
Ask HN: Is it time for software developers/engineers to unionize? - kolanos
I&#x27;ve seen an increasing number of HN posts on the subject of how software developers&#x2F;engineers are almost universally underpaid relative to the value they bring. The collusion between Apple, Google and others to keep salaries down and block poaching suggests that this is a systemic problem. There are sites out there like Glassdoor that offer some transparency -- but for the most part this industry is very opaque. The average software developer&#x2F;engineer is left with only anecdotal information to gauge their value in zsalary negotiations.<p>So my question for HN is this: Would software developers&#x2F;engineers benefit from a union? From a collective bargaining standpoint, would a union give software developers&#x2F;engineers a leg to stand on? What would the backlash be from the tech industry if developers&#x2F;engineers unionized in large numbers?.
======
oppositelock
Hell no.

Unions serve a big need when employers exploit employees in a detrimental way.
They did great things to expectations about safety on the job, number of work
hours, ageism.

In tech, we get paid better than most of the population, perks are expected
and provided, and equity sharing makes some people rich. Yes, you could maybe
get paid more if there was a union restricting labor supply, which is how they
work, but it would really suck to have union seniority rules or have union say
in who works where. It limits freedom for both employers and employees once
the important items like job safety have been addressed. Union negotiations go
both ways; the employer agrees to something, the union makes you agree to
something by proxy in return. You may not like what the union forces you to
do.

~~~
antocv
> Unions serve a big need when employers exploit employees in a detrimental
> way

Like for example when the biggest companies, Google Facebook Apple and all
others in California agreed to not give wage increases to employees who would
be looking to switch employers?

Was it in the ten thousands per year difference in average salary?

------
jprince
I'd hate to be stuck in a Union where what I'm paid is based on my seniority
or on some test they come up with to measure my ability. I like being able to
negotiate my salary. Unions may initially bring us higher wages but the
combination of union dues, corruption, and bureaucratization of our field by
unions will ruin it. Soon you wont be able to develop unless you're part of a
union and have done your mandatory 3 years apprenticeship if we go that path.

I don't want to be the next automotive industry.

~~~
percept
As food for thought, could the coding schools be creating exactly that? (While
from another perspective, they create an avenue of home-grown employment for
displaced workers in an economy where entire sectors have disappeared.)

Also consider consulting shops that adhere rigidly to specific development
tools and practices, including hiring only compliant developers for customers,
post-engagement.

------
byoung2
My wife is a registered nurse, so she's a union employee. While it is nice to
have someone negotiate on your behalf and represent you when you have a
dispute, it certainly doesn't help with salary negotiations. You can't switch
hospitals to get a higher salary because it is a formula based on education
plus years experience. As an engineer, I have tripled my salary over the last
5 years by switching companies and being a good negotiator. A union would have
just gotten in the way. Developers need to learn their true value and
negotiate accordingly.

------
jonnyy
My understanding of unions has been that they work through the restriction of
the supply of their labor. I haven't thought about it for very long, but it
seems to me that the union's success is contingent on its being able to
prevent other companies from hiring developers unless they hire only union-
certified employees. I am doubtful this can happen.

I think that a semi-successful union would hamper the success of smaller
companies by demanding that they hire only certified, highly-paid engineers.
These engineers can only work a certain number of hours, use certain
languages, etc. (Assuming such conditions can be enforced in the first place,
with so many available employers in the market).

These conditions seem to me difficult for many organizations to accommodate.
Thus, my thinking is that a semi-successful union would trigger software boot
camps like App Academy to attempt to "break" the union by increasing available
supply. The union would then fail. Collusion between Apple, Google, and other
companies to hold down salaries only succeeds if there is no "spoiler".
Facebook turned out to be a spoiler, and they benefitted greatly from it.

------
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.

------
aasarava
Unions seem to offer the most benefits to industries where workers' skills are
commodity -- a factory worker can fairly quickly be replaced by someone else
who can assemble equipment. A bus driver can be replaced by someone who else
with the proper license.

Using this constant threat of replacement -- "there's someone waiting to take
your job and happy to do it for less if you complain" \-- management can hold
back wages and take advantage of employees. Hence, the union fights for things
like standardized salaries and tenure and so on.

Good developers/engineers aren't easily replaceable. As much as outsourcers
and body shops want managers to believe you can just tell any developer what
to do build and you will always get the same result, we all know that one bad
developer can ruin a project and a great developer is often worth way more
than 10 mediocre ones.

