Do you think I would join an organization like that? There is a clear conflict of interest between blue and white color workers and the more numerous blue color workers push the union to prioritize them.
this is a bizarre simplification, sounding like some kind of silly propaganda
I am well aware of enemies not fitting into such labeling at all (and probably there are more less obvious ones)
Soccer hooligan vandals.
Corrupt local politicians.
Some vandals obsessed with damaging community-run geodata collection project.
People who thing that overregulating everything in Europe is an exciting adventure and we should have more of it.
Climate change deniers, people misunderstanding vaccines and in effect trying to resurrect diseases that were extinct locally.
People with Saruman-like approach to trees.
Coal miners parasiting on billions from public funds to fund coal mining (as selling coal does not allow to pay for it, at least with how much they are paid for it).
I realize that many other users have been doing this as well, but each HN commenter needs to stick to the intended use of the site regardless of what others are doing.
Fortunately, it looks like your comment history is mostly fine (at least the parts of it that I skimmed back through) so this should be easy to fix.
If Factory workers longer and more efficiently my job becomes more secure. So obviously I want a union which advocates that factory workers work longer hours, it is clearly in my interest. The same goes for strikes, if factory workers strike they endanger my job and reduce the size of the engineering department, reducing my chances to get promoted.
>Get rid of them and there'll be plenty of money for both of you.
The unions? Sure, if they were gone things would become better.
(1) demanded flat payment increases for all workers based on seniority etc. Which may make sense for factory workers but I am not enthusiastic about flat rates for programmers not taking into account actual experience/availability/output etc.
Factory workers in many cases do job that can be easily rated and measured and do some specific amount of it.
While measuring output of programmers is notoriously hard.
I expect that union agreement of this kind would in fact benefit only lazy freeloaders not doing any work but having seniority.
(2) are guilds that existed to keep jobs for members and to outlaw or ban hiring outsiders.
I strictly prefer for exclusionary guilds to not exist and one of my big worries is that one would be setup, in area affecting me. One way or another, not necessarily an obvious self-naming itself as a guild.
(3) are gangs existing to steal public money - for example, see coal miners in Poland. Main union achievements was to steal billions of public money to help lazy freeloaders doing work that was not worth doing or outright harmful.
I do not support theft, also in terms of parasiting on public resources. Even if I would get some of proceeds of theft.
(4) intended to achieve more free days, flexibility etc. On my freelancing agreements I sacrificed large part of earning to get about 100+ free days a year, very significant flexibility where and how and on what I work. So this part is achieved for me - and I am not sure how many other tech workers would actually prefer more free time over being paid more.
I am not automatically against unions for tech workers but my first reaction and assumption is not that it will be positive or useful for me.