
Verizon Workers Strike on East Coast After Deadline Passes - Amorymeltzer
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/14/business/verizon-workers-strike.html?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&clickSource=story-heading&module=first-column-region&region=top-news&WT.nav=top-news&_r=0
======
tsunamifury
Good. If only tech workers had the spine to do the same after finding out
their CEOs had conspired to suppress their wages and targeted those who wanted
to leave...

~~~
home_boi
It's very hard to complain about wages when you make $200k+ on flexible 40
hrs/week with free food. From the outside, tech workers would look entitled.

~~~
spacecowboy_lon
Doesn't stop CEO's or beter known Actors does it and they earn a lot more than
$200k.

You may earn $200k but your still a worker and most do a lot of unpaid OT

~~~
eitally
You need to weigh this perspective with the alternative point of view, that
the US tech industry wouldn't have developed as quickly or be as world leading
as it is if it wasn't for what has been accomplished because of the long
hours. I don't disagree with you entirely, but I think we ended up in a good
enough spot that it's much more productive to focus on the future than dwell
on the past.

What gets me is the dichotomy between "big tech" and everyone else employing
programmers/designers/UXers doing exactly the same kind of work but for
1/3-1/2 the pay. But hey, when those companies have quarterly EPS above $5,
they might start paying better, too.

~~~
_delirium
Did the U.S. tech industry actually have long hours during the period when it
became world-leading? The U.S. was dominant in technology by the 1970s, and as
far as I understand the '50s-'70s tech work culture, it was more of a
professional engineering culture. 9-to-5 jobs, everyone wore a tie, etc.

~~~
ArkyBeagle
As it is known now, there sort of wasn't a "tech work culture." People just
topped out at fairly low salaries relative to now. People were mostly
"lifers". There was very little hope of a replacement job. I had relatives
caught up in the early 1970s aerospace bust and they were out of work for a
while and had to retool.

As a view into it, see "Moon Machines" \- that's what it looked like as a
child to me.

A lot of the "work long hours" thing is cargo culting / social signalling to
project the image of "high performance." The first step is admitting you're
not John Carmack. I have tendencies that way; I'll get caught up in something
at home on the weekends and completely lose track of time.

But it must be managed. I know better than to do that at work. You have to let
the work breathe ( a metaphor for letting all your cognitive processes catch
up after a burst ).

It's fun to do... beer/coffee-fueled sprints far into the night but it's not
very responsible nor sustainable. I learned this looking carefully at what I'd
done in those.

------
bdavisx
Did I read the 2014 annual report correctly and they had $20+ billion in
profit? I think they can afford to keep the pension plan the way it is.

~~~
bko
Pensions are outdated and are bad for both workers and employers. The idea
that you get a guaranteed payout (defined benefit) creates conflicts when
today's managers have to make decisions that affect the entire company over
the next few decades. Considering that few managers believe that they will be
in charge at the time the pension benefit are due, they are incentivized to
push costs into the future through bloated pensions.The employee is then stuck
holding the credit risk of their employer from long ago.

A much better system is a defined contribution, in which the employer makes a
contribution to a retirement fund for the employee. The employee then has sole
proprietorship of the funds, regardless what happens to the company.

~~~
gherkin0
If I'm understanding you correctly, it seems like those conflicts could be
mitigated by better regulations around company pension contributions. Plus,
you could probably align the c-level manager's incentives by regulating that
their pensions have less priority than those of regular employees, so if
pension cuts have to be made, they'll feel the hit harder and faster. Power
should come with responsibility.

Defined contribution is not "a much better system" for employees. It just
moves risk from the company onto them. IIRC, there's not actually much
"employer credit risk" to employees because pensions have to participate in a
mandatory government insurance program.

~~~
ASinclair
Defined contribution plans are better positioned for today's employment
reality in which people switch jobs much more frequently. Pensions give
employers more power to keep employees when it would otherwise be beneficial
for them to leave for better pay.

~~~
eli_gottlieb
It should really be up to the workers whether they enjoy how golden the
handcuffs are.

------
johnm1019
> Verizon officials have assured wireline customers that they will suffer no
> service disruption during the strike, saying the company has spent months
> training unaffected workers, primarily supervisors, to take over the duties
> of their unionized colleagues.

> “On Day 1 our first priority is to maintain the customer base we have —
> answer the phones, surveil the network, work repairs — and we’re fully
> staffed to do that,”.....

So I guess today is a great day to call tech support with your problems,
you'll get a manager!

~~~
muraiki
I'm really curious as to what long term effect this will have on managers'
perception of their employees, now that they will have actual experience with
what it's like to be one of their subordinates.

------
PaulHoule
It's no coincidence that Verizon announced FiOS expansion in Boston today.

