U.S. union, AFL/CIO is hardly leftist.

It's interesting that you mention Communism. Historically, U.S. unions have been vehemently anti-communist after widespread suspicion of the U.S. Communist Party spread, due to developments (mass murder) in the Soviet Union and also due to its overt link with the Soviet international organization (Comintern).

While public sector unions, ---particularly teachers unions and police--- can engage in what could be called leftist tactics and attitudes, your description doesn't fit private sector unions.

Some private sector unions in the U.S. have a long history with corruption, particularly Mafia involvement with meat packers and longshoremen in New York, but that is an entirely different matter.

linkregister3• 9 years ago

I am in agreement that the European collaborative union-management relationship is far more productive than the adversarial American one.

(disagreements noted in my other comment)

Union Is Formed at Los Angeles Times and Publisher Put on Leave

Related Stories