In terms of benefits, SV companies, modern tech companies, are typically the cream of the crop, so I think it mitigates the need.
I don't think we need collective bargaining on salaries. But I do think workers should have a unified voice at the table, and at the very least have a political lobby for their rights.
Relative to cost of living, typical SV compensation is not "pretty well off" or "cream of the crop". It's not even close to the latter…
My tech coworkers live in the dingiest of apartments. Housing prices are outpacing gains in salary, and the majority of housing is out of reach of the median tech-worker salary.
There are some exceptional positions at exceptional companies, such as FAANG, but I strongly believe they're exceptional. Frankly when I look around my office I see either a bunch of young engineers working too long and too hard for a salary that won't really ever get them anywhere, or folks who already got their share of the pie. (And perhaps are quite fine on a SV salary.)
I'm also strongly considering leaving the Bay Area, as I'm tired of trying to change the minds of a generation that doesn't want me here.
>My tech coworkers live in the dingiest of apartments. Housing prices are outpacing gains in salary, and the majority of housing is out of reach of the median tech-worker salary.
I do executive tech support & linux support for corporate and live in a 1br apartment from the 60's 10 miles outside of the city. My commute is 1-1.5hr every day on the bus. I can't afford to use my health insurance even though I pay the premium every month.
It's absolutely true that costs are outpacing salaries, and a majority of them aren't "cream of the crop".
Tech support and linux support, call centres, etc, would make sense for unionization - but they're easily outsourced.
Perhaps I should've been clearer in my comment. If we're including call centers and first level support in "tech workers" then that changes things, just like including laborers in a steel mill as "steelworkers" would change things. Strictly from a software development/engineer perspective, unionization makes little sense right now.
Where is this not true? If you actually do the math for software engineers it simply doesn't add up. Most decent rust belt cities will be a severe drop in salary that it wouldn't be worth it. Some cities in Texas you'll break even.
If we're including low skill tech workers, then sure, their benefits won't compare. I was looking at it from a different PoV.
>In terms of benefits, SV companies, modern tech companies, are typically the cream of the crop, so I think it mitigates the need.
There are a lot of lower level tech employees in modern tech companies that don't have the luxuries or benefits software engineers do and get stomped on all the time. It's really only engineers who have 'cream of the crop' jobs and benefits.
Of course - most tech workers are not in this group. They would benefit from unionization - but outsourcing has decimated that ability.
Speaking from a software engineers perspective, the need for unionization is pointless. Software engineers are at the top or near the top for most jobs in terms of compensation - so the need for unionization isn't as necessary.
I don't think we need collective bargaining on salaries. But I do think workers should have a unified voice at the table, and at the very least have a political lobby for their rights.