Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

So you point is since programmers can negotiate preferable working conditions (which include both salaries and work schedule most of blue-collar workers can only dream of) they need unions to negotiate for them because otherwise they can't get working conditions they'd prefer, even though there's evidence they're already getting it. I think you broke my logic parser.


1. It's much harder to negotiate early in your job.

2. Some people are less willing or able to negotiate for various reasons.

Thus, while individuals can and should negotiate for themselves, negotiating for everyone is even better.


> 1. It's much harder to negotiate early in your job.

Of course, you have no experience and have not proven yourself. Essentially you're a huge pile of risk asking to take a chance on you. How would you expect to be easy to negotiate in this position? Why would you expect the employer to remain in a position where they get all the risk and no power for any significant amount of time?

> 2. Some people are less willing or able to negotiate for various reasons.

If somebody is content with what they are getting and is not willing to negotiate, then where's the problem?

> Thus, while individuals can and should negotiate for themselves, negotiating for everyone is even better.

That's a non-sequitur. Are you claiming since some people don't have good negotiating position and some just don't want to do it, their negotiating power should equal to those who both have good offer to negotiate and are willing to do it? How it's better? Of course it could be better for some people - namely, somebody who has no negotiating skills and very weak negotiating position - but that can come only at the expense of other people who are willing to negotiate and have a good position, since employer's resources are not infinite, and one-size-fits-all negotiation would surely have to take into account that part of the pool is very risky, and compensate for that risk somehow.


> If somebody is content with what they are getting and is not willing to negotiate, then where's the problem?

Segments of workers are less likely to negotiate, and often it might not be because they are content with what they're making, but are either intimidated by the prospect of negotiating, or ignorant that they could or should negotiate.

https://www.payscale.com/career-news/2015/05/millennials-and...

And this is a situation that often occurs in software development:

http://www.kalzumeus.com/2012/01/23/salary-negotiation/

https://www.twilio.com/blog/2016/02/patrick-mckenzie-on-sala...

https://hn.algolia.com/?query=negotiation&sort=byPopularity&...

Is this the main reason for a software workers' union? Not necessarily. It seems like there's at least one service that exists for such a case. Or perhaps the IEEE, or some other industry guild could provide free training and education about how to better negotiate their salaries, to reduce the obfuscation that often accumulates in the hiring processes of the industry.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17276423

> since employer's resources are not infinite

Certainly not, but employers are often choosing to spend revenue elsewhere instead of raising wages:

https://www.forbes.com/sites/joshbersin/2018/10/31/why-arent...

And this is not consummerate to, especially in tech, how much revenue each employee brings in:

https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2015/02/why-the...




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: