> That leads to pushes for things like seniority based pay, indifference to those who are better at their jobs, certifications, pointless bureaucracy to prevent moving jobs away from the union, etc. Personally, I don't like those things.
Why assume that unions in tech, an industry that has had little to no experience with unions, is composed primarily (at least in Silicon Valley) of those who are often interested in recreating things from first principles, and claims to embody a spirit of invention, will be doomed to repeat the mistakes of the past? I thought our whole shtick was about innovating things for the better?
Silicon Valley is composed of humans with the same drives, limitations, etc. as everyone else. The fact that they think they're better than the rest of humanity doesn't mean they are. It just means they're more self delusional. Self delusion tends to make you repeat history more rather than less.
You're still making the assumption that labor unions are inherently limited by human nature, and not worth attempting a v2. That goes against the SV ethos of tinkering with existing systems and reinventing them.
Labor unions are inherently limited by human nature because they’re made up of humans, not cats. They’re also limited by economic facts which would be the same if they were made of lizard people. That doesn’t mean it’s not worth attempting version 2 but there are very real constraints on what’s possible.
Why assume that unions in tech, an industry that has had little to no experience with unions, is composed primarily (at least in Silicon Valley) of those who are often interested in recreating things from first principles, and claims to embody a spirit of invention, will be doomed to repeat the mistakes of the past? I thought our whole shtick was about innovating things for the better?