So as long as developers are being valued individually for the skills they
bring to an organization, it's better for them to negotiate individually
rather than bargain collectively.

~~~
AndrewKemendo
Right, there is currently no upside for individual developers to unionize
because there is massive demand and low barriers to entry.

What unionizing would do is create a quality floor for development, which
would be good for businesses but less immediately beneficial for individual
developers.

Until barriers rise or the market is completely flooded with good developers,
thus causing wages to plummet, unionization won't happen.

------
AndrewKemendo
There already is one [1], it just has no power because no one joins it. People
forget the requirement of unions where it's member/non-member ratio is at an
equilibrium where employers are compelled to negotiate with the union.

Every time I have ever seen this issue come up, the loudest voices in the
community are vehemently against it.

The argument goes that software engineers are too creative and valuable to
simply be replaced like so many union workers. See thread here:
[http://programmers.stackexchange.com/questions/9481/are-
ther...](http://programmers.stackexchange.com/questions/9481/are-there-any-
unions-for-software-developers)

I think the real answer is that the ethos/personality/philosophy of a large
swath of software engineers does not jive with collective organization. Also
the market is such that developers are on the top of the pile and thus do not
need to organize.

[1]
[http://www.iww.org/unions/dept500/iu560](http://www.iww.org/unions/dept500/iu560)

~~~
mrfusion
Wouldn't athletes unions or actors unions be a counter-example to the too
creative/valuable argument?

~~~
sjg007
If software was mostly contract work then yes. Unions for athletes and actors
provide an underlying stability (health care, retirement benefits etc...)
since the average career length and stability in these professions is low.

------
angersock
So, I'm all for unionizing, but let's be particularly careful about _why_ we
might want to do such a thing.

Is it because of job security? _No_. There's nothing worse in the world then
being "secure" at a job working on a codebase you hate--every day, seeing the
madness and pointless mud piling up and piling up. In many cases, the company
and culture is worse off if you can't readjust teams to retain the people who
fit and let go the people who want (or need) gone.

Is it because of wages? _Somewhat_. As programmers, we shoulder a
disproportionate part of the responsibility for delivering value to customers
and if we do it properly we end up with a product that scales with little
intervention. Accordingly, we should reap a better share of the long-term
profits. At the same time, even if you aren't in vastly over-inflated talent
markets as on the coasts, we generally aren't paid too badly--unless you are
in a town were the profession isn't respected, in which case you are getting
shafted repeatedly.

Is it because of work conditions? _Yes_. We work a very sedentary job. Many
shops expect/require bullshit-long hours and at weird times, and few promote
life/balance with anything more than a wink and a nod. There is a large amount
of stress involved with our work, especially as deadlines draw near or as code
rot becomes apparent. Cognitive dissonance is great, because we aren't allowed
to lie to ourselves about reality: we can't, because computers don't deal in
lies. Bad code is bad, sales features promised don't exist unless there's code
backing them up.

Is it because of professionalism? _Yes_. I can pick a "programmer" out of a
set of 100, even from a good school or respected company, and still fin
glaring omissions in what they know and how they practice. There's no quality
control in what people describing themselves as software engineers or
programmers know, and so hiring becomes annoying. This in turn makes the
market screwy.

~

A full-blown union would be of questionable utility--I sure as fuck don't want
to give any of my paycheck to yet another bureaucracy claiming to represent me
well. That said, there may be a good argument for a professional body similar
to the ASME or IEEE.

------
dpweb
Unions may not be practical because of globalization and virtual workforce.
What would be interesting though is agents.

Kind of like recruiters, but overall a more serious and professional bunch,
for instance, you need to become certified/accredited in some way to be a
"programmer agent".

They get paid, not like recruiters today. They negotiate on your behalf, they
are _your_ advocate in negotiations with the employer, and they get a standard
10% of your yearly salary.

You don't talk money _at all_ , they negotiate your deal. Also they could act
as your career adviser. Their interest would be a long-term relationship, and
in your advancement, which may work better than in say sports or entertainment
where the career lifespan is shorter.

------
mrfusion
Here are some thoughts on what unions might be useful to fix:

Agesism in tech

Non payment for employees or contractors

Protect programmers refusing tasks on ethical grounds

Establish ethical standards

What other problems have we not been able to solve so far?

~~~
Someone1234
No vacation time, no overtime pay, unreasonable working hours, and so on.

------
dominotw
> I've seen an increasing number of HN posts on the subject of how software
> developers/engineers are almost universally underpaid relative to the value
> they bring.

Examples?

------
grownseed
Working for the Public Health Sector, I am yet to see any advantages to being
unionized (beyond a few additional health benefits), so far I've pretty much
only seen drawbacks. My salary is far lower than most people on here (mind
you, I was aware of this going in), getting an actual pay-rise is near-
impossible, but by far the worst is how everybody is put in the same basket,
and I can't emphasize this enough.

