55 karma · joined January 25, 2023
It makes perfect sense for business leaders, as agents of the owner class, to continue doing as much as possible to minimize and undermine labor power.
X% less productivity is more palatable to such creatures than the risk of workers gaining a real seat at the table.
"We", which is to say a majority of residents and citizens of the US, constituting the working class, had these things imposed on us by others who have systematically and successfully manufactured the appearance of consent over a period of decades, the ongoing results being consistently undermining the working class and incepting a kind of learned helplessness that justice can never be found.
The "cult of the MBA" is apt, although a more appropriate appellation might be the "cult of Mammon".
I like this idea and think it's in the same vein as proposed in Developer Hegemony[0]. Stumbling blocks for me:
- I don't think anyone in my network also wants to do this and I'm afraid to take the first step. This one's on me obviously.
- health insurance. In the US, it seems small business health plans only cover full-time employees, and a certain number of covered employees are needed to have a decently-priced risk pool (so good luck if not everyone is all-in right off the bat). The individual insurance marketplace absolutely sucks, at least in my state, cynically viewed as by design but also probably because it's a Lemon Market.
- reputation. How do you generate quality leads and close deals without either an established reputation as a business or significant funding?
[0]: https://daedtech.com/developer-hegemony-the-crazy-idea-that-...
Tech workers are prone to giving away free labor and the author's "advice" illustrates one example (things which are "part of the job" but really separate from the core of The Machine). Continuing the analogy: when you hire a plumber to fix your toilet, he doesn't repipe the rest of your house or do your laundry unless you pay him specifically to do those things. Your relationship is transactional and without loyalty on either side. Just like how most employers view their relationship with employees.
Many if not most tech workers suffer from misplaced loyalty towards their employers, whose owners will continue coordinating as a class, taking all they can, while workers remain distracted and divided.
The sad facts are that most workers in the US: lack class awareness thanks to decades of successful pro-owner, anti-worker propaganda and policies; are falsely divided along lines which are convenient to the owner class (left/right, boomer/millenial, gay/straight, receiving public benefits/not); are unknowingly and dangerously close to medical bankruptcy even when covered by "good" insurance; can't afford to be even temporarily unemployed, because their health coverage is tied to their employer; can't afford to protest or attempt organizing, because they could then quickly become unemployed and endanger their dependents.
The Silicon Valley engineer earning $500k/year is better off than the midwest bank junior IT worker earning $50k. But they are part of the same class and should organize accordingly in order to gain true leverage.
Having competing job offers is a kind of leverage available to some, at an exhausting personal cost. These can be used to obtain one-dimensional improvements like higher pay, more vacation days, or choice of projects. But true leverage could make CEO's weepy and meaningless "I take full responsibility" statements actually mean something, among other things. The recent layoffs in the US including a hefty severance rely on luck, not leverage.
Tech workers probably have all the tools needed to organize effectively, and not only among themselves. But whisper "union" and ten peers will chime in before your next breath with falsehoods and other generic claims based on misremembered anecdotes which miss the point entirely and diffuse useful discussion.