Slashdot Mirror


BART Strike Provides Stark Contrast To Tech's Non-Union World

dcblogs writes "The strike by San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) workers this week is a clear and naked display of union power, something that's probably completely alien to tech professionals. Tech workers aren't organized in any significant way except through professional associations. They don't strike. But the tech industry is highly organized, and getting more so. Industry lobbying spending has been steadily rising, reaching $135 million last year, almost as much as the oil and gas industry. But in just one day of striking, BART workers have cost the local economy about $73 million in lost productivity due to delays in traffic and commuting. Software developers aren't likely to unionize. As with a lot of professionals, they view themselves as people with special skills, capable of individually bargaining for themselves, and believe they have enough power in the industry to get what they want, said Victor Devinatz, a professor of management and quantitative methods at Illinois State University College of Business. For unions to get off the ground with software workers, Devinatz said, 'They have to believe that collective action would be possible vehicle to get the kinds of things that they want and that they deserve.'"

12 of 467 comments (clear)

  1. Cue anti-union rage by AmiMoJo · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Unions seem to be blamed for everything wrong in the world of work on Slashdot but, even though I'm not a member because there isn't one at my company, I really appreciate the rights they have got for workers over the decades.

    --
    const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
    SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    1. Re:Cue anti-union rage by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The grad student union at my university is responsible for me having health insurance. That was a while back, but not in the grand scheme of things. (I've actually never been able to find a date, but I get the sense it was a couple of decades ago.)

      That's not a minor benefit even remotely.

    2. Re:Cue anti-union rage by the_other_chewey · · Score: 5, Funny

      I've actually never been able to find a date, [...]

      What is this, slashdot punbaiting?

    3. Re:Cue anti-union rage by JDG1980 · · Score: 5, Informative

      Sure, me too. My question is, what have they done for us lately? Answer, fuck-all. Let's see them, for example, push to increase the minimum wage, so that people can even afford their union goods and services. What, they don't want to do that, because they don't have to worry about the minimum wage?

      Actually, unions have been among the strongest advocates of raising the minimum wage. Here, for example, is the AFL-CIO's position on this subject.

    4. Re:Cue anti-union rage by bmarkovic · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I know it's unpopular to say that, but if there weren't global-level pressures from socialist organizations you'd get fsckall of those 40-hour weeks and work safety. Unions solved (and still do) issues on trade by trade basis. Overall conditions of workers improved only when powers that were felt grass roots pressure from protesting and increasing number of people going the red route everywhere. The whole red scare thing was more-less designed to create a stigma over a whole concept of labour rights in the West, leaving trade Unions to become charades quite often. Tho, charming personalities like Stalin and Mao helped a lot. Nothing says an idea is broken better than pointing at a perverted, evil implementation of it.

    5. Re:Cue anti-union rage by jcr · · Score: 5, Insightful

      There are countless examples of unions making the world a better place

      Yeah, like Detroit.

      Oh, wait.

      -jcr

      --
      The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
    6. Re:Cue anti-union rage by nbauman · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I remember about 15-20 years ago grad students and adjuncts were complaining that they weren't getting health insurance from their universities.

      The universities had a good bargaining position, the individual grad students had a bad bargaining position, and the students couldn't get health insurance.

      When the grad students organized a union, and organized together, they had a better bargaining position, and they were able to force the universities to give them health insurance.

      That sounds to me like the union being responsible for the grad students having health insurance.

      The student tuition dollar goes to pay for a lot of things. When the grad students have a union, more of that student tuition dollar goes to the grad students, including for health insurance.

    7. Re:Cue anti-union rage by Dahamma · · Score: 5, Insightful

      One thing that does annoy the crap out of me is when union "rules" prevent you from even perform your *own* simple tasks, requiring a union employee to do it/be present.

      For example, several times I have helped set up demos at CES booths/suites, and literally wasn't even allowed to move around furniture, unpack certain objects from boxes, or run/plug in certain kinds of cables without union workers. Sometimes we had to just sit there for an hour waiting for someone to show up to perform a 30 second task. That sort of practice not "protecting" the union employees from "management" hiring cut-rate non-union labor, it's extorting $100/hr for pointless tasks that they had no business being involved with in the first place.

      THIS sort of thing is why there has been such a backlash against unions - just like government agencies these days, they DO still perform valuable services, but the bureaucracy, politics, incompetence, and waste are giving them a really bad name. It used to be about COMPROMISE, but seems to be increasingly about ENTITLEMENT...

  2. Outlaw Government Employee Unions by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The state of CA has a debt of what? $127,000,000,000 was the last I heard. Much of the tax base is leaving the state. Govt. employee unions are largely responsible for the utterly unsustainable financial situation of the U.S. state which has the most natural economic advantages.

    BART workers don't work in sweat shops and never have. They are overpaid and underworked like most govt. workers. Govt. employee unions should be illegal since they screw the taxpayer, the people who actually pay the bills.

  3. Bad P/R by Tablizer · · Score: 5, Informative

    Unions simply have a poor reputation and haven't worked very hard on improving it.

    For one, they've failed the address the perception that unions protect lazy workers at the expense of the productive ones. They should actively encourage bonuses, for example, and allow some degree of "demerit" pay cuts. (They don't have to be biting cuts such that a worker has to suddenly sell their house, but allow small gradual demerits.)

    Second, they've often negotiated contracts with local governments that end up appearing one-sided during downturns, making the unions look unwilling to scale back in hard times. The problem is that local governments often think short-term because of election cycles, and unions take advantage of this stance in negotiations. While not directly the union's "fault", it does damage their reputation. Unions should ensure they scale back a bit more during down-times to match everybody else's experience. Sharing the pain makes you more popular.

    Third, they need to make their case in the media. Corporations trash unions left and right in the media, and unions have done a poor job of putting out their side of the story.

  4. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  5. Re:OMG, no please god no unions in Tech by MAXOMENOS · · Score: 5, Insightful

    So, I'm a sysadmin in a union shop. The upside to being in a union is that it's harder to get fired for speaking out when management is doing something stupid. The downside is that people get complacent about their jobs. For example, when management wanted our VB programmers to learn VB.NET because we're phasing out VB6, they all said "no." In practical terms, that means that management is either going to have to find something else for them to do (such as application administration) or figure out how to let them go (which is going to be very painful indeed, for everyone).