[Discuss] Discuss - Software Engineering union

[adler at stephenadler.com (Stephen Adler)]

The problems with unions, as any other such institution, is that they
end up being miss-managed. A good example is the teachers union of
Mexico. The woman running the union is basically a mafia don, who spends
her time extorting millions from the people she controls.

On the other hand, unions are the only force against aggressive capital
systems who work to divide and conquer for the benefit of pure profit.
The dividing, in the divide and conquer, is usually done by dividing up
the worker, isolating him/her so that they push their wages down to the
minimum possible and thus reap the most profit. (i.e. keep them from
forming unions.) As capital systems have gone global, the unions are
lagging behind, and thus now unions in the US have to compete against
non-union workers in China and elsewhere, where there is no such thing
as a government system to protect the working citizen. This whole notion
that china is a communist country established to protect its working
class is just garbage.

Sorry... I digress. What's most important in forming a union is sticking
to strict democratic standards for which the union is accountable for.
Only through real democratic process, can a union truly stand and fight
for its members. Otherwise, one ends up with a union like the teachers
union of Mexico where the leader was self appointed behind closed doors,
by basically making backroom money deals with those in power. See 

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/jul/07/scandal-mexico-union-elba-gordillo

I'm wondering if one could study how the unions, who protect actors and
writers, to see if they have come up with a particular effective
unionizing method. I've always considered software developers/engineers
to be on par with artists in that we essentially spend our days
creating/writing/publishing.

On Wed, 2012-04-18 at 08:36 -0400, Mark Woodward wrote:
> I wrote this on slashdot, and was wondering if you guys have an opinion.
> 
> I come from a blue-collar background, my dad was a union iron worker. 
> Trust me, there is a valuable skill set there. Strong guys who can weld, 
> lift heavy equipment, and aren't afraid of extreme hights is, in itself, 
> a fairly self limiting market. Anyway, the union in my view was a 
> positive force for his industry. It set the safety standards, it 
> provided benefits and retirement planning, it provided help for when the 
> iron workers were mistreated. Unlike the teamsters, the iron workers 
> were fairly well run. They partnered with the local construction 
> companies and, in his day, help the business environment get buildings 
> built. Decent pay and benefits and a guarantee of decent workers to 
> employers, why wouldn't an honest business use union workers?
> 
> I often argue that our interpretation of capitalism is incorrect. The 
> word "capital" isn't just money. It is anything of value that can be 
> traded. Just as businesses bargain with a capital collective, i.e. the 
> business, banks, and investors join forces to create an entity greater 
> than any one of them as a financial collective, workers' capital, i.e. 
> the work that they do and their skils, is their capital and there is no 
> conflict, in my eyes, when they bargain as a collective.
> 
> An engineering union, could be a good move for the industry. It would 
> certainly provide some "push back" against abusive contracts and NDAs.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Discuss mailing list
> Discuss at blu.org
> http://lists.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>