Because software workers should start looking to form unions as large companies take to stagnate wages with large hire/layoff cycles that flood the employment market.
Articles like this make me wonder why software workers don't have a union. But then I remember the time I tried to contact SEIU to organize about 1000 people, and walked away wondering why I ever thought that was a good idea.
Maybe software developers should create a union or something like that? Maybe the fact that unions have been destroyed since the 1970s has something to do with the wages not increasing that much anymore?
Unions are useful for more than just better pay. If that's a concern, charter some new type of union-like organization that doesn't touch salary/wages.
One of the most important reasons for unions is to fight back against abusive employment practices that are unrelated to employee compensation. While software development doesn't have anywhere close to the problems mining or factory jobs, we it might be a good idea to address the culture of working long hours with chronic sleep problems. A union could also fight unfair hiring practices like age discrimination or the scandal from a couple years about hiring collusion to between several Silicon Valley companies.
> Joining a general union until there's a critical mass that can spin off as a software-specific one?
There's a number of software workers in "general" unions already, particularly (but not exclusively) public sector workers. And there's arguably quite a bit of utility in being part of a bigger union like SEIU, IWW, etc.
This is yet another reason for software developers to unionize. Otherwise it'll continue to be a race to the bottom as developers continue undercutting each other and giving away any leverage they may have had.
So, I'm all for unionizing, but let's be particularly careful about why we might want to do such a thing.
Is it because of job security? No. There's nothing worse in the world then being "secure" at a job working on a codebase you hate--every day, seeing the madness and pointless mud piling up and piling up. In many cases, the company and culture is worse off if you can't readjust teams to retain the people who fit and let go the people who want (or need) gone.
Is it because of wages? Somewhat. As programmers, we shoulder a disproportionate part of the responsibility for delivering value to customers and if we do it properly we end up with a product that scales with little intervention. Accordingly, we should reap a better share of the long-term profits. At the same time, even if you aren't in vastly over-inflated talent markets as on the coasts, we generally aren't paid too badly--unless you are in a town were the profession isn't respected, in which case you are getting shafted repeatedly.
Is it because of work conditions? Yes. We work a very sedentary job. Many shops expect/require bullshit-long hours and at weird times, and few promote life/balance with anything more than a wink and a nod. There is a large amount of stress involved with our work, especially as deadlines draw near or as code rot becomes apparent. Cognitive dissonance is great, because we aren't allowed to lie to ourselves about reality: we can't, because computers don't deal in lies. Bad code is bad, sales features promised don't exist unless there's code backing them up.
Is it because of professionalism? Yes. I can pick a "programmer" out of a set of 100, even from a good school or respected company, and still fin glaring omissions in what they know and how they practice. There's no quality control in what people describing themselves as software engineers or programmers know, and so hiring becomes annoying. This in turn makes the market screwy.
~
A full-blown union would be of questionable utility--I sure as fuck don't want to give any of my paycheck to yet another bureaucracy claiming to represent me well. That said, there may be a good argument for a professional body similar to the ASME or IEEE.
I am utterly persuaded at this point that the software industry workers need a union.
Software engineering hiring practices are profoundly flawed; this is something a union could address at an industry level. It's also deeply problematic for me to take home $fat_paycheck when, say, $sales_guy two tables over is paid minimum wage + commission (disclaimer: I have no knowledge of this occurring at my current company; it happened to a sales guy I know, however). A company of people work together, and should share in the returns as they cover each other's deficiencies.
I'm comfortable asserting that while there are issues with traditional unions, it's possible to improve and make better organizations.
Honestly, this is why labor unions could help even highly-paid occupations such as software engineering. There needs to be something to serve as a counterweight to management, especially during economic downturns when finding a new job is more difficult.
Because as far as I know traditionally unions have existed in jobs where humans are basically robots (manufacturing, etc...). These jobs can be dangerous and also each worker is very easily replaceable giving the employer a huge upper hand.
This is not the case in software at all. Skill levels can vary dramatically and the more experience you have with your company often the more valuable and harder to replace you become. Software developers are expensive, especially bad hires. This puts them in an advantageous position. In sum we are - In demand, scarce, hard (or at least expensive) to replace (skill & domain knowledge vary considerably). The exact opposite of what a union fixes.
reply