
Why Most Software Engineers Lose Nothing by Unionizing - ern
https://michaelochurch.wordpress.com/2018/05/31/why-95-percent-of-software-engineers-lose-nothing-by-unionizing/
======
krupan
What a dismal picture the author paints of our world:

"most software engineers are low-status workers whose jobs their bosses would
gladly ship overseas, and who live under the surveillance described above.
They’ll be fired as soon as their performance dips, or a cheaper worker comes
on the market, or they piss the wrong person off. The adversarial climate
exists. Again, nothing to lose."

What world is this author living in? Maybe 10 years ago, maybe, a lot of
software jobs were like this. Everything I've experienced lately is that
companies can't hire enough software engineers. You are _not_ going to be
fired if your performance dips a little. You are too hard to replace.
Interestingly, this is very similar to the situation that Paul Graham
described here:
[http://www.paulgraham.com/unions.html](http://www.paulgraham.com/unions.html)

I mean really this whole post basically says, "unions kinda suck, but your job
already kinda sucks, so why not try a union?" How...inspiring? Honestly, if
you really feel that down about your career a union isn't going to fix it.
It's probably time to try a different field.

~~~
StephenAmar
Classic mchurch. He's had bad experiences with some companies in the bay area.
You can read his (many) rants about Google for instance.

~~~
murderfs
It turns out that if you spend all of your time at work posting on mailing
lists about your T7-9 vision instead of actually doing your work, your
performance reviews suffer. Who would have thought?

~~~
meowface
Creating at least 45 Wikipedia sockpuppet accounts [1] probably doesn't
correlate with optimal performance, either.

[1]
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Suspected_Wikipedia_s...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Suspected_Wikipedia_sockpuppets_of_Mike_Church)

------
bhawks
As a child of two union parents and married to a union worker, it is clear to
me that the only contact the author has had with unions is in his dreams.

Unions constantly have to deal with internal corruption (and often don't...).
The seniority system is much more arbitrary than anything approximating
meritocracy. Better hope that you've saved enough if/when the union decides to
strike because you are going to have to suck it up even if you don't think
it's worth it. You better buy in to all the politics your union supports
because your dues go to it. Enjoy watching the union protect the most
incompetent worker who will go on to put lives at risk with his drinking
problem. Just don't count on the union going to bat for you against the
company, if they don't like you they'll hang to out to dry.

The author is out of his depth.

~~~
bhawks
Disappointed but not surprised that folks are down voting instead of replying.

The unionization discussion focuses way too much around compensation instead
of on union-employee relations. People just assume unions are all roses in
this department (the author likens them to some street fighting Batman) when
in reality they're flawed and have incentives that work against workers too.
If you don't think there's nepotism and favoritism in unions then you've
probably never worked in one. Unions pick and choose the workers they stand up
for, it's not some romantic all for one and one for all story.

In my experience you should trust the union just about as much as hr or
management. If you're not on the same side as them in whatever issue, watch
your back.

~~~
bjourne
The "As a child of two union parents ..." argument in relation to unionization
is the equivalent of the "As a mom of two children ..." argument in relation
to child psychology. I also have two parents who are members of a union but
that doesn't make me an expert!

~~~
yellowapple
Perhaps not, but it does give you exposure to a wealth of first-hand
information. I don't think the mother-of-two-children's opinion is worthless
relative to a child psychologist, either; both have insights that are valuable
in different ways.

~~~
bjourne
No, it gives you a lot of anecdotal evidence that is impossible to decouple
from the specific circumstances of the situation. E.g my experience with my
union has been the completely opposite of everything stated by bhawks. So + 1
- 1 = 0, words have been exchanged but nothing learned.

~~~
yellowapple
"Nothing learned" only if you don't care about those "specific circumstances".
The anecdotal datapoints are useful specifically because Earth's population of
7+ billion humans is remarkably efficient when it comes to running across
corner cases and confounding variables.

We're talking about something that does indeed have very-situationally-
dependent impacts and effects. The anecdotes require filtering, sure, but
they're vital if you want aggregate data that reflect the real world instead
of theoretical conditions.

