I appreciate unions, but I often feel like this website gets out of touch with them.
Many jobs simply do not lend themselves to having a union. They’re too niche, the employees are scattered around, there’s no willing union representation, etc. “These guys should just join a Union!! And if they have to - by golly, form one themselves!” Always comes off to me like such a reductive take on how complex a lot of working/employment systems are, and where unions can and cannot benefit.
It often pushes up on just being idealogical grandstanding rather than legitimately listening and understanding case by case problems in employment
You have to remember that these are the same people who romanticize and call for general strikes without any consideration for what it does to families. Not to mention it doesn’t even acknowledge the fact that most general strikes in history have failed miserably. The reality is that successful union activity is generally small, difficult, and has to be sustained for years.
Precisely so. It can be grating to see Lemmy, a site full almost exclusively of well-paid computer programmers - preach “just unionize!” With the same oily lips as conservatives who tell millions to “just pull yourself up by the bootstraps!”.
In both cases it’s “talking down” to the end worker, pitching an ‘easy’, one sentence solution to all of their ills without any consideration for the vast amount of effort required in reality.
Absolutely. It’s really good to hear your perspective on the matter, because yeah - that shit is brutal and SAG-AFTRA was a ‘good outcome’. Many - especially those without the benefit of millions and millions of dollars, celebrity backers, and mass public support, do not have good outcomes.
If you’re interested in this kind of thing, “Germinal” by Zola is what I find to be the best depiction of a real strike. Because it has genuinely good intentions, but it’s also fucking terrible, and essentially everyone involved ends up worse for wear after it’s done.
There’s a concept where I’m from of an employee committee, which is just an assembly of the workers in a particular workplace and a valid actor in collective bargaining. I’ve been a part of one to negotiate specific policies.
Still a collective bargaining agent, though. Whether or not it fits the US’s specific legal categorization of a union, engaging in collective negotiations with employers in an organized manner is fairly universally applicable and positive. “Unions just don’t fit this kind of work” sounds a heck of a lot like an excuse to avoid having collective bargaining altogether.
There is a balance that needs to be struck. Back when we were peak union in the UK in the 70s their leaders would hold the country to randsom. They’d tell politicians that they want them gone and would instigate bi-weekly blackouts until they got what they wanted. Every household was well stocked with candles and wood logs due to the number of orchestrated blackouts.
The pendulum has swung too far in the other direction in recent years. Now professions with strong unions like train drivers are among the only people who have had their wages keep up with inflation over the past 10 years.
Some jobs don’t lend themselves to having unions but they are the minority. Even software developers probably should have unions these days - if people don’t want to be part of one they can always work as a contractor instead.
My wife is a data analyst for what’s essentially a tech firm, she’s unionized and in her particular circumstances it’s amazing. Fully remote, 3 raises last year LoL, great benefits etc etc. I work with unions and many are not nearly as good for their members as others.
I appreciate unions, but I often feel like this website gets out of touch with them.
Many jobs simply do not lend themselves to having a union. They’re too niche, the employees are scattered around, there’s no willing union representation, etc. “These guys should just join a Union!! And if they have to - by golly, form one themselves!” Always comes off to me like such a reductive take on how complex a lot of working/employment systems are, and where unions can and cannot benefit.
It often pushes up on just being idealogical grandstanding rather than legitimately listening and understanding case by case problems in employment
You have to remember that these are the same people who romanticize and call for general strikes without any consideration for what it does to families. Not to mention it doesn’t even acknowledge the fact that most general strikes in history have failed miserably. The reality is that successful union activity is generally small, difficult, and has to be sustained for years.
Precisely so. It can be grating to see Lemmy, a site full almost exclusively of well-paid computer programmers - preach “just unionize!” With the same oily lips as conservatives who tell millions to “just pull yourself up by the bootstraps!”.
In both cases it’s “talking down” to the end worker, pitching an ‘easy’, one sentence solution to all of their ills without any consideration for the vast amount of effort required in reality.
spoiler
asdfasdfsadfasfasdf
Absolutely. It’s really good to hear your perspective on the matter, because yeah - that shit is brutal and SAG-AFTRA was a ‘good outcome’. Many - especially those without the benefit of millions and millions of dollars, celebrity backers, and mass public support, do not have good outcomes.
If you’re interested in this kind of thing, “Germinal” by Zola is what I find to be the best depiction of a real strike. Because it has genuinely good intentions, but it’s also fucking terrible, and essentially everyone involved ends up worse for wear after it’s done.
There’s a concept where I’m from of an employee committee, which is just an assembly of the workers in a particular workplace and a valid actor in collective bargaining. I’ve been a part of one to negotiate specific policies.
Still a collective bargaining agent, though. Whether or not it fits the US’s specific legal categorization of a union, engaging in collective negotiations with employers in an organized manner is fairly universally applicable and positive. “Unions just don’t fit this kind of work” sounds a heck of a lot like an excuse to avoid having collective bargaining altogether.
There is a balance that needs to be struck. Back when we were peak union in the UK in the 70s their leaders would hold the country to randsom. They’d tell politicians that they want them gone and would instigate bi-weekly blackouts until they got what they wanted. Every household was well stocked with candles and wood logs due to the number of orchestrated blackouts.
The pendulum has swung too far in the other direction in recent years. Now professions with strong unions like train drivers are among the only people who have had their wages keep up with inflation over the past 10 years.
Some jobs don’t lend themselves to having unions but they are the minority. Even software developers probably should have unions these days - if people don’t want to be part of one they can always work as a contractor instead.
My wife is a data analyst for what’s essentially a tech firm, she’s unionized and in her particular circumstances it’s amazing. Fully remote, 3 raises last year LoL, great benefits etc etc. I work with unions and many are not nearly as good for their members as others.