Support NeoGAF

[MagusMajul]

You're allowed to discuss the idea of unions in a thread about unions. I'm not sure what Leonard Peikoff has got to do with this though. His idea of obectivisim would mean that the group of people who form a union to get more from the corporation are just doing what's best for them. Your idea is that they drive up prices but so does a monopolistic company who has control over the workforce and consumers too. Unless you're saying a corporate monopoly doing what's best for the company is good but a union doing what's best for their workforce is not.

I just don't want to get into the weeds. Whenever you talk about unions and monopolies and markets it inevitably gets political. I don't have anything good to say about unions or socialism as a whole and the conclusions I would arrive at are too abrasive for a gaming forum and are much more suited for a political forum.

 

[Gamer_By_Proxy]

MS has been outsourcing, using 18 month contractors as much as they can. The exact opposite of unionized workers.

 

[ChorizoPicozo]

MS has been outsourcing, using 18 month contractors as much as they can. The exact opposite of unionized workers.

and how is that been working for them?

MS has no clue about the world they’ve gotten themselves deeply involved in by buying ABK.

we are taking industries with different cultures, I wouldn't be surprised if people at MS still see videogames with desdain and lack of understanding of what it takes to have a successful videogame endeavor.

 

[Gamer_By_Proxy]

and how is that been working for them?

MS has no clue about the world they’ve gotten themselves deeply involved in by buying ABK.

we are taking industries with different cultures, I wouldn't be surprised if people at MS still see videogames with desdain and lack of understanding of what it takes to have a successful videogame endeavor.

Never said it was the right move. Ha! IMO MS hasn’t made the right moves since 2016. I think the high execs just see how gaming dwarfs movies and tv when it comes to revenue and thought they can just purchase their way into those coffers. And that’s about as far as they looked into it.

 

[Felessan]

I'll never understand people arguing against unionization wearing it as a badge of honor when it is indeed a badge of stupidity. The only people who should ever argue against unions is business owners. If you're an employee and you argue against unions, you're arguing against your best interests.

Unions protect general crowd of employees at expense of employers and high performers, not just employers.
High performers usually have no problem to negotiate for themselves or even go to up-or-out firms (those are completely opposite to unionization) - for them being in union means subsidizing their colleagues.

 

[PSlayer]

Wait until a good chunk of them gets fired.

 

[FalconPunch]

Unions protect general crowd of employees at expense of employers and high performers, not just employers.
High performers usually have no problem to negotiate for themselves or even go to up-or-out firms (those are completely opposite to unionization) - for them being in union means subsidizing their colleagues.

Wrong, high performers also benefit from union protection. Also since "high performers" make up a very small subsection of the employee market, it makes no sense for the general group of employees who combined do most of the work to jeopardize their best interest for the benefit of so called "high performers". Finally, those who aren't in a union but work in the same industry benefit because unions drive up the base wages in an industry. So, if you're not in a union, the starting point of your negotiations are much higher. Unions also provide superior job security, benefits, etc on average. Your take is mostly wrong.

Like i said, anyone who argues against unions who is not an employer is most likely very stupid.

 

[Bitmap Frogs]

Wrong, high performers also benefit from union protection. Also since "high performers" make up a very small subsection of the employee market, it makes no sense for the general group of employees who combined do most of the work to jeopardize their best interest for the benefit of so called "high performers". Finally, those who aren't in a union but work in the same industry benefit because unions drive up the base wages in an industry. So, if you're not in a union, the starting point of your negotiations are much higher. Unions also provide superior job security, benefits, etc on average. Your take is mostly wrong.

Like i said, anyone who argues against unions who is not an employer is most likely very stupid.

"as an employee, it is my god given right to open my mouth when billionaires piss at me from above, so help me god!"

I'll never understand that attitude.

Unions are statistically shown to improve worker conditions. Everything else is union-busting propaganda.

 

[StreetsofBeige]

Like i said, anyone who argues against unions who is not an employer is most likely very stupid.

Enjoy your gimped wages and protecting lazy workers where seniority and rank and tiered wages are more important than getting paid more with less rules. Who the hell want to get paid based on a rigid pay structure where years of service is more important than performance? You know who? High school kids making weekend money where hourly wages everyone knows which jobs pay exactly what wage. Fry guy gets paid $10/hr. And his next jump is Drive Thru dude at $10.50/hr.

Union jobs and wages are best fit for 9-5 punchclockers who put in minimal work and want as much job protection as possible because they all know a guy in Asian or Mexico can do a better job for cheaper, and that guy doesnt even need to know English to do it.

Non-union workers in the office dont need that because we can negotiate on our own and if we do get laid off, we just get another job. Who cares. Brush up the resume, call some buddies or recruiters and get a another job.

The best paid jobs out there are non-union, which skews to medical/science, lawyers, finance, sales, vast majority of tech workers, and all management jobs. Most union jobs are low/mid tier blue collar or government jobs. Your union job will have a much lower ceiling maxing out an annual salary/wage.

All youre doing is making your union rep rich, wasting money on union dues, and follwing dumb rules set up by union/management policies to keep you guys in line.

