Comment by wpietri
6 years ago
There are certainly bad unions. But I think that often arises as a reaction to poisonous management behavior, a zero-sum mentality that treats workers as a cost center, not a value generator. It's a "fuck me, no fuck you" scenario.
Your point about the Hollywood unions is a great one. Like tech, in Hollywood everybody has clear incentives to create a great final product. Positive-sum thinking usually part of the culture. In that context, I think unions can be a big help, especially when there are such large wealth and power differentials between the bosses and the workers.
I also think your former colleagues' seeming lack of agency is weird. The union is something the workers create and run. If they think a union they create would be bad, what are they saying about themselves?
> The union is something the workers create and run. If they think a union they create would be bad, what are they saying about themselves?
They think a union would be a bit like a homeowners association - in principle owned and run by them and never acting against their interests, but in practice a threat as much as an opportunity.
US homeowners association are another great example that doesn't match European experience. Why do Americans turn everything that's supposed to be in their own interest, into a vehicle for power abuse? That seems to be the recurring story in American unions, as well as homeowner associations. Are there any other supposedly-good organisations that are toxic in the US? Political parties? News? Boy scouts?
> Are there any other supposedly-good organisations that are toxic in the US?
There aren't many supposedly-good organizations in the US.
According to Gallup[1], in 2019 there were only three institutions in which more than half of Americans had "a great deal" or "quite a lot" of trust: the military, police, and small business. The police probably lost that trust recently, leaving only small business and the military.
Only 29% trusted organized labor, which puts it below the presidency, in 2019. But even fewer trust big business, and trust in organized labor has been rising, so there might be some hope for unions.
1: https://news.gallup.com/poll/1597/confidence-institutions.as...
As an American I strongly agree with your insight, and independently arrived at it. It is an underlying cultural issue -- a lack of community spirit that is relatively widespread.
It is a universal human tendency that is strongly in effect here at the current time and place.
2 replies →
> Are there any other supposedly-good organisations that are toxic in the US?
Definitely.
> Political parties?
Check. There are only 2, and cynicism towards both of them is pretty high, as neither really represents the people.
> News?
Check as well. See Fox News, which actually delivers "entertainment" disguised as news.
> Boy scouts?
Probably not, but who knows?
Disclaimer: Not an American, just a Canadian that follows US new a bit.
1 reply →
> union is something the workers create and run
I just assume that it's almost never going to be the case.
It might look like it's created by worker, but it's created by a sub group of workers which is unhappy with a status quo. This effort will be led by even smaller sub group of activists that have a drive and skillset to organise and weasel into a leadership positions.
Worker run union seems to be even more implausible. It's going to be run by a managerial body composed of said activists, which I absolutely expect to be self-serving, rent seeking and, well, parasitic. Occasionally their interests will coincide with interests of workers they represent, but that will be just some happy accidents.
Unions are run by the members
In theory. In practice unions are run by union leadership. Who are elected. But then again so is Congress and the President - and we know how that works out.
1 reply →
Just like democracies are run by the voters?
True in principle, but rarely in practice.
Hollywood unions are a slightly special case: while the studios hold a huge amount of power, the staff are pretty much all contractors per-project, and the entity they're contracting with will be a special purpose corporate vehicle for that film. Most software doesn't look like that - except game development, which is notoriously abusive and can get away with it because of a fresh supply of enthusiastic young people.
> game development...is notoriously abusive and can get away with it because of a fresh supply of enthusiastic young people.
Hollywood also has an endless supply of enthusiastic young people. To me this sounds like an argument in favor of unionizing the game dev industry.
You don’t get into the Hollywood unions until you put in hundreds of hours of set time, most ADs I know don’t get the corresponding benefits until they are about 30.
4 replies →
All those game industry horror stories are an even stronger argument in favour of unionising the game industry.
Hollywood unions are a prime reason lots of movies are made in Vancouver/Georgia/Other Countries now. Hollywood will end up like Detroit.
Favorable tax conditions are more likely the reason for that.
This is correct. I know a few producers who shoot in Georgia and Louisiana and the tax credits are exactly why.