> apple can do whatever because it's a company

I don’t think this is what I would advocate for. Me not bitching on Twitter is not the same as me not allowing Apple to do whatever they want.

Smart engineers leaving is a big deal, even for Apple. There are ways to deliver constructive criticism. I’ve done it many times, sometimes successfully. And it never involved leaking to the press or talking bad about my org.

I think there are needs for corporate governance and don’t like the “you’re either with us or against us” or equating not speaking publicly with condoning or allowing behavior. There are many other options.

> The very same Apple employees who were demanding that Apple fight Texas’ new abortion laws were also demanding that Apple support Palestine — where abortion is 100% illegal.

I can find no articles linking Janneke Parrish to opinions on Palestine, so I'm not sure how that's relevant.

(and of course this is a vapid test for sincerity of beliefs. Are all people who want to ban abortion but supportive of Israel similarly insincere and disingenuous?)

> if union is generally flatten the salaries to make me receive less for others more

Who says that’s what will happen? Tom Cruise is a member of SAG, do you think he gets paid SAG union rates?

Union busters in tech have done a fantastic job of convincing engineers that all unions are blue-collar. Which is funny, because you only have to look to Hollywood to see unions like SAG, the DGA, and the WGA which exist to protect all workers from exploitation and not cap compensation at all.

It’s the work rules that make a lot of American unions distasteful to workers. A lot of people just don’t want to work in a place where people routinely say stuff like, “that’s not my job, union rules.”

The Wizard of Speed and Time is a great film about how difficult it is to be an independent creator in Hollywood due to the costs of getting anything started. The unions make it very hard to bootstrap anything without massive financing.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=j5a_00YVVkQ

There are two sides to that. I was representing a German union institution inside our org for one simple reason. The employer had gone out of his way to ignore what peoples responsibilities were and showered them with work that wasn't there's and then tried to punish them for pushing back. Usually the reason people respond with this is not my responsibility is because they have been burned by doing things that wasn't theirs. It's a cultural issue and the solution which you describe is a crappy generic solution to a cultural problem.

That said the very same union would frequently respond with that's not our responsibility when I pointed them to take up actual legal issues that they were responsible for.

A lot of the old union representatives were there for decades with no desire to change anything and enjoying the good relationship they had built with the leadership.

At the end of the day any human organization that grows too big seems to end up in its own lazy comfort zone, whether it's the employer side or the employee representing union side.

The thing about forming your own union is that major unions also have big lobbying institutions saying that their union is the only thing with real power, while the other side has their own lobbying groups pressuring workers into believing that all unions are bad.

Unions in Germany are also a pain in the bottom when they are populated with incompetent people who want to show how important they are.

Adding any security technology is a nightmare because they have an obsession about being spied on.

Take a standard EDR: the security team just wants the company to be safe from hackers. The unions think that all they wish is to spot on them. What will happen is that the company will crash after repeated hacks and they know they will be the last to be fired because they are there to protect people...

Of course this is just une side, unions are fantastic when they actually do their job and this is thanks to them we have the Labour Law we have. It is just that the people today are not the same as the ones who actually cared.

Fully agree, but I recently had the thought that DLP actually to some extent is to shut down law enforcement and whistleblowing into companies shady behaviour.

Take for example machine learning algorithms, a lot of the actual model definition you could just copy yourself even when there is DLP. What you can't take with you is the source data and the labeled data.

DLP allows you to prevent people from leaking sketchy and incompetent leadership from investors, SEC and law enforcement. I get the logic behind it, but most of the actual critical stuff you can just take with you in some fashion or another. The situation is obviously a bit different when you're talking hardware manufacturing, CAD models etc.

Funny thing about unions. If you form your own union, you get to write the rules. The agreement with the employer is a matter of negotiation, but the operation of the union is entirely the prerogative of the union as long as it's legal.

Don't want to operate a holywood-style guild? Then don't.

In reality most unions dominate their industry to the point of monopoly.

In reality there are almost no unions operating in tech spaces. The world is our oyster, and the only way to let huge unions into the industry is by voting them in. It's a space ripe for disruption.

> It's a space ripe for disruption.

I want to add that disruption is what huge unions excel at, so if anybody wants to keep them out of tech, the best approach might be to fill the space they'd otherwise sweep into unchallenged with a compelling organization.

Always insane to see tech workers claim that labor unions are inherently flawed and unable to innovate upon, when so much of Silicon Valley's own rhetoric is about disrupting everything else under the sun.

I don’t like absurd rules and unions seem like an out of touch project manager to the extreme. This may not be true.

But I don’t see this as a problem in tech that needs to be solved. The barriers to entry and exit are so low to me as a programmer that I think organizations already have to compete to hire and keep me. So any unions wouldn’t do much to help me and seem like an extra layer of bureaucracy that would stop me from having fun while I work.

But industries are always joining some of the mega-union because they have most effective lobbying, I will quit before I join aflcio or similar.

I don't have to see that at all. In fact here's a movie about how much those Hollywood Unions suck

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j5a_00YVVkQ#t=16m50s

What about sports unions? Or airplane pilots?

Guild is some exception, not so common in unions. Always it end up more like typical aflcio union. I also have made some switch between front end and back end in job, have done some security job and back to normal developing, all these are usually harder in unions. Maybe in theory it is not required but in practice it is almost always this way.

Also I have started prior tech company, it would have been hugely difficult if i had to make negotiations with unions.

We've banned this account for using HN primarily for ideological battle. That's not allowed here, regardless of ideology, because it destroys what the site is supposed to be for: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html.

If you don't want to be banned, you're welcome to email [email protected] and give us reason to believe that you'll follow the rules in the future. They're here: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html.

because it's not a zero sum game? those union busting talking points keep you focused on your less-fortunate colleagues and and not the obscenely wealthy guy screwing the both of you over.

But if i turn over to a union there is small assurance i will not take some pay cut. I doubt people making so much are top of bargaining priority list, probably more rank-and-files level are their focus. And then I have turned over my rights to majority, so it is suck up what my coworker wants or leave. It is similar for employer, i must suck up what it want or leave, but I already known these terms are okay with employer. Since i am not in majority bracket of workers this probably is not good.

This is not how unions work. (source: am union member)

Your claims and arguments are against some imagined shitty union-like thing that does not much resemble an actual union.

Next time you need help by others remember "Why should they?" Your paycheck become worthless if society gets fucked up.

I guess i forgot some consideration that disaffected brogrammers may start new revolution for payed only $85,000 not $125,000.

Is this trolling? Either way, I hate this self-centered comment.

Have you considered that a union could be good for all employees? What about setting minimum salary requirements? Maybe ensuring more of a company's profits are paid out to its workers?

nice, it only took two comments before we got to the "my paycheck very big, union very bad, why I join union? tomorrow will be like today, I will always be big paycheck"

That could be interpreted as "I've got mine, Jack. Why should I give a fuck about anybody else?"

This raises the question: if you only care about yourself, why should we care about you?

Because he can do well regardless of how much you do or do not care for him.

Many people would very much appreciate it if other members of society cared less about them. Care is not required for humans to participate in a mutually beneficial society.

> Many people would very much appreciate it if other members of society cared less about them

Um, could you elaborate?

Why it is selfish for me to want my paycheck but not when you want me to take some maybe paycut to pay you more?

Because you won't always have it so lucky and also because other people deserve nice pay and working conditions too.