If it's impossible to decouple something from the specific circumstances of
the situation, then that "something" is insufficiently understood.

------
Nasrudith
Personally I think that if organized labor is to have a chance to be remotely
successful in Software engineering it needs to break away from the old
assumptions that don't hold any more including commoditization. They might
have some luck if they established sufficient ground floors (limiting crunch
time and death marches, setting rules for what they can be expected to be
required for late changes - bonuses for rushes being fine, etc.) instead of
uniformity.

I am not familiar with the fine details of labor but I suspect the Screen
Actors Guild would be a better fit as a template. The actors are anywhere from
minor extras to superstars.

~~~
briandear
Totally agree. While I am traditionally anti-union (I have seen too many
rubber-room situations and ridiculousness,) SAG or the WGA are actually good
models for software engineers. It recognizes minimums, but doesn’t have
maximums and “merit” is determined by whatever the market is willing to pay.
So a superstar first time writer can make millions of their script warrants
it, while journeyman script re-writes are assured getting paid scale. The
teachers unions are exactly the opposite: you get more pay for seniority and
the implication is that seniority necessarily means “more valuable” when that
isn’t necessarily the case.

Although I am economically very far right, I could get behind a WGA model for
software devs. I would be happy to join such an organization. But a teachers
union style union.. no way.

------
ptero
I felt the article is underwhelming, to put it mildly. It drones on and on,
seemingly repeating the same point.

Under different guises article says that if you are a low-level code monkey
with no freedom or an "IT peon" doing menial tasks, unionizing can give you
job security (so you can be sure that you can keep doing those boring things
forever) and maybe raise your salary, too. That is probably a true statement.
But this setup is _BORING_. The article claims this setup describes 95% of
software engineers and I think this is nonsense. IMO at least half of the
software engineers either have some project freedom and can pretty easily
switch employers if they find themselves under abusive management.

And this could be at risk if unionized: no firing often means greatly reduced
hiring, too. Please count me out. My 2c.

------
nkurz
Meta: This article has been flagged a few times. Could those who are flagging
it explain why they feel it is inappropriate for this site?

~~~
glangdale
Seriously. If folks generally understand the idea that you shouldn't use the
downvote button to mean "disagree" I think this should go double for using
flagging. I'm far from convinced by the article but don't see how it falls in
the category of something that should be flagged - it's not trolling or
offensive.

~~~
kodablah
IME flagging on HN is not what you think of as flagging on other sites.
Flagging is often used for off-topic or "inappropriate" and is subjective
based on the flagger. I don't believe you can apply general understanding of
downvotes from other sites or assume allowed reasons for flags based on other
sites.

People flag for all sorts of reasons. Sometimes they just get tired-head on a
topic, feel a site adds nothing new to the discussion, think it doesn't
belong, etc. The only real hardfast rule about flagging is that you don't talk
about why.

~~~
yellowapple
Okay, so if someone could actually clarify what, exactly, is off-topic or
inappropriate about this article, then that would be much appreciated.

~~~
pvg
I'll trade - what about this article makes you finish reading it and go 'oh
yeah, that is an interesting and insightful piece of writing that other people
might benefit from reading and discussing'.

~~~
yellowapple
Let's not trade. If you feel so strongly that Hacker News should be prevented
from being able to discuss an article, then it's on you to articulate why.

To humor you, though: it's a thorough representation of an opinion that
relates to my career, and the resulting discussions are important to have,
regardless of whether or not I agree with the article.