The work conditions (and associated politics) reach ridiculous levels,
particularly since the union (which I was forced to join...) seems to only be
concerned with the clinical side of things, of which I take absolutely no
direct part in. So for instance, I won't be allowed to work remotely, because
"it may affect patient care"... > I'm a programmer.

So as far as developers/engineers are concerned, I would say no to unions.

PS: I'm aware the public sector is a bit of a different beast (I worked in the
private sector for a long time before that), but I think the point remains.

------
vlucas
Man, this just smacks of entitlement. Software engineers are one of the
highest paid professions in the world - FAR more than the average job, and the
job is consistently ranked among the best jobs in the world in nearly every
list made. Not only do we typically get higher base pay, we often get much
nicer perks like catered lunches, remote (telecommute) working, shares of
companies to share in the upside etc.

If you are feeling underpaid, there are probably many other companies you
could work at who are actively hiring that will probably pay you more. The
collusion cases you cited are rare, and have only been discovered at the
largest tech firms like Apple and Google - who by the way most certainly have
more software engineers on the north side of six figures than not.

If you are a software developer, now is not the time to unionize. Now is the
time to enjoy this while it lasts, as make as much money as possible. It won't
last forever.

------
ozuvedi
The problem is: We programmers choose to stick to the companies run by money
crazy people who don't care about us. It's a choice we make. We want to feel
safe, love to see payment coming to our bank accounts every week. Problem is
in us, not in the people who run the business - most of them have no respect
for developers. We all need to be brave, make better choices, refuse to be
slaves, search for better options - isn't it what we Engineers are supposed to
do? If we start leaving companies who don't treat programmers well, eventually
they'll realize the fact. It's already happening..... more developers are
doing start-ups, more people are doing freelancing..... Finally, NO UNIONS
please..... we enjoy solving problems, we enjoy programming, Money comes
second.....

------
mrfusion
I wonder if a union could prevent white-board interviews. Perhaps a working
professional organization could pre-qualify programmers.

I don't think CPA's or lawyers have to do whiteboard interviews.

------
fidanov
No it is not. The IT sector is one of the highest paid in the world, and there
are so much possibilities to choose from, that no agreement between Google,
Apple, Microsoft or any other can keep the salaries low, which they are not.

When going the union way your give some of your freedom. You don't have
freedom to negotiate everything yourself on your own terms based on your own
needs, knowledge and value. No one knows better than you what your needs are.

------
taprun
I think it would be easier for developers to just form small companies. All
the advantages of a union with none of the disadvantages.

------
TulliusCicero
I feel that programmers are compensated pretty well for what they do,
especially in the US. I certainly don't feel underpaid personally, and it's
hard for me to imagine unions improving my wages when they're already quite
good. I also think unions would cause my workplace to become 'stiffer' and
less pleasant to work for.

------
arenaninja
It's a good discussion to have, and while I think there is need for added
transparency, I think the 'Union' solution is old-fashioned, maybe even
inapplicable. As you already mention, Glassdoor is part of that step

------
dreamdu5t
Underpaid? Here's an important economics lesson you should have learned
yesterday: The price is what someone is willing to pay.

You are paid exactly what you were able to negotiate.

------
scottlocklin
The IEEE and ACM already exist. While they don't do collective bargaining type
things, the IEEE certainly looks after member interests via their lobbying
efforts.

------
raldi
In a world where any programmer is free to quit and start their own company,
and many successfully do, what's the benefit of unionizing?

~~~
powatom
The fact that they aren't, for one thing. This is a delusional worldview -
most people in employment, regardless of their industry, do not have the time
or necessary capital to fund their own business venture.

~~~
raldi
You don't need everyone to do this; just enough to ensure that if a worker
feels exploited, they always have someplace else to go.

~~~
powatom
The nature of exploitation is that the exploited often do not recognise that
they are being exploited. Being exploited introduces so many other problems
into your life that it becomes incredibly difficult to identify the root cause
and do something about it.

------
mrfusion
Are there any modern examples of unions that actually work well and avoid the
problems of airlines/autoworker type unions?

~~~
brudgers
Professional sports.

~~~
notahacker
Professional sportspeople usually have _agents_ to look after their salary
negotiations, transfer prospects and endorsements though...

------
sarciszewski
Having lived most of my life in a state that is hostile towards unionization,
I don't think this would make life much easier for me. Nonetheless, it's a
good question.

(I don't have the answer.)

------
sidroast
It will NEVER happen.

