Why are tech workers so resistant to organized action? Their owner employers sure are organizing adversarially in a multitude of ways in the open and behind closed doors
If you mean software engineers when saying "tech workers" because unions make it harder to fire people. There's not much that makes a software engineer's job harder than a bad engineer who isn't getting fired and is destroying the quality of the product and the code and creating work for everyone else to fix, all the time.
Unions also result in gaining seniority by time spent in a job instead of competency, and that's also a miserable experience, when someone incompetent is dictating the engineering work. In software engineering you want people who are technically proficient and capable of mentoring to assume leadership positions and positions of increased responsibility, not people who've been there the longest.
Why that is the case is another interesting question.
It's entirely possible that in the post-IBM microcomputer, pre-Google AdWords span, they were correct.
However, it's pretty obvious that current era, power has slid back from labor towards extremely-large corporations.
Sadly history repeats so we'll probably just have another "cultural revolution" and "great leap forward" in the 21st century.
In Marxist terms, lumpenproletariat is a close approximation, but a weird accident of history.
That depends on your baseline, of course. Or to answer your other question:
> Why would you expect anybody getting that kind of money to identify with the lower classes?
I don’t expect it, though I do have deep solidarity myself. Because, to return to the middle of your response:
> If you're making 100k+/year, you're well into bourgeois territory, and FAANG benefits are practically near-instant-owner-class.
I can speak to six figures, and I’m in no way into bourgeois territory. I’m approximately as comfortable as middle class boomers, ie I can make financial decisions to benefit my aging family with some hope I’ll still be comfortable myself. I don’t own anything in the sense meant by “bourgeois” in this context. I may yet, in the sense of a retirement plan. That’s a middle class aspiration. Which, having grown up poor and then broke and then getting by… I recognize very much is still working class.
There certainly is a larger segment of the tech work force than the general population which has reason to believe it can cross the bridge from gentry to ownership… but it’s still a minority of us and it’s mostly scraps. I don’t expect most of my colleagues to be comrades, but I certainly don’t agree with their class analysis which you have expressed so clearly.
I am not actually so much resistant to unions, as I do not see what benefit I’ll get from them. What exactly in my life would have changed for better if I had been a part of a union? Just one thing, can you name?
If you have ever gone up against HR over anything ever, a union would have benefited you.
On call? They paid me $500 a week to have a cellular phone officially, but at the same time unofficially everyone was strictly forbidden to call it. It was an internal political move by the engineering department (see our commitment to this new product? we even put Mike on call), turned into an additional benefit to best engineers.
> If you have ever gone up against HR over anything ever, a union would have benefited you.
My wife (who is one of the best teachers in California, documented) was fired exactly because of the union rules. The principal wanted to keep her so much, that the district turned his desire into a political tool: oh you want to keep L? she is a good teacher? sign this paper (some financial cover up) and we will give you the money to keep L. The union did not care is she a good teacher, or not. Less seniority? Go away (but we keep your $1000 union fees).
They won't, but its a delusion that favours capital over labour.