 

[Felessan]

Wrong, high performers also benefit from union protection. Also since "high performers" make up a very small subsection of the employee market, it makes no sense for the general group of employees who combined do most of the work to jeopardize their best interest for the benefit of so called "high performers". Finally, those who aren't in a union but work in the same industry benefit because unions drive up the base wages in an industry. So, if you're not in a union, the starting point of your negotiations are much higher. Unions also provide superior job security, benefits, etc on average. Your take is mostly wrong.

Like i said, anyone who argues against unions who is not an employer is most likely very stupid.

No. Salary pool/benefits has a soft cap (management has ROE obligations that limit overall expenses, it's unwise to reallocate capex to opex unless necessary - so opex has upper limit). And if high performer want a higher salary because he do more and better work - it'll come at the expense of other employees. And if other employees are protected by union, company either deny request as there is no salary pool available for the raise or impede its own future by expanding opex and high performers don't want both cases.
People who wants to be paid based on merit do not go near unions. Merit-based compensation hardly compatible with union equalization of workers.
For high-performance workers competitive job market do all the work that unions do for general workers.

 

[StreetsofBeige]

No. Salary pool/benefits has a soft cap (management has ROE obligations that limit overall expenses, it's unwise to reallocate capex to opex unless necessary - so opex has upper limit). And if high performer want a higher salary because he do more and better work - it'll come at the expense of other employees. And if other employees are protected by union, company either deny request as there is no salary pool available for the raise or impede its own future by expanding opex and high performers don't want both cases.
People who wants to be paid based on merit do not go near unions. Merit-based compensation hardly compatible with union equalization of workers.
For high-performance workers competitive job market do all the work that unions do for general workers.

Even worse. Some people dont want to join unions, but have to because that job has been completely organized by unions/gov. So in Ontario, if someone doesn't want to be a member of the union but still be a teacher you cant. You can only be a teacher if you join the union. So much for freedom and flexibility.

Union jobs are for small portion of jobs in companies. Most jobs and companies are non union.

Non-union have the entire spectrum of companies and jobs (unless it's a mandatory union agreement job like teaching, police work etc...). So you can get almost anything from the fry cook guy to CEO and practically any job field. Union jobs are a defined selection of jobs in some sectors which typically span a middle of the road job. You arent going to be a min wager. But youre not going to be management, upper tier job or CEO or be part of many sectors that are non-unionized to begin with.

Union jobs are good for people in certain situations and sectors. Typically, ones they can push around government due to sheer numbers of strikers (teachers going on strike a week before school year starts), or a job that can be easily replaced overseas for half price.

Just to show union jobs arent that valuable, union jobs have tanked over 40-50 years in USA/Canada. A lot of those jobs go overseas, so it shows the job protection isnt even great to begin with.

 

[FunkMiller]

The only people who are against unionisation are those with a vested interest in not properly providing for their staff.

 

[jubei]

Maybe I'm missing crucial information but to me this issue seems simple.
I love games.
The employees of game companies make games.
Therefore, I want to protect the employees of game companies so that my favorite games continue to be made.

 

[FalconPunch]

Enjoy your gimped wages and protecting lazy workers where seniority and rank and tiered wages are more important than getting paid more with less rules. Who the hell want to get paid based on a rigid pay structure where years of service is more important than performance? You know who? High school kids making weekend money where hourly wages everyone knows which jobs pay exactly what wage. Fry guy gets paid $10/hr. And his next jump is Drive Thru dude at $10.50/hr.

Union jobs and wages are best fit for 9-5 punchclockers who put in minimal work and want as much job protection as possible because they all know a guy in Asian or Mexico can do a better job for cheaper, and that guy doesnt even need to know English to do it.

Non-union workers in the office dont need that because we can negotiate on our own and if we do get laid off, we just get another job. Who cares. Brush up the resume, call some buddies or recruiters and get a another job.

The best paid jobs out there are non-union, which skews to medical/science, lawyers, finance, sales, vast majority of tech workers, and all management jobs. Most union jobs are low/mid tier blue collar or government jobs. Your union job will have a much lower ceiling maxing out an annual salary/wage.

All youre doing is making your union rep rich, wasting money on union dues, and follwing dumb rules set up by union/management policies to keep you guys in line.

L take. Individualism while cool for the day to day person is stupid as it relates to employment. All those professions you listed would make more money in a union because you're essentially forming a cabal. Finally, you have no idea what you're talking about. Union workers make more period and often in the private sector, it's difficult for the average employee to get anywhere close to the wages of union employees. I easily make 6 figures and I still have friends who are in unions making more while doing less work. Unlike you, I'm not jealous of those in a union and if I could get in a union, I could.

Finally, your insults are laughable. Union employees are "punchclockers", asian and mexican employees? It's like I'm having a conversation with fox news. Guess what guy, life is not all about work. Some people have family and friends that they want to spend time with. They have children they want to watch grow up, they have countries they want to visit, they want a good balance between life and work. As someone who works in the IT sector, jobs get outsourced regardless of performance. Capitalism dictates that you find a way to reduce costs and increase profits. If you can pay someone less to do the same job, it's just idiotic not to outsource. That being said, I hope you don't experience job loss due to outsourcing. Sometimes, people run their mouth when they haven't experienced something because they think they know the beginning, middle and ending of a matter. It's only after they have gone through it that their eye becomes clear and a new level of understanding is revealed to them.