Unions in the IT world

Slashdot had an article on this one:

http://it.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=06/05/11/1829222

The idea of unions in the tech marketplace has been around ever since the .COM boom started. And every time it comes up, several sentiments arise:

• IT people are too mobile to be in a union.
• One of my major beefs with unions (and one of the biggest reasons that I would never join one) is that they provide the ability for... dead weight.
• IT-work is a meritocracy. Unions pride seniority over ability. Not for me!

The Union as we've all been brought up to see it is the kind of thing that under-age garment makers in Asia wish they had. Unions provide a way for disenfranchised people to strike back at an abusive management. Unions make sure that investment in the company, in the form of years served, is rewarded by a reduced risk of lay-off.

Which isn't 100% true. Some of the criticisms of Unions in the technological work-place are very apt. Unions work best when the job could be described as 'disposable worker'; the kinds of jobs that require not a lot of training to participate. That isn't to say that such environments are the only environments they work, but that environment is merely best suited for unions. Airplane Mechanics require extensive training and are unionized. ASPX programmers are trained, perhaps less than the Airplane Mechanics, and tend to be rabidly anti-union.

Tech-work is still an area where a highly trained individual with a verifiable track record of results has his pick of employers. This is a situation where the employee has power. This is not a situation that is well suited for traditional unions. I don't like how I'm being treated? I go elsewhere. Maybe if I'm lucky, I'll get the two companies in a bidding war. Go me. You can't say the same thing for a poultry-packer in Kansas.

One area that was ripe for a unionization drive has instead been 'offshored'. First Line Tech Support is now the domain of foreign nations, not US citizens. Drives are being made to unionize those Indian tech-workers, but that is not here. Once unions get a hold in India, the call-centers of the US will be moved somewhere else. This is Union Busting in the tech-age.

Unions survive because the workers come together and present a united front to Management. Skilled tech-workers are, in general, too mercenary for that; the job market has been too good for too long. A skilled tech-worker doesn't always see himself as having the exact same job as 40 of his co-workers, even though they may share a job-title. A skilled tech-worker is used to an environment that rewards innovation and productivity of the individual, something Unions historically have avoided at all costs. Skilled tech-workers have been trained from the begining to think of themselves first, and others second if at all.

Unions historically have avoided 'merit' systems because they are so devilishly hard to police. If the on-site manager is the soul authority handing out merit raises/bonuses, that throws the union compensation package out the window. How do you document or prove abuses and favoritism? The favored tactic is to use elaborate evaluation systems, and independant testing where possible. This leads to a vast increase in red tape for what in a non-union shop could be handled with a simple conversation with the Boss.

And it is also very much the case that worker-protections also prevent management from dumping non-productive, but rule-savvy, workers. Think 'Wally' from Dilbert. Tech-workers have a universal disdain for such people. When combined with the 'all for me, none for you,' mentality of the previous paragraph you can understand why tech-workers see 'workplace protections' as a negative thing.

It is my opinion that you can't unionize an IT shop along traditional lines. Can't be done. Past practices assume too much uniformitiy in both job function and training, and solidarity for it to make it very far. The only place you find unionized IT workers is Government.

Any Union looking to Organize IT workers needs to set up an organization that allows FAR more flexibility than historical unions:

• Employees must have the ability to negotiate salary independant of the Union, or perhaps within a VERY light Union-contract framework. With most IT workers, the power of salary negotiation still exists. Do NOT take this away.
  
• The contract has to permit a meritocracy, complete with the ability to fire underperforming workers for minimal cause. Otherwise, you'll never get IT workers to sign on. One thing tech workers hate more than anything is seeing 'workplace protections' keep a clear free-loader on-staff, and at a high salary.
  

Two things that have been central to Unions in the past end up being in the Employee's and Management's hands. That's going to take some work to organize. Unions have always been strong about the idea that when you bargan in strength, you get better deals and IT workers break that mold. Unions have long been about senority and other easy measures of knowledge over more nebulous methods like manager discression, which is an environment IT workers have a real problem with.

No, traditional unions do not fit the IT workplace. But all it'll take is some innovative Organizing to come up with a framework that WILL work. It CAN happen, but I don't know of any examples yet.