------
pm90
The argument seems to be that:

* 95 ( _no, sorry 99%_ ) of Software Engineers are IT peons and

* therefore don't lose much by unionizing; however

* if you're one of the few lucky ones being recognized for what they do and making enough in compensation, don't bother

It seems to me that the biggest problem in this theory is the first assumption
is wrong (at least the numbers are wildly off). Most software engineers tend
to be highly compensated, work in fairly independent teams, are recognized for
their contributions so don't have much to gain from unionizing.

~~~
PavlovsCat
> if you're one of the few lucky ones being recognized for what they do and
> making enough in compensation, don't bother

I would disagree with that. Of course I should still "bother" to make the
world around me better, I still "bother" with solidarity. Even if it's just so
I can enjoy my own luck freely, and be open when I meet new people. The less
corpses I have in my basement, the less corners I cut because "fuck you got
mine", the more free I am. The more free I am, the quicker and better I
develop. Also, unused muscles atrophy, unused mental and social "muscles" do
as well, and the primary reward for being in shape is being in shape, it just
feels better than being out of shape.

~~~
pm90
If a system is working for _you_ as you expect it to, you understandably have
no real motivation to change it. That is the only point of that statement.

If you're concerned that your coworkers in the same company or in other
companies are not being treated fairly by the system and want to help in
changing it, sure, you can do that. But that's usually not the strongest force
for change in these things.

In fact, the better compensated and happy workers would want to ensure the
continuity of this system that treats them so well.

~~~
PavlovsCat
So in summary, I say I disagree and give my personal reasons for me personally
disagreeing, and you give me permission to have them and act on them, and then
reiterate what "most" people feel, as if I didn't know that, as if that wasn't
the basis for me commenting in the first place.

------
jknoepfler
a highly professionalized industry in which individuals have massive
bargaining power and draw gigantic salaries, where furthermore we culturally
are able to open source parts of the means of production (engineers have
unprecedented levels of ownership over the fate of their labor) is literally
the last place I would think to unionize. color me naive, though.

~~~
heyjudy
You're probably right. It's janitors and other low-skill/low-pay workers who
need and benefit from unionization most because I've seen the results of
union-busting environments: janitors working 16 hours a day without benefits
and living in their cars.

------
wildfray
I’ve actually been in this exact situation quite a few times. I finally found
a safe space to work where I’ve been able to prove to myself that I actually
am a skilled developer.

PIPs have no appeal process. Many developers are forced to work on menial bugs
while simultaneously being promised more freedom “soon”.

Every company is constantly hiring because every company has drastically high
turnover. Burnout is a very real thing in the field, and it shouldn’t be
considered the norm.

------
Cyclone_
"If you’re the typical, low-status, open-plan programmer, forced to interview
for his own job every morning in “Daily Scrum”, then all the bad things that
unions can bring have already happened at your job"

Seems like a rather cynical take.

------
markbnj
I am neither a principle engineer at a big "N" company, nor am I a high
frequency trader, but I kind of hope I am not an "IT peon" either.

~~~
Avshalom
I mean I don't know your situation but "I kind of hope I am not an "IT peon"
either" is exactly how people who do have bargaining power end up peons to
people with more power and/or information.

~~~
markbnj
My sarcasm probably wasn't clear, but I am merely mocking the author's
trichotomy.

~~~
Avshalom
... implying that it is so fundamentally unsound that simply disagreeing with
it counts as mockery.

but again whatever evidence you may have in your individual situation: the
belief that "I'm getting a good deal" is exactly how a mark gets conned.

~~~
markbnj
Of course it's fundamentally unsound. It's not even a reasonable abstraction
for reality.

------
chrisco255
Unionization doesn't work well in high tech because traditionally the industry
has changed so fast that a union would torpedo any company that fully embraced
them. I think the tech industry also has among the most relaxed, easy going
environments with some of the best perks.

~~~
bjourne
Wait until you hit the far side of 40.

------
awinter-py
Pessimistic = realistic here. Companies manage knowledge workers like they're
fred winslow taylor and it's 1930. Managers & ed policy wonks are both trying
to make programming blue collar (though for different reasons).

Nobody knows how the next recession will affect programmers. If adtech
collapses will compensation follow? Why aren't more companies using offshore
tech labor?

Can't comment on the union stuff but we should be wary of thinking devs are
exceptional. Expensive labor isn't always valuable labor; as detroit learned
in the 80s.

