Re:Ask HN: If you were in a software developers' union, what...
by verdverm on Saturday February 12, 2022 @05:58PM
(#30317228)
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.
Re:Ask HN: If you were in a software developers' union, what...
by kelseyfrog on Saturday February 12, 2022 @06:43PM
(#30317523)
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?
Re:Ask HN: If you were in a software developers' union, what...
by verdverm on Saturday February 12, 2022 @11:36PM
(#30319266)
> 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?
Re:Ask HN: If you were in a software developers' union, what...
by kelseyfrog on Sunday February 13, 2022 @12:15AM
(#30319454)
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?
Re:Ask HN: If you were in a software developers' union, what...
by kelseyfrog on Sunday February 13, 2022 @12:45AM
(#30319584)
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.
Re:Ask HN: If you were in a software developers' union, what...
by kelseyfrog on Sunday February 13, 2022 @01:08PM
(#30323946)
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?
Re:Ask HN: If you were in a software developers' union, what...
by verdverm on Sunday February 13, 2022 @12:34PM
(#30323569)
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.
Re:Ask HN: If you were in a software developers' union, what...
by kelseyfrog on Saturday February 12, 2022 @03:01PM
(#30315809)
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.
Re:Ask HN: If you were in a software developers' union, what...
by missedthecue on Saturday February 12, 2022 @04:12PM
(#30316519)
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?
The best thing a software union could do is refuse to build harmful technology.
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?
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?
What if we think about workplace requirements for vaccines? Does your opinion on employee option to not consent remain?
Perhaps try to avoid treating the other person as an adversary when they don't agree with you
Most people don't have the kind of eff-thou money, which is why OP asked his question conditioning on unionization.
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 rest is noise