[http://stopthecap.com/2016/04/12/breaking-news-waiting-
forev...](http://stopthecap.com/2016/04/12/breaking-news-waiting-forever-
boston-finally-getting-verizon-fios/)

------
ones_and_zeros
Ah yes, the ills of working collectively for the generally anti-union HN crowd
to see.

~~~
cylinder
White collar unions are quite common outside the US, too. The thought never
even seems to cross the minds of professionals in the US, though.

~~~
drzaiusapelord
US white collar culture works better with associations than unions. Arguably,
its a better solution as union corruption is a big problem, especially in the
public sector, and associations solve this by being less powerful entities
while still being effective for their member's goals.

Many other countries either have associations or simply join US associations
and re-distribute their certification materials locally and promote their
research and policies locally. I think its pretty obvious that unions solve a
specific problem that is more in tune with the earlier industrial era than
today.

The rise of associations in the past 40-50 years isn't a coincidence. Unions
simply do not work well outside of very specific industries. This trend works
internationally too. Associations aren't a US thing anymore.

~~~
cylinder
Union, association, enterprise agreement ... it doesn't matter to me what it's
called, but I think there should be collective bargaining and written
agreements. I don't want an adversarial approach that sucks the life out of
the company.

------
Overtonwindow
Honestly I have very little sympathy for them. They did this in 2012 of the
same issues, and they're doing it again. I think they've got a really good job
and a great compensation package. There are many others in the technology
industry that can't even get a fraction of that.

~~~
dionidium
I wouldn't look to technology workers for a lesson in how to demand more of
the profits your work generates

[http://www.businessinsider.com/top-tech-companies-revenue-
pe...](http://www.businessinsider.com/top-tech-companies-revenue-per-
employee-2015-10)

------
eli_gottlieb
Excellent! Strikes are the only way to punish intransigent, anti-worker
management practices. Solidarity forever!

------
droopybuns
If more technical workers were exposed to the risk of electrocution, ladder
death and poison gas in cramped spaces, I'm sure they would unionize too.

Doesn't make much sense otherwise.

------
known
1\. Impose tax on corporate revenues, not profits

2\. Regulate market capitalization of corporations

------
blisterpeanuts
_" The unions also procured a letter from 14 mayors that criticized the
company for not making its fiber optic network available to enough of their
residents, and from 20 United States senators urging Verizon to act as a
“responsible corporate citizen” and negotiate fairly with its workers."_

Interesting; so the union's going on strike not only to maintain their pension
levels, but also to help underserved communities. Noble of them. But it would
be nobler still if they offered concessions of pay and benefit cuts in
exchange for Verizon making its fiber available to more neighborhoods.

Obviously it's just a ploy to get the voters on their side, but they're
omitting the detail that the voters are going to end up paying higher for
their phone and data service as a result.

~~~
Retric
You can't pass on 100% of worker wage increase to customers without losing net
revenue. So, a lot of this money comes from management and stock owners.

PS: It's a question of price / demand curves. Raising prices costs customers
which reduces profits.

~~~
blisterpeanuts
But by the same logic, you can't pass on 100% of profit to the workers without
losing spending flexibility and the ability to reinvest in the company's
infrastructure and future prosperity.

No one complains that Google Fiber doesn't serve every neighborhood in the
cities where it is established. Google negotiated that deal with the cities,
and if a city refuses to let them target only specific, profitable
neighborhoods, they simply take that city off the list.

In my opinion, this whole situation is emblematic of why American digital
infrastructure is slow and behind the times, because of antiquated and
senseless rules.

I don't think Verizon is some kind of nice company; they're reprehensible at
times and frankly I feel sorry for the people working there and I kind of
understand their anger. But, business is business.

~~~
mikeash
A failure to serve poor neighborhoods actually is a criticism people have of
Google Fiber (search for "google fiber digital divide" for examples), and it's
something they attempt to combat by providing free service to libraries,
community centers, and low-income housing in some places.

I do think that trying to shame or regulate companies into serving
unprofitable areas is the wrong way to go about it. If it's that important,
then subsidize service in those areas so it's actually profitable. But
Americans seem to hate obvious subsidies, and prefer to make them weird and
convoluted instead.

~~~
Retric
The problem is it is generally profitable, just _less_ profitable. Worse we
are subsidizing them, but if they finish the subsides end _and_ none of the
subsides where directly tied to actually deploying new fiber to every home.

PS: You get a lot of very different numbers out there. But remember at 10
acres per house you get 64 houses per square mile and people tend to clump
near roads and in towns. [http://blog.performantnetworks.com/2012/11/how-much-
does-rur...](http://blog.performantnetworks.com/2012/11/how-much-does-rural-
fiber-really-cost.html) Sure, there are a few places where it's still
unprofitable, but we can debate the last 1/2th of a percent of homes when you
get close to 99%.

