Comment by drzaiusapelord | Hacker News Reader

Comment by drzaiusapelord | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

This really does sound like working in a union shop in the US, especially as a public sector worker. Seniority, loyalty, etc matter and things like competence and productivity are someone else's problem. Jobs are wielded as political weapons (The Democratic Party leader in Illinois, Mike Madigan famously has a list of every union job he's gifted and calls on favors from that list), etc. Inefficiencies are continually introduced.

I find the far-left often bemoans a lack of paternal aspects in US society, by my god, this blog posting horrified me. I would feel to trapped and powerless in that structure. I think it also explains the milquetoast offers, especially in regards to software, these types of companies deliver.

There's something wonderfully rebellious and wild about US culture, in general, that leads to enough weirdness that somehow gets results. All the early pioneers of the things I love were pretty out there and let their freak flag fly. I can't imagine personalities like these thriving in that type of environment.

I see what you are saying, but it's also almost the complete opposite of a union shop. The huge differences that you don't have to work outside of 8 hour day (without time and a half pay) and you are also paid more than non-union people, but basically guaranteed pension and job for life if you get in.

The system you just described encourages incompetence. Drag jobs out to as long as possible to force overtime if you need some extra cash. Don't bother putting effort into your work because you are all but impossible to fire. Additionally, refuse to do things just barely outside of your job scope because that falls under a different union worker's responsibility and you are concerned about growing the union, not doing good work.

Luckily the wonderfully rebellious and wild US non-union culture definitely doesn't encourage incompetence and fraud. That Color thing never happened.

> I find the far-left often bemoans a lack of paternal aspects in US society

Obviously politics are way out of scope on this site, but I think I can sneak in a meta point. I found this bit of frame-above-fact language absolutely hilarious. It's almost Orwellian, really. Bravo.

Those crazy democrats. Always bemoaning the lack of paternalism.

Let me just comment that US Democrats are a little right of right, and nowhere near "far left". It's a small point, but as the discussion resolves around global comparisons, it's an important one.

I also find the extreme feelings towards organized labour in the US somewhat bemusing... what's the alternative? Waiting for fast food chains and supermarkets to decide to increase pay, sick days and holidays, and reduce hours out of "efficiency reasons"? Or maybe wait for invisible hand-me-downs?

You know, having worked for a union in my youth, I was gobsmacked by the... I guess you'd call it indifference to the quality of your work. Your production has nothing to do with your job.

Then sampling the cutthroat nature of capitalism on the 'management' side of things, I understood what the unions were fighting for. (Even if I think they fundamentally fucked things up along the way.)

And now, as a vaguely paternalistic employer, I try to enact the kinds of things which unions would try to do (reasonable work hours, good wages, respect for the people working for me and their efforts on our collective behalf), and eliminate the failings of the union system (mostly by ruthlessly culling dead weight-- verboten in a union).

And all in all, I find myself concluding that management is an art, not a science. It can't be process-ized, or bound up by rules. The tyranny of Wall Street excel spreadsheets in bleeding workers dry is wrong. The indifference of unions to the economic output of the companies that employ them is wrong. And the people who can square that circle are not interchangeable cogs that can be replaced at will.

No, he's right. It's people from that side of the aisle who are most interested in forcing employers to do things like offer paid maternity leave and birth control. That's paternalism, at least the way I see it.

As stated, I'm not going to engage on the politics of the situation. It was a point about language.

If you ask one of those "far left" people why they favor those policies, you're going to get an answer along the lines of "fairness" or "safety net", etc... That is, they want that stuff because it seems like a good idea. But if you don't want that stuff and want to argue against it, yet have at best a subtle or abstract reason, you end up being on the side of "unfairness and danger" in the argument.

So you make up a term like "paternalism" (or better: "nanny state") to describe the same policies that evokes a negative connotation. Problem solved!

Politicians do this all the time, and it's just something we live with. But the danger to the thinking person is that you end up internalizing this kind of language to such a degree that it pops out in a completely non-political discussion about Japanese corporate culture.

Don't do that. Leave the spin to the talk shows. If you feel competent to have an opinion about someone else's ideas, you should be capable of discussing it in a neutral manner without resorting to Orwellian newspeak.

Again: "bemoaning the lack of paternalism" ... WTF?

US public employees would never tolerate these kinds of hours. You can't get them to work 40 hours, for the most part.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com