Hacker News Reader

Comment by apexalpha | Hacker News Reader

Good for them. I work for a large company and am a member of the union. While they're not perfect they're very constructive and provide a lot of benefits to all employees, and also to the company itself.

Compensation has become very complex over the years. While most people understand their pay the rest is usually where employers cheap out, things like insurance, sick pay, long-term provider care, pension contribution, tend to be worse for my friends who also work in IT but in non-unionized workforce.

I understand that in the US unions are often seen as a burden, rather than a constructive partner, so I hope this one will help to improve the image of all unions as well as improve live of Googlers.

View on HN

> I understand that in the US unions are often seen as a burden

Some are, some the opposite. Often people discuss unions like something very homogenous. They're like companies - there will be both loan sharks and non-profit activists (and lots in between).

I hope it all turns out well for googlers.

Of course, there is a difference, in that there's a strong financial interest in painting all unions as the loan shark type.

Unions have also been centers of corruption and organized crime. This is what gave them such a bad name in the 1980s and is why it's so easy to "tie" anyone in construction to the mob, such as one famous person in charge these days.

The insinuation seems to be Trump. Sure, he has had buildings built/remodeled, but I don't see how you can say he is in construction.

Building industry / real estate is a "bit like that" unfortunately.

His company is renovating buildings or building new ones, less frequently now.

There are recordings of one of the mob bosses discussing Trump buildings and their concrete. The likelihood that Trump never spoke to a mob boss is just about 0%, either willfully or accidently. But judging from his behavior the last 4 years, there is a decent chance Trump knew and liked it.

> pension contribution

Pensions are horrifically anti-worker. You're basically withholding X% of someone's pay for 40 years, and also confiscating that pay if they don't stay at the same company until the pension vests (so people cannot leave without incurring a huge financial penalty even if they hate their job and can find better options elsewhere).

> Pensions are horrifically anti-worker. You're basically withholding X% of someone's pay for 40 years, and also confiscating that pay if they don't stay at the same company until the pension vests (so people cannot leave without incurring a huge financial penalty even if they hate their job and can find better options elsewhere).

It depends. I have a defined-benefit pension that vested after a short time (5 years? it was a long time ago, but it was about the same as the 401k match). I've never felt tied down by it, and it's a nice thing to have to diversify my retirement assets, since it was one where I wasn't taking the risk.

See, this is why people need unions. In my country pensions are handled by the employer AND the union. All the issues you mention are not present here, since unions would not agree to let employers hold a pension over someone like this.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com