Hacker News Reader

Comment by hackeraccount | Hacker News Reader

Unions are just monopolies. I don't really have a huge problem with that - as long as they are not given the backing of state power. Having a law that enforces closed shops is not something I'd support.

That and government sector unions. Those things are toxic because the unions end up supporting providing political support for the people they're employed by i.e. that's like me and my co-workers voting on how much we'll be paid.

View on HN

"...that's like me and my co-workers voting on how much we'll be paid."

You mean like every C-level manager at every corporation in the world?

> Having a law that enforces closed shops is not something I'd support.

AFAIK it is the other way. Closed-shop may be a result of contract freedom between a powerful union and a company (and then it is enforced as any other contract). While union laws often limits content of union contracts, e.g. forbids closed-shop. That is why you do not see closed-shop in Europe (with generally stronger union laws).

Uber etc. raise millions and billions in the idea that if they scale enough they can capture a market and monetize it once captured. A market monopoly.

Why can't industry workers do the same? Once software has eaten the world, what's to stop software people monetizing the employment market they have captured?

That is why there are anti-trust laws, and we should apply them much more rigorously against companies like Uber.

> i.e. that's like me and my co-workers voting on how much we'll be paid.

thats bad?

It is when they're voting on how much a third party (I.e. you) will be required to pay them. See: the Chicago, California, and general us public pension crisis.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com