I've seen places where engineers and other ICs, some team leads and managers, those with far more experience and clout at me, voice skepticism against questionable product decisions coming from upper management, only to receive nothing in response. Even when these decisions involve infeasible engineering forecasts, leadership stay the course. The worst they might get is some uncomfortable questions from the most bold, outspoken senior or staff engineers during all-hands. And the response is usually some stock party line about staying the course and everything will work out. Sometimes, this is coupled with toxic cultures that prevent people from truly speaking out.
Beyond fighting for better labor conditions, an intracompany tech worker organization should be able to push back against bad management decisions. Imagine if your engineering guild had power not just to determine the tech stack or coordinate between teams, but also to check the power of management on product and technical decisions, or even question strategic business decisions.
People imagine tech unions will just be a rehash of Industrial Era blue collar unions, but they have the potential to be something more- a way for the rank and file to finally have the clout to push back against bad engineering decisions from poor leadership.
Sure, you can say disgruntled engineers can just leave, or companies with bad management cultures should deserve to fail. But that just seems like defeatism. It seems like a form of capitalism that promotes throwaway, wasteful behavior. If employees have valid concerns, but management ignores them, doesn't it seem like a shame for an organization to decline and the product to die because of no one could oppose management's mistakes? What about the customers?