Ask HN: If you were in a software developers' union, what would you fight for?
34 comments
All technology can be used for harm. How do you propose to make a distinction between acceptable and not?
How do we do it outside the workplace?
Typically those who cause harm are punished, rather than banning a technology for the possibility of harm. Insurance is often around too. Cars are a great example, but pretty much everything follows this pattern.
Sure, but before punishment, how is it decided what causes harm and what doesn't?
My point is that this is a group activity. Ascribing the status of harm causing behaviors happens in aggregate. This is in contrast to workplace decision making which happens hierarchically. Democracy is a superior version of decision making right? Why should that idea cease to exist the moment someone steps into the workplace? Who has an interest in perpetuating the myth that workplace democracy is untenable? We run whole countries with the input of citizens, surely that could scale down to a workplace, right?
My point is that this is a group activity. Ascribing the status of harm causing behaviors happens in aggregate. This is in contrast to workplace decision making which happens hierarchically. Democracy is a superior version of decision making right? Why should that idea cease to exist the moment someone steps into the workplace? Who has an interest in perpetuating the myth that workplace democracy is untenable? We run whole countries with the input of citizens, surely that could scale down to a workplace, right?
> Democracy is a superior version of decision making right?
Not always, no. Everything has nuance and context. For example, would you like democracy and voting in the emergency room? While I don't agree with it, China has demonstrated interesting results from non-democratic decision making. Certainly direct democracy does not scale well and would be a terrible idea at out present moment.
Is the country really run with the input of the citizens? What are politicians optimizing for? What are the contents of the policies being passed and what are they based on? Who's actually writing the majority of that? Do all employees have the ability and context to make informed input or decisions? Are there any decisions which will make all people happy? Do all people consider the same acts harmful?
Not always, no. Everything has nuance and context. For example, would you like democracy and voting in the emergency room? While I don't agree with it, China has demonstrated interesting results from non-democratic decision making. Certainly direct democracy does not scale well and would be a terrible idea at out present moment.
Is the country really run with the input of the citizens? What are politicians optimizing for? What are the contents of the policies being passed and what are they based on? Who's actually writing the majority of that? Do all employees have the ability and context to make informed input or decisions? Are there any decisions which will make all people happy? Do all people consider the same acts harmful?
Even in the emergency room there is always at least two people giving input. The patient can always not consent. In an employee-employer environment, shouldn't employees have at least some option to not consent as well?
Employment is a contract, not a right. You can always end the contract.
What if we think about workplace requirements for vaccines? Does your opinion on employee option to not consent remain?
What if we think about workplace requirements for vaccines? Does your opinion on employee option to not consent remain?
We already have voting with one's feet and yet here we are. Workers should be able to collectively bargain on whatever they want including input on the ethics of what they are asked to produce.
Seems as though your mind is made up and your questions are not for gaining understanding
On the contrary. I did gain an understanding. Correct me if I'm wrong, but your position is to maintain the status quo w.r.t workplace decision making, correct?
You are wrong, but that's what happens when you project your biases and assumptions.
Perhaps try to avoid treating the other person as an adversary when they don't agree with you
Perhaps try to avoid treating the other person as an adversary when they don't agree with you
You can always end the contract
Most people don't have the kind of eff-thou money, which is why OP asked his question conditioning on unionization.
Most people don't have the kind of eff-thou money, which is why OP asked his question conditioning on unionization.
Then they are probably not managing their finances as well as they ought to be. Given OP is talking about software jobs, which are among the highest paying in any region.
The end of overtime exemption status. No one should be allowed to work off the clock. It is legalized wage theft.
is not working while on the clock wage theft in the other direction? (stealing from employer)
Is the argument "Because time-theft exists and operates in the opposite direction to wage theft they cancels each other out"? If I'm misinterpreting it, then please correct me.
Well the parent comment reads to me like working after hours without extra pay is getting work without pay i.e. wage theft. My question is asking whether pay without work is also wage theft?
Assume it is.
Workers: We don't want to do labor unless it is tied to more pay.
Employer: No, we want you to do more work with the same pay.
Workers: Ok, we will do less work then.
Employer: Ok, work longer hours then.
It sounds a lot like what we already have right now. There are better questions than "what about time-theft?"
Workers: We don't want to do labor unless it is tied to more pay.
Employer: No, we want you to do more work with the same pay.
Workers: Ok, we will do less work then.
Employer: Ok, work longer hours then.
It sounds a lot like what we already have right now. There are better questions than "what about time-theft?"
The right to not be part of the union.
An end to companies laying claim to IP generated in your own time.
Against stacked raking and then for overtime pay.
The rest is noise
The rest is noise
jimmyvalmer(1)
Protect from jobs being sent overseas.
The best thing a software union could do is refuse to build harmful technology.