~~~
erik_seaberg
I was involved in a few outsourcing attempts. If you write a big check for a
no-name company under a different legal system, you're going to get ripped off
mercilessly ("deliverables" that don't even compile). If you open a serious
branch office and interview and hire a team of your own, you might have a
chance.

~~~
matwood
Don’t forget, and pay properly. Even places that are cheaper than the US are
highly competitive for quality workers. For many companies it’s less hassle
and overall TCO cheaper to hire in the US.

------
elihu
One of the problems that most unions try to address is that companies will
often fire employees for union organizing if they can get away with it
(generally they can make up some secondary excuse, like poor performance). In
some unions, firing happens by seniority; the company can only fire employees
in the reverse order they joined.

In software development, we obviously don't want to have to work with under-
performing coworkers, so we need some way to remove those people that isn't
based on seniority. If it can't be at management's discretion either, then
what's a good solution?

I think one answer may be to have a union-negotiated peer-review process --
you can be laid off or fired if your coworkers don't vouch for your work, or
consider you indispensable. Depending on the process, this could work okay or
it could be awful. At best, it would seem to encourage a sort of Lord-of-the-
Flies atmosphere and some unpleasant office politics.

Another approach would be market-based. Maybe projects within the company are
allocated some sort of virtual currency units which can be claimed by
employees when they finish units of work. Employees with a surplus of currency
units but not enough time to finish their tasks by themselves can put bounties
on subtasks. Worker's pay should be proportional to their credit surplus; if
it's not, they can have their pay reduced or they could be asked to leave.
This would less political and less personal, but working out the details could
be tricky and it doesn't address the problem of highly productive people that
no one wants to work with because they treat people badly.

I expect there are other possible solutions.

How does the Screen Actor's Guild, and screenwriter's and athletic unions deal
with this problem?

~~~
dragonwriter
> In some unions, firing happens by seniority; the company can only fire
> employees in the reverse order they joined.

No unions prohibit individual firing for cause (though they tend to require
process for it); union contracts may require _layoffs_ to be conducted by
seniority, and companies not covered by union contracts may use allocation of
what is notionally a not-for-individual cause layoff as a PR cover for
targeted firings, but it is simply not the case that union contracts (at least
commonly) require _firing_ by seniority.

~~~
elihu
Thanks for the clarification.

------
jellicle
> And, if you work in a federally-funded research lab that pays for your
> graduate education, and that allows you to publish papers, attend
> conferences, and perform original research on working time, then you
> probably don’t need a union.

These research labs are mostly unionized. That's _why_ they have good
benefits, working conditions, etc.

------
stmfreak
Unions were great for workers at one point. But for the majority of my life,
they seem to have taken worker’s rights to the point that it is consistently
enticing for CEOs to at least attempt to offshore huge amounts of jobs. No
matter how terrible the results, they keep trying because unions kill
companies in the USA.

I would like to avoid that happening to software jobs.

------
exabrial
No we lose fking everything. I just spent an evening to an electrician in his
second year, excited the electrical union his giving him 8 whole days of
vacation. His pay increases are on a fixed scale. And because senior members
of the union are unemployed if he loses his job, those guys get hired first.
And if you're unemployed and you take a non union sideproject you're moved to
the back of the bus. Run far far away from unionization.

------
username90
Unions are usually equivalent to non poaching agreements, they set a price and
most companies agrees to not pay significantly above that while most workers
agrees to not work if they are paid significantly below that. It ensures that
everyone is paid a mediocre salary, so if you want American engineer salaries
to look like European ones start a union!

------
jf-
Software developers will be non-unionised until there are so many of us that
supply outpaces demand. Then we’ll form cartels to demand better pay and
conditions, much like everyone else.

------
heyjudy
It's unfortunate most IT/engineering people buy into anti-union propaganda
blindly. The fact is that organized labor, for better or worse, equals fairer
pay than anarcho-capitalist gratituity. See also: Robert Reich, Richard Wolff.

------
matchagaucho
There are many good reasons to unionize, but aligning the argument with Jira
and daily standups may not carry much weight.

The #1 reason is that HR no longer represents the best interests of employees.
They serve to protect the company, leaving employees with zero representation.

