Slashdot Mirror
IBM Union Calls It Quits (computerworld.com)
dcblogs writes: A 16-year effort by the Communication Workers of America to organize IBM employees into a union is ending. The union's local, the Alliance@IBM, is suspending 'organizing' efforts, and says its membership has been worn down by IBM's ongoing decline of its U.S. work force as it grows overseas. The union never got many dues-paying members, but its Website, a source of reports from employees on layoffs, benefit changes and restructuring, was popular with employees, a source of information for the news media, and a continuing thorn in the side of IBM.
Fact is, when comparing unions to corporations, there are no angels.
Unions are quite prone to using dues-money for self-enrichment, power-playing, politicking... and even today, some unions are not above using violence and intimidation (on the down-low of course) to get their way among their membership, 'potential' members, and basically anyone who gets in their way or frustrates them. For example, the 'scab' who dared to cross picket lines, usually because he needed the income that damned badly.
Mind, I'm not picking on either one - just providing perspective and balance here.
I know of honorable and good unions (and had once been a member of one - the Ironworkers). I know of honorable and good corporations run by honest men. Problem is, they both sit on the bright side of a very long and subtly graduated scale that runs all the way down to some downright evil shit.
Quo usque tandem abutere, Nimbus, patientia nostra?
Woah there Hoss. Not so sure about that. We regularly hear about ridiculous crunches and there are plenty of IT workers being treated like crap by management through offshoring, sick leave abuse, holiday abuse or whatever. I recently had to sign a contract with a previous employer that threatened to sack me if I called in ill with a stress or mental related condition. Now that' clearly unenforceable but that's the kind of shit they pull.
I can see why there'd be a tension between someone who can make out alright and someone on the lower rungs of the ladder, but managers are managers and workers are workers and wherever that differential exists, the former will always try and abuse the latter.
I had a dream, bright and carefree, but now there's doubt and gravity
Unions are not just about wage growth. They're also about protecting employees from abuse. Let's face it, over the last 20 years or so, abuse of tech workers has been rampant. Companies expect their tech workers to put in 50 to 60 hours a week with no overtime or comp time. Many tech companies offer their employees stock options, which are not as handsome as they used to be since the tax rules surrounding them changed a number of years ago. So tech companies often feed their employees the line "Well, the more you work and the harder you work, the more valuable your stock options will be in the long run". That rarely turns out to be the case; not every tech company turns out to be an Apple, or a Microsoft, or a Netscape, or a Facebook.
Yes, I'll agree that I don't care for other aspects of unions either, like seniority over merit, and some unions can be very corrupt as well. But if tech companies aren't careful, they may have no choice but to deal with unions in the future. Running tech employees into the ground is not a sound or sustainable strategy for remaining competitive in the world. Unions could at least help ensure that practice stops.
Not quite. The second layoff for 35 people in New York and California were cancelled after the NYT wrote an earlier article on the 250 people in Florida who were forced to train their replacements (see link below).
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/04/us/last-task-after-layoff-at-disney-train-foreign-replacements.html
Australian GDP growth has remained steady over the last 40 years. What are you basing your assertions on?
GDP growth has been steady. While it may not be perfect it clearly doesn't result in what you're describing.